@teleshoes, @direc85, @Steve_Everett, please mind that Jolla does not run this Discourse instance, it is a SaaS provided by Discourse Inc., as noted before. As outlined there, they sell zero administration and promise zero moderation, which I assume to be major reasons why Jolla has chosen this SaaS offer.
This answers all “i could also ask:”-questions by @teleshoes: Because Jolla does not administer this Discourse instance and they are paying money in order to not pay any attention.
This also explains why fiddling with the database of this Discourse instance (taking backups, merging entries etc.) is out of scope: Jolla does not have the know-how and resources to do that, plus the contract with Discourse Inc. presumably does not cover that. What obviously was covered was a roll-back to a snapshot of the whole container (in which this Discourse instance runs) taken some time before the update was deployed.
So far this is the sad, modern world of SaaS and outsourcing in general: Companies make themselves helpless, dependent slaves of service providers, which solely fulfil their contractual obligations. And when the internal know-how is gone, it is very hard to build it up again.
But for Jolla’s deliberate decision to let Discourse Inc. roll back to a snapshot many ten hours old, just to keep the facade that “everything is fine”, which includes erasing the thread which documented the issues with the Jolla browser (being redirected to a “browser too old”-page) among a couple of other threads and many messages in extant threads, IMO @teleshoes has chosen the right words:
- why on EARTH was DELETING posts+comments for at least one day (and maybe as much as FOUR DAYS) deemed a smaller inconvenience than temporarily breaking the website on a browser that is just barely usable as it is?
- if it was deliberate, y’all are just, like, bad at decisions.
I have the impression that patching the browser detection to still accept the current Jolla Browser was not seriously evaluated, maybe because it would have cost extra money.
But stating this in the way quoted below feels like a slap in the face and a bad joke for someone (e.g., me) who contributed to multiple threads, which do not exist any more, plus I “missed” to keep backups of all the posts in all threads at FSO (should have learnt from the last time I was confronted with that notion) 
:
P.S.: IMO it is better to omit “USA style” (i.e., meaningless) apologies in some situations. After taking actions like this, they feel like an extra kick in the buttocks.