Can we please edit our posts?

[Therapy]

Not to upset anyone, but...........

My answer is NO, HELL NO!

If you flubbed up, quote yourself and give an explanation if you want to!

You said it, you live with it!

You can apologize later if you want to.

Kinda like real life in a way.

[w42]

Sometimes a typo can change the meaning of a sentence to the direct opposite. I vote for edit capabilities.

Posts are already being deleted, why not allow edits?

Quote replies (a nice feature) preserves the context of a thread in the event someone wants to hide their tracks.

[Ex-Calif]

Janet has offered that the mods will edit for you after the 30 minute time limit is up. I don't know if I want to spend my time doing that but I will. Sometimes there are valid reasons for editing.

RickD speaks wise words. I too have seen trolling to rile people up, editing of original posts to change meanings and people deleting hundreds of their posts because they "changed" their personality or position or something. Like Rick I have been on usenet boards since the 80's and unbelievably some of my words from teh 80s are still out there on sites still being hosted.

Even if the ability to edit were available in perpetuity, once a person is quoted the words are now in a post "owned" by someone else. Will the original poster then "demand" that Bob and Bill and Benny edit thir posts to remove the offending quote?

No system is perfect, this one works pretty well. Andy and Janet are very open to user requests and as demonstrated in this thread there are people on both sides of every issue (go figure?).

I personally would support a longer editing period, perhaps an hour or so, but on controversial threads, as you all know, an hour could see 20 posts...

I really like the idea of quoting yourself and clarifying. Just like a "real" conversation.

[SV Someday Came]

Originally Posted by Ex-Calif

Janet has offered that the mods will edit for you after the 30 minute time limit is up. .

I appreciate the offer, but I think it is unrealistic. You write a post, something comes up, and an hour later you want to edit it. You have to write to a moderator AND have a moderator respond -- by the time that process unfolds, hours can pass.

I see two primary issues here:

1. Is the current editing time of 30 mins sufficient to cover 90% of oooppsseees? I do not think it is. But I do not have enough experience to suggest a good enough time to cover most contingencies.

2. Do you want to enable permament editing (deleting/adding/grammatical work)? I still think that amending posts with the original product visible a good compromise. I have been on boards where you could amend your posts and I have seen subsequent posts that quoted the original version as opposed to the amended version. The reality is that it all came out in the wash. People got their points across.

nautical62 wrote:

Often when one starts a tread in a forum it takes a few responses to realize your original post needs clarification. Carifications written later under a new post often go unseen, so every keeps commenting on the orginal unedited, incorrect question..

This is really a very good point and I am surprised it has slipped past: This is the heart of the argument for the ability to amend and it touches on Fishspearit's request for a " ... living, breathing document rather than one that decays with time." Amending is a good way to help reduce "noise" on a forum and it can produce content that is more vital.

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by MV

This is really a very good point and I am surprised it has slipped past: This is the heart of the argument for the ability to amend and it touches on Fishspearit's request for a " ... living, breathing document rather than one that decays with time." Amending is a good way to help reduce "noise" on a forum and it can produce content that is more vital.

It doesn't work.

If you amend your post #12 and I am reading #27 I will never know it.

Well, maybe I will when you post "I changed my post. Didn't you go back and reread it?"..........ummmm.........like yea sure.......go back every what......two days and reread everything to see who changed their mind?

Like I said, It doesn't work. Even if a moderator did the change for you.

If, however you quote yourself in a new post and add whatever you need then I (and others) will note it.

[Maine Sail]

As a mod on another very, very active sailing forum I too vote for full edit capabilities!

We have seen little to no problems allowing edits and I do feel you guys are being a tad paranoid.

With all due respect to Rick D. comparing a geo-politics forum to a sailing forum is like comparing Rosie O'Donnell to Lance Armstrong in a fitness competition.. Geo politics can be downright hostile compared to sailing and I understand your reasoning for locking down edits with that type of forum..

[dacust]

I vote for leaving it like it is.

Someone above (who wanted editing) said that the internet is capable of being a living document. I agree. That's what a wiki is for. And it does it very well. A forum, however, is a conversation. In the spoken world, you can't go back and change a conversation. You can clarify afterwards, though. Here in the forum we have more capabilities than a normal conversation. We can look at it and edit before we post. Then 30 minutes to make changes on our own. Then after that we can ask a mod to change.

So, just be careful what you post. Don't say anything you don't want to be read. Remember, unlike a conversation, it's in print and forever, so just be more careful than you would when speaking. And given the nature of posting I mentioned above, it's easier to be careful in the forum than when speaking.

A forum is just another type of communication. It is different than other forms. Different forms have different strengths and weaknesses. By it's nature, I don't think a forum lends itself to unlimited editing. Just my opinion.

FWIW: I went back and reworded some of the above...

-dan

[SV Someday Came]

Originally Posted by Therapy

It doesn't work.

I have seen it work on other boards.

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by MV

I have seen it work on other boards.

How does one find out that the person has changed what he said?

Moderators note: Hello Therapy!

[David M]

Towards the bottom of the post will be a little note that comes up that says when the post was edited and by who.

I will edit yours so you can see. If you did the edit, your name would be there instead of mine.

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by David M

Toward the bottom of the post will be a little note that comes up that says when the post was edited and by who.

I will edit yours so you can see. If you did the edit, your name would be there instead of mine.

Wonderful!

So a post on page 2 is edited and I am on page 5 following as time goes by. I won't see the edit unless I go back and look.

Who is going to do the looking back?

It seems to me it only works for one person and no one else. That person can then (much later on) say "No, that is not right, I edited what I said."

Doesn't help me.

PS I edited your first word.

[David M]

Changing it from 30 minutes is being discussed by the mods, I doubt though it will be changed.

[Eleven]

Two suggestions.
1. Let me add a post script to my original post. I can add a revised view from later comments etc.
2. Transfer old posts to a historic section so only current (three months since last addition) threads appear.
3. Thread Starter to add revised comments to the original post.
4. I can't count.

[cooper]

I vote for allowing a full edit function. As a moderator on another site, I dont see that it creates that much more work (if at all). The moderators on this site are quite handy with the delete function. Continuity is reasonable but not at any cost. This is the internet not a letter home to mum that can be sorted "one on one" with a phone call latter.

Perhaps a measure of the maturity and relevance of the site ?

If the poster who has chosen to delete their ,or edit their post, is so important to the thread, and the context changes so much ...then their initial input must be so important as to render the thread dead.

That being the case...delete the whole thread.

IT IS the internet.....unless of course "controversy sells"

[GordMay]

The after-posting editing feature is really intended to be used for minor things, such as the correction of typos that might have been missed with the Preview Post feature (before the post is actually submitted); or to add a quick afterthought, of the kind that sometimes strikes the moment one clicks the 'Submit Post' button.

If, after making a post, it occurs that some useful information has been left out, or something else might be considered, it is better to make a second post in the thread, or ask an Admin/Mod to make the change.

If a contributor materially changes his mind, a subsequent retraction or correction post is appropriate.