When accounts are banned quit auto-removing all posts

Certain users have spent years answering chess questions on this site... due to one reason or another they find themselves in personal conflicts with some of the poorly moderated trolls who run rampant here, one thing leads to another and their account gets banned. But then all the content they've created - which the community is benefiting from - is auto-removed. So all the questions they asked and explanations they gave on various topics. One very noteworthy example of this happening was with Pfren (?), an IM who used to post here and explain things very thoroughly for people. His posts are no longer visible. But there are many other similar scenarios.

I am not aware of any forum that works this way, besides this one. Removal of posts is always a moderating decision, not automated. The automated approach is fundamentally dysfunctional. It reflects poor programming / planning capacity / probably a very deep laziness on part of the developers.

If your developers can't get things like this right, it's very likely they're just presenting a facade of competency that no one can see through due to their lack of technical expertise. Tbh, if this is the case, your company would be very well advised to replace them with new and better developers. Paying developers large salaries to be bad and do nothing is quite common. This is a large site, chess.com is an IT company at its roots, and there is really no justification I can see for this forum being so poorly coded. It's poorly coded in many aspects - even this message box is extremely buggy. Try quoting someone and responding to separate sections of their message, it isn't possible. This is not the website for Bob's Fish shop, IT is all your company does, how can you do it so badly? Your engineering team is faltering. I'm an engineer and I am qualified to say all of this.

I could create a much better, more modern forum in a couple months by myself. It would work in a way that made sense, too. Your forum here is an embarrassment to your brand. Your website is your brand.

A lot of the time the content being posted by an account closed for abuse needs to be hidden. Checking all previous content to make sure nothing TOS breaking is there really isn't viable.

If the mod can take the time to ban a person they can make a personal judgment on whether to delete all the persons posts. This would literally be as complicated as a checkbox you check or uncheck in the workflow for banning the person. It could even be checked by default, i.e. not unchecked unless the mod is in a position to determine it should be. It would take probably 2 days for a competent developer to add a feature like that. If the mod lacks that level of judgment they aren't in any position to decide whether to ban the person in the first place.

How is it that every other forum manages to do this, but yours can't?

And why would you need to check all content of a person posting here for years (like IM Pfren) who you've likely seen posting and known about for years? Especially considering how poorly moderated this place is anyway? You don't need to do that, that's a dumb argument.

You have too many reasons for why your company can't do anything and must continue to be sub-par. Of course.. I don't think you're an official representative of the company anyway, right? You aren't actually on payroll right? So really this feedback is not directed at you, it's directed at... the product people who obviously are paying no attention and are probably just being paid to do nothing as well.

Staff ban accounts, mot moderators.

That said, depending on how active a member was, it could take significant time to make sure content against the TOS wasn't somewhere and that could include direct messages.

My guess is that it's highly unlikely that the process of muting abuse closures is at all likely. I could see that fair play closures could be treated differently.

Content against TOS is everywhere on this site. It is very lightly moderated... they don't even pay moderation staff. You have trolls who have spent all day for years insulting eachother in the main general forum, and none of them are banned.... There's a thread with like 900+ pages of mostly insults. It is an absurd argument that when a person is banned you'd be forced to audit all that users posts and determine whether to delete them all, to keep the forum "clean" as if it is somehow clean today. Usually it's quite obvious from the infraction what sort of person you're dealing with and what content you could be potentially encountering... Forums do not work that way, anyway - No forum I have ever seen or heard of. You come up with these imaginary problems to essentially justify laziness and incompetence. If this forum were very well maintained - like if the message-box worked - the claim that this problem is somehow beyond fixing could be given a bit of credibility. Anyway, with the proposal of a checkbox it would just be at the discretion of the "staff member", or whoever is doing the banning, whether to retain the other posts - completely nullifying your argument since it's discretionary - very easy to do. I don't know why you even bother arguing since you're not a product person you're just a random unpaid mod anyway, you have no involvement in the product design process or qualifications as far as that goes. I do this for a living and can spot bad engineering / bad product design very easily, that's what this is. It is not some well thought out system, it's just a lackluster effort. Just like this buggy message box, which has probably been bugged since the founding of the site and never fixed.

Instead of insulting Martin, why not put this thread HERE? https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/state-of-chess-com-send-your-questions-here

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to insult you but I remember Pfren.

ok hold up, let's say veryverystern gets banned for cheating (veryverystern yaps a lot of the forums) and has posted like 50,000 messages/forums it would in my opinion to read and look at ALL of the messages/forums just takes too long and is very inefficient.

that's just my opinion because opinions are different!

Again it's a veryveryweak argument since a) it would take years to make that many posts, and the mods would have been monitoring for illicit content the entire time, so there is no need; b) the forum is already full of illicit content since it's lightly moderated on a good day, c) in the proposal the mod has the option of deleting all the posts, i.e. if it was necessary they could do that but it won't always be necessary. 
Before commenting please read / use your brain on a basic level, since all this has already been explained, though it is also obvious.