I was thinking that the "reverse" would be "view original", so nothing from the original would actually be lost.
For a warning, I was thinking the same character limit as the comment edit reason field. "Server load" in the context I meant it, was that choosing to expand the comment to view it in all its original glory (questionable though that might be) would probably have a similar cost to other inline expansion, and if the warning on the comment was written accurately, then there might be a small savings in server load when people read the warning/description, and decided that assuming that label was accurate, there was no need for them to read the whole thing, versus a comment that was collapsed with no ability to describe the reason for forcing it to collapse, so people would have to expand it to have any idea of what it contained.
It makes equal amounts of sense to me that an "expand all collapsed comments" command would open force-collapsed comments, or open only the naturally collapsed comments and require a person to evaluate the force-collapsed comments individually.
I see two solutions to that: reader-side, MORE OPTIONS! -- to include force-collapsed comments in expand-all; on page display, include an "expand all including force-collapsed" in addition to an "expand all autocollapsed" thingy. The latter actually makes sense because Not All Comment Threads Are Created Equal.
no subject
For a warning, I was thinking the same character limit as the comment edit reason field. "Server load" in the context I meant it, was that choosing to expand the comment to view it in all its original glory (questionable though that might be) would probably have a similar cost to other inline expansion, and if the warning on the comment was written accurately, then there might be a small savings in server load when people read the warning/description, and decided that assuming that label was accurate, there was no need for them to read the whole thing, versus a comment that was collapsed with no ability to describe the reason for forcing it to collapse, so people would have to expand it to have any idea of what it contained.
It makes equal amounts of sense to me that an "expand all collapsed comments" command would open force-collapsed comments, or open only the naturally collapsed comments and require a person to evaluate the force-collapsed comments individually.
I see two solutions to that: reader-side, MORE OPTIONS! -- to include force-collapsed comments in expand-all; on page display, include an "expand all including force-collapsed" in addition to an "expand all autocollapsed" thingy. The latter actually makes sense because Not All Comment Threads Are Created Equal.