"Return to draft" subject to some abuse?

[bartolimieu07]

The ability to return a published chapter to draft mode is very helpful for anyone who misclicks. However--and I'm not entirely sure about this, but it seems to be the case--every publishing event jumps the story back to the top of the main page (assuming it's been at least an hour and the publishing events aren't accrued). So someone could continuously cycle their story through the main page by re-publishing the same chapter over and over. Granted, this was possible before by deleting a chapter and recreating it, but that would have lost any likes or views on that chapter.

I feel like I'm seeing this happen a fair bit recently. Again, I could be mistaken in my analysis. I didn't feel comfortable waiting the hour to try it for myself and see if the potential exploit works for me. But if it does work that way, maybe stories should drop off the "recently updated" queue when their chapters are returned to draft state?

 

[Hvast]

It was possible for a very long time with deleting and recovering your chapters.

 

[TheLowKing]

But if it is happening, some kind of mod action would be appropriate, imo.

 

[Gambio]

It was possible for a very long time with deleting and recovering your chapters.

But back then you would have gotten admin involved, no? Would be much harder to abuse.

I agree, if this is a thing it should definitely be stopped.

 

[bartolimieu07]

The thing I'm sure about is that drafting (or deleting) a chapter you've published does not remove the story from the page. (You can observe this by looking at the "Recently Updated" section, where sometimes stories will appear--but their last update will be days in the past. See the attached screenshot.)

What I'm less sure about is whether publishing that same chapter again hours or days later will cause your story to appear at the top once more. I don't want to test this out deliberately myself, and I'm sure one of the mods can confirm how it works. If it doesn't behave that way, then great. No problem. If it does, then I also don't know if anyone's been abusing it deliberately. If they have, it doesn't seem like they've been doing it egregiously.