Can we please edit our posts?

[Fishspearit]

I would just like to once again request that we be able to edit our posts.

I understand the argument against allowing us to edit our own words. "It could disrupt the flow of conversation". If we were all children who edited in ridiculous ways than that could happen, but we are mostly adults here and the majority of Forums on the internet allow editing without any serious disruptions.

I've been bothered for a while by a post from Tabbycat recently on this thread http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...now-19475.html

When you purchase insurance, the application form you sign is a legally binding contract. Of course, the claims adjuster would have to find out, which is surprisingly easy, what with people posting things on forums and keeping boat blogs and the like....

I could go through the 'Sailors Confessional' section on here and find lots of examples of poor seamanship, or through the maintenance section and find lots of faulty maintenance suggestions and examples that could be used to void an insurance settlement. What if I ask a question on here about how to fix a rudder problem, and then I lose my rudder at sea? An insurance company could claim I made a faulty repair. I wonder how many claims have really been voided because of adjusters finding blogs or forum posts?

Sometimes, in an eagerness to get a post off, I don't give it sufficient proof reading in the first half hour. I don't ever bother moderators to fix spelling or grammatical errors, but for eternity I come off looking like a retard who can't spell or write well.

Sometimes I respond a little hastily because I'm in a hurry, or perhaps get a little worked up over someone elses post. A few hours later, I may regret the harsh wording and want to soften the tone a little bit for posterity.

I'm probably not the only person who has sometimes felt a strong desire to limit my posting on cruisersforum (maybe that's a good thing) because it is practically posted in stone.

I'm sure even Hemingway's first drafts were not always eloquent.

It is our words, and our thoughts that make up Cruisersforum. Yet, once posted they are then held hostage from us. I've been a member for over 2 and a half years with hundreds of posts. Have I not yet proven that I am enough of an adult to edit my own posts? What will it take?

If there is a fear that we will go crazy/wild with the unbridled power and authority to edit our own words, how about a trial period? Or perhaps give edit abilities to those who have been members over a year? Or more than a hundred posts?

[Microship]

I generally don't like "me too" posts, but this is one. Good idea. Given that Googlage turns up all sorts of historical information, I've grown wary of being adamant about product recommendations.

I understand that post-editing can lead to follow-ups appearing completely out of context, but there is already an audit trail mechanism to show that a post has been tweaked. I think, given that this is a respected searchable archive, that posters should be able to at least append to previous posts, if not actually modify them.

Cheers,
Steve

[Chief Engineer]

I theenk we shud beabel to edit our psots.

I don sea wut the porblem is widdit

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by fishspearit

... It is our words, and our thoughts that make up Cruisersforum. Yet, once posted they are then held hostage from us.You can edit to your hearts content, prior to publishing...

I believe that the contributions may become the property of CF, once posted - but maybe not.

Prior to publishing, anyone can edit all they wish. This would require using the "preview post" feature, or composing in a word processing program (as I often do).
After publishing, we still have a short time to review, and edit, our posts.

[Janet H]

Currently posts can be edited for 30 minutes after they are initially made. We made this choice (a long time ago) after some unfortunate instances of posters going through and substantially altering or removing posts in ways that ruined thread continuity and derailed conversations. If you need to have a post edited after the edit window has expired, please contact any moderator and we will be glad to make changes for you.

[nautical62]

If not editing, at least being able to add an update to the original post that is labeled as an update.

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.

Being able to post an update in the original post would allow people to see this without altering the original message. - However I agree that I think being allowed to edit (rather than update) if usually used more productively than disruptively.

Update: While I think editing or updating would be an improvement, I'd like to thank the moderators for all their time with a site that is already good!

[Microship]

I guess the work-around, if ever necessary, is to augment posts about technically detailed or fast-changing topics with a link to a corresponding article on one's own website that can easily be edited later (and is not owned by CF). This forum then provides the networking aspects and essential community discussion, but content that involves a lot of creative effort (or that might have to evolve) can live elsewhere.

The ability to add at any time, even if not change the text, would certainly solve the issue mentioned by nautical62. We all keep learning... and some clever hack or new product I recommended a couple years ago might now need a bit of clarification located closer to the original post than a follow-up way down in the thread.

Steve

[Trekka]

Another vote for editing. Give us at least 24 hrs to change.

[Fishspearit]

Originally Posted by GordMay

I'm a stubborn 'ol man

Hey, I can put words in your mouth too!

I just think that CF is missing out on one of the advantages of the internet. We can create a living, breathing document rather than one that decays with time. Would you prefer to use a cruising guidebook which the author updates occasionally, or the documents original, first edition?

Editing may also lessen some of the bickering that sometimes occurs. People could tone down their hotheaded posts, or posts that are easily misinterpreted.

[Zach]

Yup, I've had a few times where late night posts don't make a lick of sense the next day. The ability to go back and parse the half sentences and poor grammar would make me post a bit more often.

Then again... Half the time when I hit post it asks me to log in and eats what I've said. (Sigh...)

[Fishspearit]

Originally Posted by Janet H

We made this choice (a long time ago) after some unfortunate instances of posters going through and substantially altering or removing posts in ways that ruined thread continuity and derailed conversations.

It's your forum, I hope you will at least give new consideration to that decision made a long time ago.

[Janet H]

Originally Posted by Fishspearit

It's your forum, I hope you will at least give new consideration to that decision made a long time ago.

Your input is welcome and we'll give it some thought. Frustration about not being able to improve an old post is understandable; finding a workable solution to this issue continues to be a challenge but we'll mull it over again.

[RickD]

I'll chime in. I run a forum like this one, not related to boats, but rather geo-politics.

The software is the same (a slightly different version).

We allow editing of the messages for 10 MINUTES only for precisely the same reasons as used here... "Disruption of conversations" and more correctly in our case to prevent someone from changing the original intent of a message.

Here is why:

Over the last 26 years I have run dial up BBSes (no editing abilities after a post), email lists (no editing ability once a message is posted to the list), BBS forums with full and configurable editing capabilities (and we've run both ways)....

On the forums where editing was capable 3 or 4 months down the road, we've had disgruntled posters, or even people who for some reason decided they wanted to REMOVE messages (for whatever reasons) actually go in and empty the text of the messages leaving blank space in our forums

One person completely and utterly deleted every message he'd ever posted from one site destroying several threads - thereby abusing such abilities.

So... as a regular poster on several sites, including this one of late, and with the experiences I've had with people abusing the PRIVILEGE of posting (and then removing) messages, I am going to say "NO" - please don't allow editing past the current 30 minute mark.

There are a lot of reasons besides "abuse" not to allow it.

While there are people who want to, say, correct the spelling errors or something, this is actually something that probably should be accomplished before you post (or while you're posting).

Secondly, if you make a MISTAKE with information, there is nothing preventing you from posting the SAME message with corrections in the same thread allowing yourself to make the corrections without removing the original information. Most of the time you can simply quote the mistake and then "rewrite it correctly".

Finally, there are those who have used subtle and hidden messages (in plain sight) to rile up others for whatever their personal reasons were, and then later "reword" the original message just slightly so it does not even appear to have changed - leaving the now-riled up people screaming like a bunch of idiots while the original perp has managed to get completely away with it because a Mod or Admin didn't catch the original message and is wondering why everyone is so upset.

So... I am with the admins on this, leave it like it is.

There are other ways around corrections.

[SV Someday Came]

Originally Posted by Microship

I I think, given that this is a respected searchable archive, that posters should be able to at least append to previous posts, if not actually modify them.

Absolutely~!!! Being able to track the (occasional) amendments is extremely valuable. I think editing a post (particularly by deleting content) up to a certain point in time a good idea, but amending posts -- now that is useful, proactive, and creates its own documentation of change over time.

1. Allow total editing for 2 hours. The current 20 min limit is too short -- you can easily be distracted to finish a task in that period of time. And I think any longer could create contextual confusion. But.... no matter the final decided time, the current 20 mins is really too short.
2. After 2hours, allow post to be amended as long as the original versions are visibly accessible.

I work in a medical where every single bit of electronic documentation is "set in stone". I can amend my hospital patient record, butthe original is kept right in the same record. When I pull an amended record, I see what the provider wants me to see and if I look a little lower on the computer screen, I can see the original texty (in what must be 3 point font). The end result for all of us here is that we are all very careful to make sure the original reflects our thoughts. no one likes amending their records. I suspect the same dynamic will occur here.

[nautical62]

Originally Posted by Fishspearit

...Editing may also lessen some of the bickering that sometimes occurs. People could tone down their hotheaded posts, or posts that are easily misinterpreted.

I think this is a really good point. The internet allows us to respond quickly and more heatedly than was previously possible with paper communications. The internet can also allow us to go back and correct things said in haste.