Can we please edit our posts?

[Hud3]

We're still discussing this issue in the Mod Forum, and I'd like some feedback on my comments below...


If you want to amend a post after the time limit, wouldn't it work in most cases to simply "quote" the original post in a new post containing your amended wording? This being done after religiously using the "Preview Post" feature to make certain that what you typed is what you really wanted to say in the first place. [note: I've been saved from embarrassment on more than a few occasions by using Preview.]

Therapy is right, in my opinion. Changing a post buried pages back in a thread does nothing for those who are following the new posts.

And as Dan states, your words can't really be deleted from the Internet. The original post will likely be out there in a cache on a server somewhere, and Google usually can find it.

[Fishspearit]

Originally Posted by Hud3

If you want to amend a post after the time limit, wouldn't it work in most cases to simply "quote" the original post in a new post containing your amended wording? .......Therapy is right, in my opinion. Changing a post buried pages back in a thread does nothing for those who are following the new posts.

I agree, editing an earlier post does little for the moderators and active forumites who are always on here clicking the "view new posts" button.

However, if you look back at all the older threads you notice that they have a much higher views to replies ratio than the newer threads. People keep reading them, usually from the beginning. CF does really well in broad google searches when you are researching an item, and somebody a year from now may read the bad advice, or inappropriate comment that I left on page one and not make it to page three where I redact my statement.

I understand that there must be a balance, you don't want people getting pouty and taking all their posts home with them when they get upset. I don't know what options the software gives you for edit control.

[imagine2frolic]

My parents advised me once to think before I open my mouth. I think 30 minutes is a reasonable time to make an adjustment. It will also help teach us to think a little harder!

[Zach]

Originally Posted by 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.

I like number one.

If anything, not all participants in the discussion are are real time readers. Being able to add a post script, would help if on the next page there are later comments from the author, clarifying thoughts on the page before.

In other words... if you want to add more information/clarification there is a third button... not just Reply, and Quote. But one that leaves a comment below that particular post, while quoting the original in a new post with the comment, bringing the thread back to the top of the list.

It is true that in conversation what you say is forever... but are we trying to capture in time the message of the author, or the time line of the discussion?

Me thinks the ability to edit yields higher quality content for those searching the archives.

I guess it all depends on what the greater goal the boards are meant to accomplish. Real time discussion, or a library of user supplied information.

Cheers,

Zach

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by 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.

Thank you!!!!!!!!!!1

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by Hud3

If you want to amend a post after the time limit, wouldn't it work in most cases to simply "quote" the original post in a new post containing your amended wording? This being done after religiously using the "Preview Post" feature to make certain that what you typed is what you really wanted to say in the first place. [note: I've been saved from embarrassment on more than a few occasions by using Preview.]

If not all.

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by Fishspearit

However, if you look back at all the older threads you notice that they have a much higher views to replies ratio than the newer threads. People keep reading them, usually from the beginning. CF does really well in broad google searches when you are researching an item, and somebody a year from now may read the bad advice, or inappropriate comment that I left on page one and not make it to page three where I redact my statement.

Stop that then!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by Zach

I like number one.

If anything, not all participants in the discussion are are real time readers. Being able to add a post script, would help if on the next page there are later comments from the author, clarifying thoughts on the page before.

In other words... if you want to add more information/clarification there is a third button... not just Reply, and Quote. But one that leaves a comment below that particular post, while quoting the original in a new post with the comment, bringing the thread back to the top of the list.

It is true that in conversation what you say is forever... but are we trying to capture in time the message of the author, or the time line of the discussion?

Me thinks the ability to edit yields higher quality content for those searching the archives.

I guess it all depends on what the greater goal the boards are meant to accomplish. Real time discussion, or a library of user supplied information.

Cheers,

Zach

I will continue to disagree.

Folks who use the "library" idea would soon learn that one must read all posts because of "wandering" (related or not). They cannot read just a couple of posts in a thread (edited or not) and expect to come away with enough correct information for a learned decision.

If all posts are read then all corrections and retractions would be noted.

[nautical62]

Originally Posted by Hud3

...If you want to amend a post after the time limit, wouldn't it work in most cases to simply "quote" the original post in a new post containing your amended wording? ...
Therapy is right, in my opinion. Changing a post buried pages back in a thread does nothing for those who are following the new posts....

.

I guess one thing I'm beginning to understand is that different people tend to read and answer forums differently. I agree with Hud here that quoting the original and amending it would work well for those who focus primarily on new posts and not the original post. However, that's not how I tend to read and answer most forum threads.

I see the OP as the question someone really wanted answered, so I usually pay more attention to that than all the following posts which often wander into side issues often without really answering the OP. So for me, and people who approach the forums like me, being able to edit or add to the OP would be of benefit.

I think being able to add, but not delete or edit would solve the contextual issue, but obviously would not do anything for correcting typos or correcting something someone says in the heat of the moment and wishes to correct a short time later. Obviously quoting the original later also does nothing to correct typos or things said in the heat of the moment either.

Again my compliments to the site administrators and moderators. Which ever way you decide to go, I appreciate that you listen and consider what people here have to say. I've experienced other forums where that was not the case.

[MidLandOne]

Originally Posted by 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.

While the mood is one of asking for things can we have a thumbs up smiley cos I would like to put one here in affirmation of GordMays post (and Therapy's ones too but he has been too valuably voluble for me to quote it all ).

The forum is open to all sorts, the intelligent, the knowledgable, the foolish, the suspicious, the gullible, those inclined to post with red mists over their eyes, those that shoot from drunken hips, etc, etc and also those who seem not to be able to read in the first place.

Don't see any point myself in trying to turn the forum into the Encyclopedia Britannica or provide a means for a living feast of edits and counter edits throughout threads as people change their minds as to what they wanted to say or ended up saying something they regretted afterwards.

[nautical62]

For those who have argued that it is important to preserve the orginal post unedited but also advocate the idea of quoting and adding as a later post because you feel most people will not go back to the original post but rather focus only on recent posts, consider this:

In the current system I am not able to go back and edit my old post after thirty minutes. However, if I quote someone else, I am able edit what someone else posted any time in the future which can radically change what people perceived they originally said. If you believe people only read the most recent posts, the power to edit what someone else said when you quote them has more power to be abused than being able to edit your own original post.

[Hud3]

Originally Posted by nautical62

For those who have argued that it is important to preserve the orginal post unedited but also advocate the idea of quoting and adding as a later post because you feel most people will not go back to the original post but rather focus only on recent posts, consider this:

In the current system I am not able to go back and edit my old post after thirty minutes. However, if I quote someone else, I am able edit what someone else posted any time in the future which can radically change what people perceived they originally said. If you believe people only read the most recent posts, the power to edit what someone else said when you quote them has more power to be abused than being able to edit your own original post.

Nauti,

That hasn't been a problem on the Forum so far.....

Don't give 'em ideas!

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by Hud3

Nauti,

That hasn't been a problem on the Forum so far.....

Don't give 'em ideas!

I have known that to happen elsewhere.

Usually in jest and acknowledged at the time as a joke.

If not a joke and done maliciously they are easily found out and permanently banned. NO warnings or reprieves.

Easily!

PS I just edited this for spelling and since I did not put a reason in the "Reason for Editing" box there is no way for you to know I misspelled maliciously or reprieves upon posting. Hehe.

[nautical62]

Originally Posted by Hud3

Nauti,

That hasn't been a problem on the Forum so far.....

Don't give 'em ideas!

My intent is certainly not to give others bad ideas, but rather to show that people who's intention it is to go back and edit wording to make others look bad can do it in worse ways than editing their own words.

If you feel my pointing that out opens up new potential problems, please feel free to delete my post. No worries.

[MidLandOne]

Well if we are into ideas for the contrary view to scuttle themselves with, then for those that want to be able to edit their posts there is on most forums (including this, but I have not tried) a pretty easy way to post such that you can edit your post for as long after as you wish and which, furthermore, cannot be edited by the moderators except by deleting the whole thing.

But I would not promote it myself .