posted
I tried to edit a post and got this message: "Sorry, the time in which you may edit your message has elapsed." It was about 30 minutes between when the post was first put up and when I found the link I was looking for (and attempted to edit the post).
-------------------- And now for something completely different... Posts: 4164 | From: Alabama | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
Personally, I like it. No more will people be able to delete every post they make to a thread when it turns away from the way they wanted it to.
-------------------- I swear, it was funnier in my head. Yeah, I used to be pink. vanilla_pink. Posts: 2493 | From: California | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
vanilla, I replied to a person not long ago without quoting the post but just mentioning the name (as I'm doing, now), and the person went back and changed the OP, thus making my reply look strange, if not ridiculous. It's not the same thing as what you said, but it is similar. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The post counts will probably increase, I think. For instance if Doug posted then couldn't add a link when he found a cite, he'd have two posts, instead of one. Also, it will make it more difficult to erase a waffle if you happen to go back to a thread much later and discover that you have waffled. I've done that once or twice, myself.
I'm sure there is good reason for the new edit time limit, so what we all need to do is to find a cite and be ready to link to it before we post and to stay where we are long enough to be sure we haven't waffled before we leave a thread. It might take a day or two to get used to it, but we can do it!
-------------------- "This air we're breathing. Oxygen, isn't it?"~I’mNotDedalus, impersonating Vincent D’Onofrio.|"Sometimes trying to communicate can be like walking through a minefield."~wanderwoman "Give people a break. It's not easy doing a life."~Joshua Halberstam Posts: 4020 | From: Oklahoma | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:It might take a day or two to get used to it, but we can do it!
It's already been at least that long
Frogpond, it's happened often enough to be a problem. Members used to be able to delete their own posts, which was mostly used for double posts, but it was abused by people going back and removing their posts when they didn't like where the thread was going which led to that privilege being taken away. There are still times when posters go back to edit their posts to change the meaning or content and similarly abuse the privilege.
It's not always a problem of abuse but also of people missing an addition. In Doug's case, he waited more than 30 minutes before going back to add a link. Anyone who had already read his post may well miss whatever he edits to add later. Speaking only for myself, once I read a post I rarely go back to it except a glance to find my place once new posts are made. I have very often discovered later that significant additions were made to a post after the time I read it.
As Signora suggests, it's a good idea to be ready with everything you need - and be sure it's what you want to say! - before you hit "Add reply." It's really for everyone's benefit.
-------------------- "You're the opposite of troll. It's a compliment!" Posts: 12086 | From: Alberta | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jenn: As Signora suggests, it's a good idea to be ready with everything you need - and be sure it's what you want to say! - before you hit "Add reply." It's really for everyone's benefit.
Wait, you're asking us to be prepared? Or, like think before we post???
-------------------- And now for something completely different... Posts: 4164 | From: Alabama | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Signora Del Drago, G.R.I.T.S.: I'm sure there is good reason for the new edit time limit, so what we all need to do is to find a cite and be ready to link to it before we post and to stay where we are long enough to be sure we haven't waffled before we leave a thread. It might take a day or two to get used to it, but we can do it!
Maybe you can, wonderwoman, but I'm almost always thinking of something more, once I submit. I haven't run into the time limit wall yet, but I'm glad I know about it so I'm not alarmed when I do.
tag misses the penguin...
-------------------- Explore, enjoy and protect the planet --- AAMAH Posts: 8532 | From: Michigan | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Signora Del Drago, G.R.I.T.S.: I'm sure there is good reason for the new edit time limit, so what we all need to do is to find a cite and be ready to link to it before we post and to stay where we are long enough to be sure we haven't waffled before we leave a thread. It might take a day or two to get used to it, but we can do it!
Maybe you can, wonderwoman, but I'm almost always thinking of something more, once I submit. I haven't run into the time limit wall yet, but I'm glad I know about it so I'm not alarmed when I do.
tag misses the penguin...
Me, too. I've had to edit many of my posts, but it's usually less than thirty minutes after the original reply. Of course, sometimes it takes me longer than thirty minutes to round up cites, etc., and then when I finally post, I've been spanked.
Will this do?
-------------------- "This air we're breathing. Oxygen, isn't it?"~I’mNotDedalus, impersonating Vincent D’Onofrio.|"Sometimes trying to communicate can be like walking through a minefield."~wanderwoman "Give people a break. It's not easy doing a life."~Joshua Halberstam Posts: 4020 | From: Oklahoma | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
If I wrote the software ( ), I would limit edits to posts based on the # of posts AFTER and not the time limit. That would take care of the problem of changing posts after the thread has moved on but allow folks to edit if they find something to add.
Just an idea.
-------------------- And now for something completely different... Posts: 4164 | From: Alabama | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug4.7: If I wrote the software ( ), I would limit edits to posts based on the # of posts AFTER and not the time limit. That would take care of the problem of changing posts after the thread has moved on but allow folks to edit if they find something to add.
Just an idea.
Why add to an old post? Why not just make a new one?
-------------------- "But I'm adding this to my reasons why I never really liked really good looking men much. Sheesh, what good is good looking if you have to stuff a sock in his mouth." - Sara at home NFBSK, IIRC and other mysterious Snopester language Posts: 851 | From: Indiana | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Doug4.7: If I wrote the software ( ), I would limit edits to posts based on the # of posts AFTER and not the time limit. That would take care of the problem of changing posts after the thread has moved on but allow folks to edit if they find something to add.
Just an idea.
Why add to an old post? Why not just make a new one?
Because I get a, "Why did you add a new post instead of just adding to your last one?", comment.
It's no big deal either way. Just a suggestion.
-------------------- And now for something completely different... Posts: 4164 | From: Alabama | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Should I state the obvious that if you have a legitimate reason for needing a post edited (made the screen too wide, waffled, etc) and your 30 minutes have expired, all you have to do is hit the "Report Post" button?
It's not something I'd suggest for typos, but if it's really something that will cause problems and can't be fixed by a second post, then reporting is a good way to fix it. Reporting posts isn't just for tattling on someone doing something against board rules.
quote:Originally posted by Auntie Witch: Should I state the obvious that if you have a legitimate reason for needing a post edited (made the screen too wide, waffled, etc) and your 30 minutes have expired, all you have to do is hit the "Report Post" button?
I wouldn't suggest reporting waffles unless it's an extreme case of several in a row within a thread or multiple threads accidently started. Lots of waffles happen every day and it would rather bog down the inboxes if every waffle was reported. Like typos, they're really not important enough to worry about. Edit if you can, but if you can't just leave it be and it will be deleted if and when it's noticed.
-------------------- "You're the opposite of troll. It's a compliment!" Posts: 12086 | From: Alberta | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here's a suggestion - though I don't know if the software would support it.
Allow a post to be edited for only 30 minutes after it is first posted, but allow the "owner" to append to it after. This would allow the ubiquitous "ETA" to acknowledge corrections to grammar, omitted words, faulty links, etc.
This keeps the original text and the spirit of new rule for the "limited time for editing".
-------------------- "The fate of *billions* depends on you! Hahahahaha....sorry." Lord Raiden - Mortal Kombat Posts: 1587 | From: Ontario, Canada | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mike, if I understand your suggestion correctly then then the software simply doesn't work that way. You can either edit your post or you can't and having a time limit for editing/appended is the closest compromise available.
-------------------- "You're the opposite of troll. It's a compliment!" Posts: 12086 | From: Alberta | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
Richard W
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV
posted
There seems even less reason to allow "eta"s after 30 minutes than to allow the correction of typos. I have a bad habit of adding loads of "etas" to my posts, but usually only straight after posting and before there are any more posts in the thread.
Even then, I usually think I should probably have made the addition in a second post so that people (like Jenn) won't miss it.
I can't have been as bad at this as I thought, though, since I hadn't noticed the editing limit until somebody pointed it out and I tried it to check. If it was half an hour before I thought of a new point, then I would add it in a separate post anyway.
Posts: 8725 | From: Ipswich - the UK's 9th Best Place to Sleep! | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[lol]](graemlins/lol.gif)
), I would limit edits to posts based on the # of posts AFTER and not the time limit. That would take care of the problem of changing posts after the thread has moved on but allow folks to edit if they find something to add.
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
