When I write a post, I know what I mean to say. It doesn't always come out that way. I might not realize until some time later. Sometimes long afterward. I like the idea that I can add a word, change a word, and delete a word if need be. If the meaning is affected, I can explain how, and why. After all, I'm not writing the frickin' bible here. Cosmic truth, maybe. Bible, no.
I agree. If one now corrects a spelling mistake 20 seconds after the post is entered, it is duely noted as being *edited*. I see no reason for a time limit on editing. Were that time limit to be removed, folks could rephrase statements that they deem appropriate for rephrasing, if their original statement did not come across the way they meant it to.
Lord knows I've had to do that many a time (my tang got tongueg'ld up in my *eye teeth*, and I couldn't see what I was saying type of thing), and was glad to have a chance to re-state what I meant. That is one feature I miss from the other site, because it was a handy item to have. It usually takes me more than two hours to realize I mis-stated something, and by then it is too late to change it.
Actually, in a way, I can see the reasoning behind the '2 hour limit and then your revising time is up' logic. And this is coming from a poster that several others here perhaps don't particularly care for what I post (or how :D), and I can understand that. And perhaps one such as me would be one of the biggest benefactors of the unlimited time to rush back and 'wipe clean' and put forth a ahh, less controversial version of what I have previously posted. And then there is the 'Preview post' function that is helpful in editing as well.
That being said however, perhaps this isn't so much a 'censorship' function, but more like a 'make sure you know what/how/why you are going to post what you do while you still can' type function. Now we all know that the spoke word, once hurled, cannot be withdrawn, or edited at all from the second it leaves your mouth. Here we're given a 2 hour 'reprieve'.
Be that as it may, I don't think that its anything major one way or another. Works with me just fine.
I hope anyone who votes "no" will explain here, and be prepared to defend that position.
Of course, Garth, your response is to acknowledge your first instinct, which is to abuse the editing privilege. I'm not at all surprised. Regardless, I'd be happy to tolerate your misuses if it meant others could post without the burden of "make sure you know what/how/why you are going to post what you do while you still can" looking over their shoulder.
I heard a well known author today, Joan Didion, say that she didn't know what she thought until she read what she wrote. In other words, writing was a process of working out her feelings and ideas. Suppose her editor said, "Joan, no re-writes after 2 hours?" Rather than beautiful prose, Garth, she might write something resembling what you do, if she could write at all under such strict guidelines. And that would be a great loss, as are your own posts.
how about a day or so... personally, I like the fact that now a certain long winded, pfal master can't go back and change his posts months afterwards to fit his current diatribe...
Well, at least I have enough honesty to admit to my writing foibles and to making them, and I would hardly call it my 'first instinct'. It does show that your 'first instinct' to insult those you are biased against might serve as an argument in actual favor of the limitation, ya think. ;) (You really need to stop taking your political opponents so personally. Drives up the blood pressure)
And I have given the reason why I see the logic as to why such editing limitations might be in place. And 'chilling effect'? Really now, I don't think we're talking about censorship here, nor any demonstratable harm because of this new wrinkle.
I have taken note of other practices that do far more harm that you seem to dismiss with nothing more than a "It's regretable that such and such happened, but ..."
Strict guidelines? Not knowing what she wrote until after she wrote it? I take it that she never uses a word processor, nor does drafts before the final version goes out? (That's what later articles that addresses previous ones are for in newspapers and magazines are for, because once the article goes to press, you can't exactly 'call it back')
"Be prepared to defend that position" O-kay. It was just an opinion, that's all, and not one that 'must be defended on principle!' Gad, how many times has *that* term been basterdized.
I'm glad to see that you 'happily tolerate' my 'misuses'. Nice try at a guilt job but, .... sorry, no sale!
I like the ability to edit too. I became very comfortable at the cafe and posted quite a bit of personal information over the years. It then came to my attention what a foolish mistake that may have been, and I recently went through my posts and deleted quite a bit. Not in an attempt to deceive anyone, but in an attempt to protect myself and my family.
I think it is easy to post things that we later regret, not just hasty words said in anger, but even the heartfelt, well intentioned ones that may not be best left on a website that can be accessed by anyone and everyone.
I don't think we should be allowed forever to edit a post, but 2 hours is a bit on the short side. Rather than say "whenever we want" in the above poll, maybe 12 hours? I certainly don't want any poster changing his tune and then blaming it on us OLG's. yetch
That being said however, perhaps this isn't so much a 'censorship' function, but more like a 'make sure you know what/how/why you are going to post what you do while you still can' type function.
I agree -- I don't see it as a censorship, but I do see it as a detriment (of sorts). What Abi said makes sense to me. There's many reasons for wanting to edit, besides the CYA aspect of it.
I'll go along with it either way, even if it means really looking over what I say, before I hit the *enter* button.
Im playing with a few others before I go back to normal, hows this one?
Heh heh -- you do what you want to do. :)
I think both suit you well. The choice is yours.
(Ps. --- took me a while to find the Fiddlehead avatar I wanted, but the wait was worth it. As* they say* (whovever they are say, go for what you want!!!)
Without the edit and delete thread ability the test area will be overflowing I used to have one window which could be reused to test now each test requires a post. I don't see any advantage to the limit so I 'd vote let it be.
And most of all to correct spelling and typos as I did here.
It's 3:00 in the morning,I have to get up in three hours,but I drank too much coffee today and I have nothing better to do than to offer my opinion on editing posts on greasespot....
I think I've used the editing option about a half-dozen times...I've never used spell check,or word perfect or any of the other bells or whistles that make one's posts more perfect...I suppose I've used a smiley or two,but never a cyber ((((hug)))) or a ROFLMAO....
Out in my everyday world,I usually don't carry a tape recorder with me and use the playback option so I can remind people of what they said and show them that they were wrong in saying it....Nor do I carry around one of those clickers like in the "Men in Black" movie where I press the button and it makes you forget what you just saw,or what I just said...I also don't carry around a thesaurus,or the Word of Google,for that matter...
Now,I realize that an internet forum serves a different purpose,and a discussion board allows more time to research facts,put more time and thought into what one is saying and hopefully produce a more educated and informed form of discussion than at the local barbershop...So,I suppose a lot of these tools that enhance a poster's ability to communicate are a good thing...
On the other hand,I'm all for accountability,and if what we say in the real world doesn't come out right,or we mispronounced it,or we wish we hadn't said it....oh,well,that's life...We learn to at least make an attempt to,as the saying goes,"insert brain before engaging mouth"...I would prefer to read posts here that didn't have the safety net of the edit option...I think it better to become acquainted with a person "warts and all" than the cleaned up,edited version...
[This post was edited by simonzelotes at 2:55 A.M.]
[This post was un-edited by simonzelotes at 2:56 A.M.]
[Wait a minute,let me edit this post just one more time,please]
I think that we should have to live with what we post. I also think that we should have to live with the warts of our posts. With this new board we can preview our posts...I think that previewing the post should be mandatory before allowing us to add the post to the thread, but once we've previewed it (do you really want to add this?), then we should have to live with what we've said.
Having said that, though, we should be able to petition the moderators to remove a post we've made if we truly regret that post.
Look...in the real world, if you send an e-mail, once its gone, its gone. Once you say something in person...its said. Once you drop the letter in the mail, its gone. Why should this be different?
For me, it doesn't make much difference. I'm one of those asswipes who proofreads everything he sees, and corrects it, if only in my mind. I used to point these things out to people who I thought might be interested, but it seems they are getting fewer and farther between. :D
In a perfect world, people would not use the edit function unethically. However, it would seem some here are doing just that (this is just hearsay for me, since I rarely cruise the doctrinal forums). If this is the case, then I would have to fall on the side of a time limit. Perhaps four hours?
I wish that I could take credit for it-Ihave done a few that are similar but any of the pics i could find online of ones Ive done were either too big or got rejected for one reason or another
Heres one I fully restored about a bazillian years ago at Harvard
I appreciate the replies on both sides of the issue, and for now I'm undecided. Which avatar should mstar pick? Decisions, decisions... (Nice work mstar, by the way.)
Mark asks, "Why should this be different?" I'd point out that it's always be different, and ask why it shouldn't continue to be different.
To simon, I'd say that "warts and all" aren't the issue. If editing could really remove every blemish, there would be no blemishes left on these forums. But we are the "editors," and we are not perfect. Our posts should be as we, imperfect creatures that we are, intend them to represent us.
I have been disappointed or annoyed in the past when someone has removed or revised a post, especially when I thought it was very good. I have also removed quotations from my own posts, at the writer's request, because they did not wish to leave their words there. Obviously I thought otherwise, but I deferred out of common respect because it was his/her post.
So I recognize both sides of the issue. I believe the greater good is served by the ability to edit, without time limit or restriction. Two hours or twelve hours is really the same thing to me. The archives are a somewhat different issue, I guess. By the time a thread is archived, it should be understood to be permanent. But this inability to edit effectively archives our posts while their threads are still "active."
And for those who think it's a fine way to teach us to be responsible, to "say what we mean," etc, etc, since when is that part of Greasespot's charter? Is Greasespot now some kind of church?
Satori, from some of the things you have posted, I am more than glad you could not change them, ever..
It's kind of "Satori in the raw".. a live performance.. the subtle (and not so subtle) nuances really show your character.. and I like it.
Probably shows mine, too.. now what kind of character, others may feel free to judge.. :D
As far as editing priviledges for me personally, I could care less.. twenty minutes, or even ten are enough for me to correct glaring errors, punctuation or spelling "boo boos"..
Maybe my opinion is a leftover from the old days when I had to type up papers on an old Smith Corona..
It was a heck of a lot easier to get it right the first time..
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
34
12
11
13
Popular Days
Oct 2
36
Oct 3
34
Oct 1
25
Sep 30
15
Top Posters In This Topic
ChattyKathy 34 posts
satori001 12 posts
Shellon 11 posts
dmiller 13 posts
Popular Days
Oct 2 2005
36 posts
Oct 3 2005
34 posts
Oct 1 2005
25 posts
Sep 30 2005
15 posts
ChattyKathy
I would love the same editing options we had before.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
I agree. If one now corrects a spelling mistake 20 seconds after the post is entered, it is duely noted as being *edited*. I see no reason for a time limit on editing. Were that time limit to be removed, folks could rephrase statements that they deem appropriate for rephrasing, if their original statement did not come across the way they meant it to.
Lord knows I've had to do that many a time (my tang got tongueg'ld up in my *eye teeth*, and I couldn't see what I was saying type of thing), and was glad to have a chance to re-state what I meant. That is one feature I miss from the other site, because it was a handy item to have. It usually takes me more than two hours to realize I mis-stated something, and by then it is too late to change it.
David
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Actually, in a way, I can see the reasoning behind the '2 hour limit and then your revising time is up' logic. And this is coming from a poster that several others here perhaps don't particularly care for what I post (or how :D), and I can understand that. And perhaps one such as me would be one of the biggest benefactors of the unlimited time to rush back and 'wipe clean' and put forth a ahh, less controversial version of what I have previously posted. And then there is the 'Preview post' function that is helpful in editing as well.
That being said however, perhaps this isn't so much a 'censorship' function, but more like a 'make sure you know what/how/why you are going to post what you do while you still can' type function. Now we all know that the spoke word, once hurled, cannot be withdrawn, or edited at all from the second it leaves your mouth. Here we're given a 2 hour 'reprieve'.
Be that as it may, I don't think that its anything major one way or another. Works with me just fine.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
satori001
I hope anyone who votes "no" will explain here, and be prepared to defend that position.
Of course, Garth, your response is to acknowledge your first instinct, which is to abuse the editing privilege. I'm not at all surprised. Regardless, I'd be happy to tolerate your misuses if it meant others could post without the burden of "make sure you know what/how/why you are going to post what you do while you still can" looking over their shoulder.
I heard a well known author today, Joan Didion, say that she didn't know what she thought until she read what she wrote. In other words, writing was a process of working out her feelings and ideas. Suppose her editor said, "Joan, no re-writes after 2 hours?" Rather than beautiful prose, Garth, she might write something resembling what you do, if she could write at all under such strict guidelines. And that would be a great loss, as are your own posts.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mstar1
Although I can understand the why's, wherefores and probable reasonings of this new system, I'd prefer to keep the options open.
Now if I could only find my old avatar........
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
how about a day or so... personally, I like the fact that now a certain long winded, pfal master can't go back and change his posts months afterwards to fit his current diatribe...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jim
It was perfect the way it was with the old forums. Of course, so was the font size
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Well, at least I have enough honesty to admit to my writing foibles and to making them, and I would hardly call it my 'first instinct'. It does show that your 'first instinct' to insult those you are biased against might serve as an argument in actual favor of the limitation, ya think. ;) (You really need to stop taking your political opponents so personally. Drives up the blood pressure)
And I have given the reason why I see the logic as to why such editing limitations might be in place. And 'chilling effect'? Really now, I don't think we're talking about censorship here, nor any demonstratable harm because of this new wrinkle.
I have taken note of other practices that do far more harm that you seem to dismiss with nothing more than a "It's regretable that such and such happened, but ..."
Strict guidelines? Not knowing what she wrote until after she wrote it? I take it that she never uses a word processor, nor does drafts before the final version goes out? (That's what later articles that addresses previous ones are for in newspapers and magazines are for, because once the article goes to press, you can't exactly 'call it back')
"Be prepared to defend that position" O-kay. It was just an opinion, that's all, and not one that 'must be defended on principle!'
Gad, how many times has *that* term been basterdized.
I'm glad to see that you 'happily tolerate' my 'misuses'. Nice try at a guilt job but, .... sorry, no sale!
Does make me laugh tho, so thanks. B)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
I like the ability to edit too. I became very comfortable at the cafe and posted quite a bit of personal information over the years. It then came to my attention what a foolish mistake that may have been, and I recently went through my posts and deleted quite a bit. Not in an attempt to deceive anyone, but in an attempt to protect myself and my family.
I think it is easy to post things that we later regret, not just hasty words said in anger, but even the heartfelt, well intentioned ones that may not be best left on a website that can be accessed by anyone and everyone.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Mstar -- is This it?
It looks similar, but may not be the exact one you had.
Found this on page 30 of google images, of the self-portrait. :)
David
Edited by dmillerLink to comment
Share on other sites
krys
I don't think we should be allowed forever to edit a post, but 2 hours is a bit on the short side. Rather than say "whenever we want" in the above poll, maybe 12 hours? I certainly don't want any poster changing his tune and then blaming it on us OLG's. yetch
I'm not even sure I am an OLG?!
Edited by krysilisLink to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
I agree -- I don't see it as a censorship, but I do see it as a detriment (of sorts). What Abi said makes sense to me. There's many reasons for wanting to edit, besides the CYA aspect of it.
I'll go along with it either way, even if it means really looking over what I say, before I hit the *enter* button.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mstar1
good find--- thanks!
Im playing with a few others before I go back to normal, hows this one?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jardinero
Mstar:
Actually I was going to say, I love your current avatar.
Is that your work???? It's beautiful.
J.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Heh heh -- you do what you want to do. :)
I think both suit you well. The choice is yours.
(Ps. --- took me a while to find the Fiddlehead avatar I wanted, but the wait was worth it. As* they say* (whovever they are say, go for what you want!!!)
They both look good. :)
David
Edited by dmillerLink to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Woops -- I mis-spoke a few words, or missed some coyrect punctuation there.
Regardless -- do what you will!
David
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Without the edit and delete thread ability the test area will be overflowing I used to have one window which could be reused to test now each test requires a post. I don't see any advantage to the limit so I 'd vote let it be.
And most of all to correct spelling and typos as I did here.
Edited by WhiteDoveLink to comment
Share on other sites
simonzelotes
It's 3:00 in the morning,I have to get up in three hours,but I drank too much coffee today and I have nothing better to do than to offer my opinion on editing posts on greasespot....
I think I've used the editing option about a half-dozen times...I've never used spell check,or word perfect or any of the other bells or whistles that make one's posts more perfect...I suppose I've used a smiley or two,but never a cyber ((((hug)))) or a ROFLMAO....
Out in my everyday world,I usually don't carry a tape recorder with me and use the playback option so I can remind people of what they said and show them that they were wrong in saying it....Nor do I carry around one of those clickers like in the "Men in Black" movie where I press the button and it makes you forget what you just saw,or what I just said...I also don't carry around a thesaurus,or the Word of Google,for that matter...
Now,I realize that an internet forum serves a different purpose,and a discussion board allows more time to research facts,put more time and thought into what one is saying and hopefully produce a more educated and informed form of discussion than at the local barbershop...So,I suppose a lot of these tools that enhance a poster's ability to communicate are a good thing...
On the other hand,I'm all for accountability,and if what we say in the real world doesn't come out right,or we mispronounced it,or we wish we hadn't said it....oh,well,that's life...We learn to at least make an attempt to,as the saying goes,"insert brain before engaging mouth"...I would prefer to read posts here that didn't have the safety net of the edit option...I think it better to become acquainted with a person "warts and all" than the cleaned up,edited version...
[This post was edited by simonzelotes at 2:55 A.M.]
[This post was un-edited by simonzelotes at 2:56 A.M.]
[Wait a minute,let me edit this post just one more time,please]
[Damn]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
markomalley
I think that we should have to live with what we post. I also think that we should have to live with the warts of our posts. With this new board we can preview our posts...I think that previewing the post should be mandatory before allowing us to add the post to the thread, but once we've previewed it (do you really want to add this?), then we should have to live with what we've said.
Having said that, though, we should be able to petition the moderators to remove a post we've made if we truly regret that post.
Look...in the real world, if you send an e-mail, once its gone, its gone. Once you say something in person...its said. Once you drop the letter in the mail, its gone. Why should this be different?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sushi
For me, it doesn't make much difference. I'm one of those asswipes who proofreads everything he sees, and corrects it, if only in my mind. I used to point these things out to people who I thought might be interested, but it seems they are getting fewer and farther between. :D
In a perfect world, people would not use the edit function unethically. However, it would seem some here are doing just that (this is just hearsay for me, since I rarely cruise the doctrinal forums). If this is the case, then I would have to fall on the side of a time limit. Perhaps four hours?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mstar1
aside to Jardi-
I wish that I could take credit for it-Ihave done a few that are similar but any of the pics i could find online of ones Ive done were either too big or got rejected for one reason or another
Heres one I fully restored about a bazillian years ago at Harvard
this one I could take at least some credit for
Edited by mstar1Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
You really are amazing mstar. Thanks for the peek at your work. I've missed seeing it.
And I still prefer the option to edit after 2 hours. Although I'll take what I can get.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
satori001
I appreciate the replies on both sides of the issue, and for now I'm undecided. Which avatar should mstar pick? Decisions, decisions... (Nice work mstar, by the way.)
Mark asks, "Why should this be different?" I'd point out that it's always be different, and ask why it shouldn't continue to be different.
To simon, I'd say that "warts and all" aren't the issue. If editing could really remove every blemish, there would be no blemishes left on these forums. But we are the "editors," and we are not perfect. Our posts should be as we, imperfect creatures that we are, intend them to represent us.
I have been disappointed or annoyed in the past when someone has removed or revised a post, especially when I thought it was very good. I have also removed quotations from my own posts, at the writer's request, because they did not wish to leave their words there. Obviously I thought otherwise, but I deferred out of common respect because it was his/her post.
So I recognize both sides of the issue. I believe the greater good is served by the ability to edit, without time limit or restriction. Two hours or twelve hours is really the same thing to me. The archives are a somewhat different issue, I guess. By the time a thread is archived, it should be understood to be permanent. But this inability to edit effectively archives our posts while their threads are still "active."
And for those who think it's a fine way to teach us to be responsible, to "say what we mean," etc, etc, since when is that part of Greasespot's charter? Is Greasespot now some kind of church?
Edited by satori001Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Satori, from some of the things you have posted, I am more than glad you could not change them, ever..
It's kind of "Satori in the raw".. a live performance.. the subtle (and not so subtle) nuances really show your character.. and I like it.
Probably shows mine, too.. now what kind of character, others may feel free to judge.. :D
As far as editing priviledges for me personally, I could care less.. twenty minutes, or even ten are enough for me to correct glaring errors, punctuation or spelling "boo boos"..
Maybe my opinion is a leftover from the old days when I had to type up papers on an old Smith Corona..
It was a heck of a lot easier to get it right the first time..
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.