"I noticed a while back one vocal proponent of limiting edits actually edited her own old post not long after criticizing someone else for doing the same thing. Now is she a big, fat hypocrite? You decide" Amen give me five.
I saw someone (male) who is totally against editing - ever! Delete his entire response from a thread with no explanation. I laughed when I saw it. Did it make him a bad person in my eyes? Nah! But, then don't stand up in your soap box and preach against the evils of editing.
Lighten up people this is not a court of law. Words like subpoena and evidence make me wanna run for cover
As responsible, intelligent, mature adults we have the privilege and latitude to live among our neighbors according to our own principles the best we can.
Since many of us feel strongly about the issue, I propose multiple standards, making everyone happy!
1. Those of you who do not want any edit capability, place a post-it above your monitor that says, "Thou shalt not edit."
2. Those of you who feel one hour is enough, "Reminder: Past 60 minutes shalt thou edit not!"
3. Those of you who feel a day is in order: "Harken thou poster, if the c0ck crow twice, else the sun or moon returneth to its place in the sky from whence thou hast posted, thou shalt not edit!"
4. Those of you who feel there should be no restrictions, place a post-it saying, "Sweat not the small stuff." Or, "Remember to let the cat in."
Now, why would't everyone be happy with this? Each of us, as responsible caring adults, will abide according to our own rules.
This is a great solution! I can't help but think world peace is just around the corner.
Yes I did!!!!! It was an attempt to put myself in another’s shoes and pulled my thoughts when I didn’t like the way they were handled, my words were responded to in a most inappropriate way!!!!!
And you know what, there was no justification for what I did, there was no satisfaction and my feelings were that of a spoiled brat taking my *words* home with me as a child that hasn’t learned to inner act and play nicely with others……..
I have news for all you once posted it is always possible to find a copy of the thing. Like it or not, it is public property and once placed in public and is clipped and pasted by many individuals. So, there is no good reasoning nor any safe harbors after it has hit the board………
The only thing that any one has control over is themselves and what they do here, once public it is kept by any number of people including ex’s, WayGB and lord only knows who. By a simple asking around, often the disappearing comments can be found…….
That is reality and it was a hard lesson for me to learn; but at least I did. Any one that thinks that deleting helps in any way is only fooling themselves………….
In a black and white world you can come up with clear cut yes and no; rights and wrong. The world is full of gray (I saw at least three of those pesky hairs today-time for L'oreal ) fushia, mango, purple and lime green. There are times that people need to edit for whatever reason. Does that change me? Does it really change anything? Nope! I don't own anything in this life except me (and maybe some property - Ocean front in Arizona ).
Hey, I don't really care too much one way or another. I can adjust to whatever decision Paw makes on this. To me it is not too important, although I do realize that it is quite important to a some to have it either one way or another. If I had to vote on this and my vote really made a difference, I would probably abstain.
Personaly, here at GS I don't think I have ever gone after someone who has edited or deleted a post, although I was annoyed one time when someone changed the title of a thread, which also changed the meaning of it. My input to the thread then looked totally rediculous since it addressed the original title and meaning. This is the kind of stuff that an edit limit might possibly help. But these kind of things are infrequent.
I frequent several other boards as well as GS. A couple of these these allow no editing at all so I suppose I have learned to live with it. For what it's worth, it does not seem to make much of a difference either way.
I remember when I first got to Waydale 2+ years ago. I was very confused by the whole set up.
But, in addition to that...there was a woman named Victoria who apparently edited and deleted posts all over the place.
I was extremely confused at that...and actually left waydale for a few months in total confusion, until a poster explained to me what had happened. It was not until then that I ventured back.
The threads made absolutely NO SENSE...and responses to her posts made no sense...and, to someone coming for help-it sure did the exact opposite for me.
I think one day is plenty enough.
I'm sure if there is "poster remorse", Pawtucket could fidget with the controls to remedy the situation if it must be.
[This message was edited by Wacky Funster on June 15, 2002 at 19:04.]
I'm very undecided about how supportive I am about an editing time limit. I'm leaning towards a time limit, but I hope it's more generous than one hour, or even a day. That's not nearly long enough for me. By the time it first hits me that I just wrote the most idiotic post imaginable, hours might pass before I can get back to my computer to undo the damage, and try to salvage what little I have left of a reputation.
On the other hand, it really is annoying when posters habitually delete or radically edit posts, especially if it's one that I took seriously enough to devote my time to read and respond. This board is interactive. If people are writing only for their own benefit, maybe Paw can add a forum devoted to soliloquies for people who have something to say but don't want to risk being misunderstood. Like a place to practice journaling, but with a silent audience. Otherwise, like it or not, when we enter into a dialogue with others we do have a responsibility to the people with whom we're interacting. I think deleting posts is as much a way to control the dialogue (by being passive-aggressive) as is insisting others don't delete their posts (by being a bully).
Either way innocent bystanders get crowded out.
Maybe a very generous time limit will satisfy both sides.
Should there be a time limit on your capability to edit?
I like to be able to edit my posts whenever and whereever. I don't want there to be a time limit for this. What if I make a mistake and want to correct it? What if I don't see my mistake until a week from yesterday?
Per his above post, Grizz edited an earlier post. It was a sad, sad tale of anger and shame and woe. Somebody abused his words, so he up'n deleted the dang post.
The moral of the story? Grizz felt no better. No sir! In his big furry heart he knew he was behaving like a "spoiled brat."
What's more, he knows, and he wants us all to know, that them words are public, and once'n they's out there, they's out there!
Well holy ....fire, folks! If'n they's out there, then they's out there! Why sure!
Now... why is this moo-ey im-por-tan-tay, as they say south of el bordit-o? Because it solves our beeeg problem-o. You all who want or need to recover deleted posts, so as to make your lives complete again, hell!, go get 'em! They's out there. Grizz says so. (A number of posters have said so, too.)
It therefore really doesn't matter what happens to a post on a given thread. The info is there for all to have and enjoy. The notion of privacy is an illusion.
Now, let's be clear that not everybody shares the motives of a "spoiled brat." I guess that was the poster's implication, but it just ain't true. Some folks have adult reasons for doin' stuff, even if other "spoiled brats" (you know who you are) don't like it.
Maybe their hitherto private handle has become public, because somebody has a beeeeg fat yap, or some nosey, nosey person has poked her big, fat nose where it didn't belong, and once she snorted up the new info, her big, fat mouth then went into high gear. (This is all hypothetical, of course. We don't know anybody with either a big, fat nose for other people's business, or a big, fat mouth for blabbing it. But it could happen some day.) Suddenly, there is a lot of stuff out there, once shared in anonymity, now majorly biographical. Can everybody see why that could be a problem? I knew you could neighbors!
You said "After reading a previous post . . . " Would that be my post? Since you haven't addressed any points that Wacky or Mark brought up in their posts, I guess you're responding to me.
"No one is told anything other than what people want them to know!"
No argument from me here.
"What may look 'wierd', may in itself, be that one person honored another's wishes, as in 'please edit', while the other didn't admit to others, an edit was done on their behalf, or at their request!"
We used to have a poster here who was still "in." Not only were some of his comments supportive of TWI, but he also occasionally deleted his posts during a time that he was working out his own comfort level in what he wished to reveal or not. He was swimming in an ocean of hostility every time he posted. I deleted a few of my posts at his request, as well as speaking up on his behalf so he could have a place to work out his TWI involvement without the distraction of constant criticism. So you're not telling me anything I don't know.
"TWI messed up alot of people * who feel they must look 'right' (which is not right in the big world) and therefore, one is probably needing recovery in that area and the room made here for that is tremendous, even IF they don't know it, others do..."
I've made room for plenty for people by not jumping on their backs every time they post something I disagree with. Have you?
"Who should judge a poster ~ when we all live in glass houses!!!"
We all make judgments. We decide who we like and who we don't. We decide whose causes we're willing to fight and whose we aren't. We get judged in return. If we choose to, we can use those judgments as mirrors to see how our words are reflected onto others.
"Some people don't choose to make an issue out of anothers' lack of honesty, because they hope they are finding it ~ without making a spectacle of them, unless it's a joke...It's called tolerance Respect Compassion"
Please don't demand that I accept your version of tolerance, respect, and compassion. If something is important to me, then it is important to me. I don't see how recommending a generous time limit on posts makes me intolerant, disrespectful, or uncompassionate. I think it makes me willing to compromise. Speaking of making an issue out of things, maybe you haven't counted, but you've posted many, many times on this thread. I think you've made your point, many times over. Whether I have your approval or not, I will make my point, too.
"Maybe someone found it in their heart to leave it alone...in hopes of the unsure and insecure to get stronger, even if it was AT anothers expense... Generosity... Definately!"
I strongly disagree with you that anyone should experience growth at another's expense. It is not generosity, unless the person has willingly sacrificed himself for the other. It is for each person to decide how much he will or will not give.
Gingertea, I have composed this response to you without insulting your values, intelligence, or character. Try to show me the same courtesy. Unless you're picking a fight, and want to exchange insults with me. If that’s the case, I will accommodate you, if that's what you want.
the board "remembers" previous post titles we've made - just got a little drop down when i went to type in that field and it gave me the most recent ones i've entered, to select from. now that's kinda cool.
there's a lot of points being brought up about editing i'd never really thought about...hmmm...
i'd still vote for just leaving edit on all the time, but i can see now why in some cases it could be a hassle. dunno. doesn't matter much to me either way...maybe a compromise inbetween...? 12 hours, 42 minutes and 30 seconds?
Is the time/space meter needle supposed to be jumping around like that? *tap-tap*...sqwrkltpzfttt@#$%^&!!!!!!.....
As a participant, I don't have strong feelings about this one way or another. If I were administering a Web forum, I would probably allow one hour for edits after posting. After that, changes or deletions would have to be done by a moderator. Corrections or clarifications by forum participants could be done through follow-up posts. The primary reason for this would be to maintain continuity in the threads.
I don't think it's fair to accuse people who favor time limits on editing of being out to control others or to otherwise attack their character. I think the specific personal attacks are particularly inappropriate, especially the remarks accusing a person who has not even posted to this thread of being two-faced.
There are opinions here that range from 10 minutes to infinity! And they're all right for each individual.
Here’s what I’m going to try to do for my own sanity when it comes to others deleting and/or changing their posts, and for my own posts as well:
If I know that someone has a propensity for deleting or changing their posts, and I choose to reply to their post the way they originally wrote it, I will copy it to a Word.doc for my own personal use . That way, if the post is changed or deleted, I can quote it to remind not only the poster, but remind myself as well as the others who read the discussion what was originally said.
If I post something that I need to edit for things other than spelling or grammar, I will add a post with an explanation of why I may have changed my opinion, or apologize to anyone I may have offended by my original post.
Whenever possible, I will use email as a way of communicating something I feel needs a response to the individual, instead of using the forums for issues that are personal in nature. If that person has their email address marked private – then I will ask them to please email me with their address. If that fails, and I really, really, really feel that it needs to be addressed, then I will post it.
I won’t post anything if I’m not sure whether I want people to read it or not. If I have any thoughts that I will live to regret something I’ve written on a public discussion forum, I won’t post it.
These are my self-imposed "rules". I don’t expect anyone to do the same things. I just wanted to share my opinion of what I need to do regarding the editing/deleting of posts - which is something I find irritating and frustrating at times.
I still think a 24 hour editing time-limit should be enough for people to make decisions about their posts. That way if someone is not sure they want others to read what they have to say, then perhaps they’ll think more carefully about what they’re saying before they post it.
P.S. An afterthought - because there is no preview function here - all of us may be editing for spelling, grammar and UBB Code more often. I know I probably will... especially until I get used to the UBB code.
I was discussing your point in the context of this thread.
You seem to be saying:
1. Deleting or editing a post in response to a subsequent post is childish and immature behavior.
2. Deleting or editing a post in response to a subsequent post is futile because the original text is archived.
To which I reply:
1. There may be very good reasons for editing or deleting a post. Not everybody who might do the same is behaving like a spoiled brat, just because you've 'fessed up to it. I pointed out that you're speaking only for yourself.
2. If the text of all Grease Spot posts is "out there" and "archived," there should be no further objection to anyone's editing or deleting of their posts, because the internet reality is that they've deleted or edited nothing at all. The original is out there forever.
That's about it.
**
On to the larger topic...
The option of editing makes some people feel better.
One cannot edit anyone else's posts, only their own. One cannot disguise the fact that their own posts, once edited, have been so. They cannot edit any part of their post which has been copied by another poster into their own post. The "freedom" to edit has a lot of limitations.
We are each highly qualified to say however much should be "enough time" to make a final edit for ourselves. None of us are qualified to say what is "enough time" for others.
How can we possibly know how much is "enough" for anyone else?
As for the board rules, they are Pawtucket's prerogative. Currently there are edit limitations set. I'd like to see them removed. Whatever Paw decides will have an impact on the board, both positive and negitive. I believe maintaining the limitations will result in a negative net gain.
edited to correct - there are no limits for editing currently. They may have been on temporarily, or I may just be on drugs. Sorry for any misunderstandings.
[This message was edited by satori on June 17, 2002 at 9:16.]
On Waydale I removed as many of my posts as the administrator would allow. Why? Because I learned that what was posted on WayDale could be used without my permission or knowledge. I was told by someone who was helping the administrator that the administrator was planning to sue twi. Feeling hoodwinked and manipulated, I pulled as many of my posts as possible. For me, time showed that I was very glad I did...I had put personal information on WayDale that I was not prepared to deal with in a court of law if needed.
Geeze the bellyaching I still hear about that! The punishment for removing my posts was to be banned.
Well, just before the old GSC forums rolled over to this one, another poster removed many of his posts. Nobody has said even one word about it.
I think...no...I know that there are those who use these boards as a personal vendetta machine and bring things up years later...and yell and scream from the rooftops, "I got proof! I copied and pasted all the documentation!"...and do so much in the same way they did things on the elementary school playground...you know, only the unpopular kids would be subject to the "rules".
Can you imagine keeping posts from years ago? Living in a quagmire of grudges, hurt feelings, personal vendettas, never allowing for personal growth for yourself or others?
This is not The Odyssey or Grapes of Wrath. This is a bulletin board (UBB...get it?) fer crying out loud. How many people go to a bulletin board and expect the posts to never change, never go anywhere, always make sense with the other posts....etc?
The very nature of a bulletin board is temporary notices.
The arguments I'm hearing from the very vocal "no limit" side aren't making sense to me.
Deleting posts is annoying. Just about everyone agrees to that. The people who find it annoying are being asked to show tolerance, generosity, and whatever other virtues they bring to the board toward those who irritate them. Fine. However, if I understand the argument, those who delete their posts offer no better explanation for it than, Hey I can do what I want and you can't stop me. So buzz off. And these are the same people who keep telling me that GreaseSpot is a community.
I used to edit my posts until they neared perfection, until someone once complained on a thread that I was pulling the topic to the top of the forum without really adding anything to it. So I learned to live with the fact that even if my post wasn't perfectly communicated, it was better to leave it than be a pain in the neck.
As far as releasing too much personal information, I try to be as careful as possible to only communicate what I want the universe to know. So while I understand "poster's regret" (I've had plenty of that), I don't understand why the entire board should accommodate a couple of posters who seem to regret most of what they write.
We're not talking about a stray post being occasionally deleted. Some posters are in the habit of heavily deleting their posts so as to disrupt the dialogue on a regular basis. Self-sacrifice has never come naturally to me, so if someone is asking me to sublimate my preferences (which in this case is to keep posts relatively intact) for their benefit (because it's somehow cathartic to erase what they've written), I need a better reason for it than that they don't owe me anything.
The only reason why this is an issue is because of how disruptive this whole post deletion thing has been.
1. The people who find it annoying are being asked to show tolerance, generosity, and whatever other virtues they bring to the board toward those who irritate them.
2. ...those who delete their posts offer no better explanation for it than, Hey I can do what I want and you can't stop me. So buzz off.
3. I don't understand why the entire board should accommodate a couple of posters who seem to regret most of what they write.
4. We're not talking about a stray post being occasionally deleted. Some posters are in the habit of heavily deleting their posts so as to disrupt the dialogue on a regular basis.
5. The only reason why this is an issue is because of how disruptive this whole post deletion thing has been.
laleo,
Just quoting an abbreviated version of your post to address a few points.
1. Some of those most vocal for limits are not exactly known for their "tolerance, generosity, and whatever other virtues they bring..." I'm not asking them for anything. I'm making the case to Grease Spot, not the vocal minority.
Also, there are plenty of irritating things on a bulletin board, depending how they might be perceived by a variety of different people. Which ones should we make illegal?
2. Is that the best explanation you've read so far? With so many other points raised, I'm thinking you may have skipped over a few. The "buzz off" response is not offered to everyone - only those who are essentially saying the very same thing to those who would like the edit option.
3&4. You're saying a couple of posters delete everything they write. Do you have any statistics to back that up, other than your own impression? I have a much different impression. I don't edit much, and virtually never delete posts. When I do edit, I usually say why at the bottom. In other words I am considerate of others when I edit, and I expect the same of others. I just haven't seen that much of it. I think you are exaggerating - mightily.
5. It has not been disruptive, in my view. It is a few very vocal opponents of the edit option, the anti-editorialists, if you will, who have made a stink about it.
The Waydale and Grease Spot precedent is that editing is permitted. Where there is opportunity for abuse, there will be abuse. Freedom provides such opportunity. Should we abandon freedom to prevent abuse? I don't think so. Neither should we make a rule to abandon a useful tool because it might be abused by a very few, in a relatively very few instances.
Grease Spot recently commemmorated 100,000 posts. Of those 100K, how many were deleted with a negative impact on a thread? Twenty? Fifty? A hundred? I doubt that many. We're talking hundredths of one percent most probably.
If editing is a benefit to those of us who use it responsibly, why should we give it up because the perceived abuse may irritate a very few.
Thus far we've called it "abuse." In the case of the people we've been discussing, I don't consider it abuse when they are only trying to avoid being abused themselves. I'd rather "abuse" a rule than a person, wouldn't you, given the choice?
-edited to correct spelling and punctuation because I'm way too hooked on phonics.-
[This message was edited by satori on June 17, 2002 at 11:30.]
Back to the point that deleting a post is irritating to others:
Pawtucket, I'd like to submit a list of the things posters do which I've found somewhat irritating. In some cases, it will be what they say and do. In others, just being whoever they are does it.
I feel certain once these distractions are out of the way I may finally discipline my mind by believing!
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
5
9
9
7
Popular Days
Jun 17
17
Jun 14
15
Jun 18
10
Jun 13
6
Top Posters In This Topic
excathedra 5 posts
satori 9 posts
satori001 9 posts
laleo 7 posts
Popular Days
Jun 17 2002
17 posts
Jun 14 2002
15 posts
Jun 18 2002
10 posts
Jun 13 2002
6 posts
AdiosMiCorazon
"I noticed a while back one vocal proponent of limiting edits actually edited her own old post not long after criticizing someone else for doing the same thing. Now is she a big, fat hypocrite? You decide" Amen give me five.
I saw someone (male) who is totally against editing - ever! Delete his entire response from a thread with no explanation. I laughed when I saw it. Did it make him a bad person in my eyes? Nah! But, then don't stand up in your soap box and preach against the evils of editing.
Lighten up people this is not a court of law. Words like subpoena and evidence make me wanna run for cover
Thanks for the Cafe con Leche Ginger!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
satori001
As responsible, intelligent, mature adults we have the privilege and latitude to live among our neighbors according to our own principles the best we can.
Since many of us feel strongly about the issue, I propose multiple standards, making everyone happy!
1. Those of you who do not want any edit capability, place a post-it above your monitor that says, "Thou shalt not edit."
2. Those of you who feel one hour is enough, "Reminder: Past 60 minutes shalt thou edit not!"
3. Those of you who feel a day is in order: "Harken thou poster, if the c0ck crow twice, else the sun or moon returneth to its place in the sky from whence thou hast posted, thou shalt not edit!"
4. Those of you who feel there should be no restrictions, place a post-it saying, "Sweat not the small stuff." Or, "Remember to let the cat in."
Now, why would't everyone be happy with this? Each of us, as responsible caring adults, will abide according to our own rules.
This is a great solution! I can't help but think world peace is just around the corner.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grizzy
Yes I did!!!!! It was an attempt to put myself in another’s shoes and pulled my thoughts when I didn’t like the way they were handled, my words were responded to in a most inappropriate way!!!!!
And you know what, there was no justification for what I did, there was no satisfaction and my feelings were that of a spoiled brat taking my *words* home with me as a child that hasn’t learned to inner act and play nicely with others……..
I have news for all you once posted it is always possible to find a copy of the thing. Like it or not, it is public property and once placed in public and is clipped and pasted by many individuals. So, there is no good reasoning nor any safe harbors after it has hit the board………
The only thing that any one has control over is themselves and what they do here, once public it is kept by any number of people including ex’s, WayGB and lord only knows who. By a simple asking around, often the disappearing comments can be found…….
That is reality and it was a hard lesson for me to learn; but at least I did. Any one that thinks that deleting helps in any way is only fooling themselves………….
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
My opinion has been spoken.
My opinion is not the be all and end all, nor should it be dogma for all.
In other words, I spoke my opinion, and have no intention of arguing it.
But I have to wonder - did I miss something?
Doth I hear they that protest too much? And for what, I know not why.
For to act like the matter is settled, yet it not be, gives only pause to ponder.
And fair Wacky one, it be as thy suspect.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
AdiosMiCorazon
In a black and white world you can come up with clear cut yes and no; rights and wrong. The world is full of gray (I saw at least three of those pesky hairs today-time for L'oreal ) fushia, mango, purple and lime green. There are times that people need to edit for whatever reason. Does that change me? Does it really change anything? Nope! I don't own anything in this life except me (and maybe some property - Ocean front in Arizona ).
Ah, smell the fresh air
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goey
Hey, I don't really care too much one way or another. I can adjust to whatever decision Paw makes on this. To me it is not too important, although I do realize that it is quite important to a some to have it either one way or another. If I had to vote on this and my vote really made a difference, I would probably abstain.
Personaly, here at GS I don't think I have ever gone after someone who has edited or deleted a post, although I was annoyed one time when someone changed the title of a thread, which also changed the meaning of it. My input to the thread then looked totally rediculous since it addressed the original title and meaning. This is the kind of stuff that an edit limit might possibly help. But these kind of things are infrequent.
I frequent several other boards as well as GS. A couple of these these allow no editing at all so I suppose I have learned to live with it. For what it's worth, it does not seem to make much of a difference either way.
Either way works fine for me.
Goe
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hopefull
I am fine with an hour.
I usually edit right after I post for grammer and spelling and only to to make my post less wordy.
If I have "posters remorse" later on I will make it an addition to the thread.
I feel for the dilemma HopeRich had regarding a post that was so radically changed so her appropriate response appeared to be overreacting,
It wouldn't bother me if the editing time was longer as long as I get my chance to proofread.
Just give me my 10 minutes and do what you want, Paw.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wacky Funster
I remember when I first got to Waydale 2+ years ago. I was very confused by the whole set up.
But, in addition to that...there was a woman named Victoria who apparently edited and deleted posts all over the place.
I was extremely confused at that...and actually left waydale for a few months in total confusion, until a poster explained to me what had happened. It was not until then that I ventured back.
The threads made absolutely NO SENSE...and responses to her posts made no sense...and, to someone coming for help-it sure did the exact opposite for me.
I think one day is plenty enough.
I'm sure if there is "poster remorse", Pawtucket could fidget with the controls to remedy the situation if it must be.
[This message was edited by Wacky Funster on June 15, 2002 at 19:04.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
laleo
I'm very undecided about how supportive I am about an editing time limit. I'm leaning towards a time limit, but I hope it's more generous than one hour, or even a day. That's not nearly long enough for me. By the time it first hits me that I just wrote the most idiotic post imaginable, hours might pass before I can get back to my computer to undo the damage, and try to salvage what little I have left of a reputation.
On the other hand, it really is annoying when posters habitually delete or radically edit posts, especially if it's one that I took seriously enough to devote my time to read and respond. This board is interactive. If people are writing only for their own benefit, maybe Paw can add a forum devoted to soliloquies for people who have something to say but don't want to risk being misunderstood. Like a place to practice journaling, but with a silent audience. Otherwise, like it or not, when we enter into a dialogue with others we do have a responsibility to the people with whom we're interacting. I think deleting posts is as much a way to control the dialogue (by being passive-aggressive) as is insisting others don't delete their posts (by being a bully).
Either way innocent bystanders get crowded out.
Maybe a very generous time limit will satisfy both sides.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
Should there be a time limit on your capability to edit?
I like to be able to edit my posts whenever and whereever. I don't want there to be a time limit for this. What if I make a mistake and want to correct it? What if I don't see my mistake until a week from yesterday?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
satori
Per his above post, Grizz edited an earlier post. It was a sad, sad tale of anger and shame and woe. Somebody abused his words, so he up'n deleted the dang post.
The moral of the story? Grizz felt no better. No sir! In his big furry heart he knew he was behaving like a "spoiled brat."
What's more, he knows, and he wants us all to know, that them words are public, and once'n they's out there, they's out there!
Well holy ....fire, folks! If'n they's out there, then they's out there! Why sure!
Now... why is this moo-ey im-por-tan-tay, as they say south of el bordit-o? Because it solves our beeeg problem-o. You all who want or need to recover deleted posts, so as to make your lives complete again, hell!, go get 'em! They's out there. Grizz says so. (A number of posters have said so, too.)
It therefore really doesn't matter what happens to a post on a given thread. The info is there for all to have and enjoy. The notion of privacy is an illusion.
Now, let's be clear that not everybody shares the motives of a "spoiled brat." I guess that was the poster's implication, but it just ain't true. Some folks have adult reasons for doin' stuff, even if other "spoiled brats" (you know who you are) don't like it.
Maybe their hitherto private handle has become public, because somebody has a beeeeg fat yap, or some nosey, nosey person has poked her big, fat nose where it didn't belong, and once she snorted up the new info, her big, fat mouth then went into high gear. (This is all hypothetical, of course. We don't know anybody with either a big, fat nose for other people's business, or a big, fat mouth for blabbing it. But it could happen some day.) Suddenly, there is a lot of stuff out there, once shared in anonymity, now majorly biographical. Can everybody see why that could be a problem? I knew you could neighbors!
That's all. Thank you for letting me share!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
laleo
You said "After reading a previous post . . . " Would that be my post? Since you haven't addressed any points that Wacky or Mark brought up in their posts, I guess you're responding to me.
"No one is told anything other than what people want them to know!"
No argument from me here.
"What may look 'wierd', may in itself, be that one person honored another's wishes, as in 'please edit', while the other didn't admit to others, an edit was done on their behalf, or at their request!"
We used to have a poster here who was still "in." Not only were some of his comments supportive of TWI, but he also occasionally deleted his posts during a time that he was working out his own comfort level in what he wished to reveal or not. He was swimming in an ocean of hostility every time he posted. I deleted a few of my posts at his request, as well as speaking up on his behalf so he could have a place to work out his TWI involvement without the distraction of constant criticism. So you're not telling me anything I don't know.
"TWI messed up alot of people * who feel they must look 'right' (which is not right in the big world) and therefore, one is probably needing recovery in that area and the room made here for that is tremendous, even IF they don't know it, others do..."
I've made room for plenty for people by not jumping on their backs every time they post something I disagree with. Have you?
"Who should judge a poster ~ when we all live in glass houses!!!"
We all make judgments. We decide who we like and who we don't. We decide whose causes we're willing to fight and whose we aren't. We get judged in return. If we choose to, we can use those judgments as mirrors to see how our words are reflected onto others.
"Some people don't choose to make an issue out of anothers' lack of honesty, because they hope they are finding it ~ without making a spectacle of them, unless it's a joke...It's called tolerance Respect Compassion"
Please don't demand that I accept your version of tolerance, respect, and compassion. If something is important to me, then it is important to me. I don't see how recommending a generous time limit on posts makes me intolerant, disrespectful, or uncompassionate. I think it makes me willing to compromise. Speaking of making an issue out of things, maybe you haven't counted, but you've posted many, many times on this thread. I think you've made your point, many times over. Whether I have your approval or not, I will make my point, too.
"Maybe someone found it in their heart to leave it alone...in hopes of the unsure and insecure to get stronger, even if it was AT anothers expense... Generosity... Definately!"
I strongly disagree with you that anyone should experience growth at another's expense. It is not generosity, unless the person has willingly sacrificed himself for the other. It is for each person to decide how much he will or will not give.
Gingertea, I have composed this response to you without insulting your values, intelligence, or character. Try to show me the same courtesy. Unless you're picking a fight, and want to exchange insults with me. If that’s the case, I will accommodate you, if that's what you want.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
the board "remembers" previous post titles we've made - just got a little drop down when i went to type in that field and it gave me the most recent ones i've entered, to select from. now that's kinda cool.
there's a lot of points being brought up about editing i'd never really thought about...hmmm...
i'd still vote for just leaving edit on all the time, but i can see now why in some cases it could be a hassle. dunno. doesn't matter much to me either way...maybe a compromise inbetween...? 12 hours, 42 minutes and 30 seconds?
Is the time/space meter needle supposed to be jumping around like that? *tap-tap*...sqwrkltpzfttt@#$%^&!!!!!!.....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LG
As a participant, I don't have strong feelings about this one way or another. If I were administering a Web forum, I would probably allow one hour for edits after posting. After that, changes or deletions would have to be done by a moderator. Corrections or clarifications by forum participants could be done through follow-up posts. The primary reason for this would be to maintain continuity in the threads.
I don't think it's fair to accuse people who favor time limits on editing of being out to control others or to otherwise attack their character. I think the specific personal attacks are particularly inappropriate, especially the remarks accusing a person who has not even posted to this thread of being two-faced.
JBM, formerly long gone 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grizzy
Exactly what in the hell are you talking about Satori?
Grizzy COLOR>SIZE>
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hope R.
There are opinions here that range from 10 minutes to infinity! And they're all right for each individual.
Here’s what I’m going to try to do for my own sanity when it comes to others deleting and/or changing their posts, and for my own posts as well:
If I know that someone has a propensity for deleting or changing their posts, and I choose to reply to their post the way they originally wrote it, I will copy it to a Word.doc for my own personal use . That way, if the post is changed or deleted, I can quote it to remind not only the poster, but remind myself as well as the others who read the discussion what was originally said.
If I post something that I need to edit for things other than spelling or grammar, I will add a post with an explanation of why I may have changed my opinion, or apologize to anyone I may have offended by my original post.
Whenever possible, I will use email as a way of communicating something I feel needs a response to the individual, instead of using the forums for issues that are personal in nature. If that person has their email address marked private – then I will ask them to please email me with their address. If that fails, and I really, really, really feel that it needs to be addressed, then I will post it.
I won’t post anything if I’m not sure whether I want people to read it or not. If I have any thoughts that I will live to regret something I’ve written on a public discussion forum, I won’t post it.
These are my self-imposed "rules". I don’t expect anyone to do the same things. I just wanted to share my opinion of what I need to do regarding the editing/deleting of posts - which is something I find irritating and frustrating at times.
I still think a 24 hour editing time-limit should be enough for people to make decisions about their posts. That way if someone is not sure they want others to read what they have to say, then perhaps they’ll think more carefully about what they’re saying before they post it.
P.S. An afterthought - because there is no preview function here - all of us may be editing for spelling, grammar and UBB Code more often. I know I probably will... especially until I get used to the UBB code.
Hope R. color>size>face>
Link to comment
Share on other sites
satori
I was discussing your point in the context of this thread.
You seem to be saying:
1. Deleting or editing a post in response to a subsequent post is childish and immature behavior.
2. Deleting or editing a post in response to a subsequent post is futile because the original text is archived.
To which I reply:
1. There may be very good reasons for editing or deleting a post. Not everybody who might do the same is behaving like a spoiled brat, just because you've 'fessed up to it. I pointed out that you're speaking only for yourself.
2. If the text of all Grease Spot posts is "out there" and "archived," there should be no further objection to anyone's editing or deleting of their posts, because the internet reality is that they've deleted or edited nothing at all. The original is out there forever.
That's about it.
**
On to the larger topic...
The option of editing makes some people feel better.
One cannot edit anyone else's posts, only their own. One cannot disguise the fact that their own posts, once edited, have been so. They cannot edit any part of their post which has been copied by another poster into their own post. The "freedom" to edit has a lot of limitations.
We are each highly qualified to say however much should be "enough time" to make a final edit for ourselves. None of us are qualified to say what is "enough time" for others.
How can we possibly know how much is "enough" for anyone else?
As for the board rules, they are Pawtucket's prerogative. Currently there are edit limitations set. I'd like to see them removed. Whatever Paw decides will have an impact on the board, both positive and negitive. I believe maintaining the limitations will result in a negative net gain.
edited to correct - there are no limits for editing currently. They may have been on temporarily, or I may just be on drugs. Sorry for any misunderstandings.
[This message was edited by satori on June 17, 2002 at 9:16.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CoolWaters
Since someone brought it up...
On Waydale I removed as many of my posts as the administrator would allow. Why? Because I learned that what was posted on WayDale could be used without my permission or knowledge. I was told by someone who was helping the administrator that the administrator was planning to sue twi. Feeling hoodwinked and manipulated, I pulled as many of my posts as possible. For me, time showed that I was very glad I did...I had put personal information on WayDale that I was not prepared to deal with in a court of law if needed.
Geeze the bellyaching I still hear about that! The punishment for removing my posts was to be banned.
Well, just before the old GSC forums rolled over to this one, another poster removed many of his posts. Nobody has said even one word about it.
I think...no...I know that there are those who use these boards as a personal vendetta machine and bring things up years later...and yell and scream from the rooftops, "I got proof! I copied and pasted all the documentation!"...and do so much in the same way they did things on the elementary school playground...you know, only the unpopular kids would be subject to the "rules".
Can you imagine keeping posts from years ago? Living in a quagmire of grudges, hurt feelings, personal vendettas, never allowing for personal growth for yourself or others?
This is not The Odyssey or Grapes of Wrath. This is a bulletin board (UBB...get it?) fer crying out loud. How many people go to a bulletin board and expect the posts to never change, never go anywhere, always make sense with the other posts....etc?
The very nature of a bulletin board is temporary notices.
Now...offa my little soapbox for the day.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
what are the current limitations satori ?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
satori
Hey, whaddya know. There are no limits. Maybe they've been turned on and off by the admin just in testing?
There is this: you can edit for 10 minutes without an "edited" message stamp. This acts like a kind of "preview" feature.
I just went back to my first posts under satori and I can edit them all.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
for the info
btw, you have the sweetest little face
i just practiced editing this
Link to comment
Share on other sites
laleo
The arguments I'm hearing from the very vocal "no limit" side aren't making sense to me.
Deleting posts is annoying. Just about everyone agrees to that. The people who find it annoying are being asked to show tolerance, generosity, and whatever other virtues they bring to the board toward those who irritate them. Fine. However, if I understand the argument, those who delete their posts offer no better explanation for it than, Hey I can do what I want and you can't stop me. So buzz off. And these are the same people who keep telling me that GreaseSpot is a community.
I used to edit my posts until they neared perfection, until someone once complained on a thread that I was pulling the topic to the top of the forum without really adding anything to it. So I learned to live with the fact that even if my post wasn't perfectly communicated, it was better to leave it than be a pain in the neck.
As far as releasing too much personal information, I try to be as careful as possible to only communicate what I want the universe to know. So while I understand "poster's regret" (I've had plenty of that), I don't understand why the entire board should accommodate a couple of posters who seem to regret most of what they write.
We're not talking about a stray post being occasionally deleted. Some posters are in the habit of heavily deleting their posts so as to disrupt the dialogue on a regular basis. Self-sacrifice has never come naturally to me, so if someone is asking me to sublimate my preferences (which in this case is to keep posts relatively intact) for their benefit (because it's somehow cathartic to erase what they've written), I need a better reason for it than that they don't owe me anything.
The only reason why this is an issue is because of how disruptive this whole post deletion thing has been.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
satori
laleo,
Just quoting an abbreviated version of your post to address a few points.
1. Some of those most vocal for limits are not exactly known for their "tolerance, generosity, and whatever other virtues they bring..." I'm not asking them for anything. I'm making the case to Grease Spot, not the vocal minority.
Also, there are plenty of irritating things on a bulletin board, depending how they might be perceived by a variety of different people. Which ones should we make illegal?
2. Is that the best explanation you've read so far? With so many other points raised, I'm thinking you may have skipped over a few. The "buzz off" response is not offered to everyone - only those who are essentially saying the very same thing to those who would like the edit option.
3&4. You're saying a couple of posters delete everything they write. Do you have any statistics to back that up, other than your own impression? I have a much different impression. I don't edit much, and virtually never delete posts. When I do edit, I usually say why at the bottom. In other words I am considerate of others when I edit, and I expect the same of others. I just haven't seen that much of it. I think you are exaggerating - mightily.
5. It has not been disruptive, in my view. It is a few very vocal opponents of the edit option, the anti-editorialists, if you will, who have made a stink about it.
The Waydale and Grease Spot precedent is that editing is permitted. Where there is opportunity for abuse, there will be abuse. Freedom provides such opportunity. Should we abandon freedom to prevent abuse? I don't think so. Neither should we make a rule to abandon a useful tool because it might be abused by a very few, in a relatively very few instances.
Grease Spot recently commemmorated 100,000 posts. Of those 100K, how many were deleted with a negative impact on a thread? Twenty? Fifty? A hundred? I doubt that many. We're talking hundredths of one percent most probably.
If editing is a benefit to those of us who use it responsibly, why should we give it up because the perceived abuse may irritate a very few.
Thus far we've called it "abuse." In the case of the people we've been discussing, I don't consider it abuse when they are only trying to avoid being abused themselves. I'd rather "abuse" a rule than a person, wouldn't you, given the choice?
-edited to correct spelling and punctuation because I'm way too hooked on phonics.-
[This message was edited by satori on June 17, 2002 at 11:30.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
satori
Back to the point that deleting a post is irritating to others:
Pawtucket, I'd like to submit a list of the things posters do which I've found somewhat irritating. In some cases, it will be what they say and do. In others, just being whoever they are does it.
I feel certain once these distractions are out of the way I may finally discipline my mind by believing!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.