I've missed comments that have generated a major part of the discussion on a thread because it was edited long after the fact. :(
I've also deleted posts that I regretted deleting after the fact.
I, too, think two hours is plenty of time to "get it right". If someone wants to clarify or change the entire meaning of their post, then I see a new post as being the best way to handle that so that people are "lost" when they come onto the thread.
I didn't vote in the poll, but, so far, I like the time limits. When I go back to a thread, it says the same thing it said when I first read it, so if there is something in the thread that I was mulling over, or thinking about responding to, it's still there. If I post, my words mean something, and will be understood, in the context of the discussion.
satori: You said, "I'm sure there's a small, puritanical contingent of forum fascists lurking in the shadows . . . "
And to that I would say that there is a small contingent of forum anarchists hiding in the shadows, or hiding behind someone else's shadow, who take pleasure in subversion for subversion's sake, not because there is a greater good to serve, or a higher principle, but just for the fun of it. Unfortunately, having no time limits seems to invite passive-aggressive behavior.
Long ago, we had a similar discussion, and the poll (which was a simple "yes" or "no") was split almost 50/50 with a slight majority in favor of time limits. I think having time-limits will help with the continuity of the threads, and the flow of the forum. Addendums and clarifications can be added as the discussion moves along, where they make sense right where written.
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."
I think this says it best. While some misuse the edit feature, most do not. Most use it honestly and without malice or ego-centered ambitions of making themselves look better.
Speaking for myself only, I find the edit feature a useful tool. I agree with Satori about the *archiving* of posts, before the thread itself is archived. Until a thread is archived, I would like to be able to act as *moderator* on what I said.
For those who don't care about it, don't use it. :)
For those of us who would like the option, it would be nice to have it ((cough!!))Available!!
While I agree with the original post remaining in substance I still find I've posted something and left the board only to return and read that it clearly wasn't worded well enough to make the point so have edited to clarify. For those times I'd like the limit of 2 hours removed as it was in the other board.
I have also removed a post and afterwards wished it'd remained and in my chicken moment I hadn't gone and deleted it. So I know I've personally abused the leave it there unspoken common courtesy so folks can understand the remainder of the thread. Where on occasion the person making first direct comment looks rather odd when the post their referring to is now gone. :unsure:
If one of us abuses that rule of deleting or altering posts then the useful tool of private messages that appear before you so you are more apt to look is a way you could ask that person to consider not altering as they do for the courtesy of the thread.
And Paw thanks for reading our input. This new place does have some nice options for sure.
Sometimes I forget to disable my signature, which is a big obnoxious banner ad I like to save for deliberate, shameless plugs. In at least one case (and I think only one), the sig remained and I didn't realize it until it was too late to remove. Fortunately, it was on an endless blather thread, which means the thread has moved three pages since my blunder. :)
Since I come in sporadically, I have come into a thread, read comments people are making to someone about what they posted, and have NO idea what they are referring to, because the poster had edited their post. That is annoying!!!!
However, I also voted in favor of no time limit--because of the fact that I do come in sporadically. It takes me quite awhile to do a post, since I am a two-fingered, hunt-and-peck typist. Sometimes I post and run because the time I had to be here is used up because of posting. And I may not get back til the next day or two days or more. If I have an error in my post, or want to reword what I said, I would really like that option. I try to state why I edited when I do.
Recently, while in a seriously emotional state, I misunderstood a person's posts, and I called that person a name. Clarification was needed as to what we each meant to say, and we apologized to each other. I felt it was too ugly to leave my comments up, so I said in that post that I was going to go back and edit my nasties, and did--editing several posts. They'd been up long enough for plenty of people to see what I'd posted--there's no way I could hide that, but since everything was cleared up, why should they stay posted? Maybe others see that as misuse of the edit feature, though. . .
Are there certain forums where the misuse of the edit feature happens more than in others? (My guess would be political or religious debates) Should there be a time limit only in those?
"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?"
Because it can be.
Honestly Mike, I can't believe that's the best arguement you can come up with. The whole point of the internet is that it's better and different than traditional forms of communications. Exploring new ways of handling the information in pleasant and accurate forms is part of progress.
Recently, while in a seriously emotional state, I misunderstood a person's posts, and I called that person a name. Clarification was needed as to what we each meant to say, and we apologized to each other. I felt it was too ugly to leave my comments up, so I said in that post that I was going to go back and edit my nasties, and did--editing several posts. They'd been up long enough for plenty of people to see what I'd posted--there's no way I could hide that, but since everything was cleared up, why should they stay posted?
This here also drives home the point that not all editing is done to correct spelling, etc. Honest mistakes are made (I've made many myself), and the chance to go back and rectify matters only makes sense.
As Psalmie says -- she noted in her latter posts that she would go back to edit that which she considered objectionable. I've done the same thing in the past on the other board. There's a lot of things that factor into one's decision to edit a post, and not all entities are readily recognizable within a certain time limit. :)
Sometimes I forget to disable my signature, which is a big obnoxious banner ad I like to save for deliberate, shameless plugs. In at least one case (and I think only one), the sig remained and I didn't realize it until it was too late to remove. Fortunately, it was on an endless blather thread, which means the thread has moved three pages since my blunder. :)
What Kathy? Shell....legs? I have a tush that follows me, but that belongs in another thread I'm certain.
As far as editing, well for spelling errors I just start my post in a word processor and correct the spelling errors then post. That's a good thing because sometimes I've had to post again because the first post didn't take. Does that happen to anyone else? Or is it just my computer?
Anyway, this one time under the previous cafe options I posted a response to something and I thought that my response was very humorous; three hours later I thought that my response was crude, thoughtless, vulgar and demeaning so I deleted it. I felt that if I didn't delete it that I would owe someone a huge apology. So, I learned something important. And this two hour time limit is going to hold me to it.
I do think through my posts and even try to spell the words correctly (I copy and paste my posts often). Still I make errors due to the fact I speak differently than folks generally and even though my buddies here have grown use to me I still state things odd at times and just flat out need to change my wording.
I still agree to just delete for delete sake is not fair to the balance of the participants in the thread but even still I've been grateful when I could delete something that was too heated at original post point also. Although that is actually rare for me, I really do try to say what I mean and consider the impact if not being a total whacko in my head at the time.
And Shell is very forgiven of me when it comes to the subject of legs. :)
Chatty, even in the real world I have to excuse myself and explain that well. I just talk funny!
I would vote for a 24 hour period, then if it is that important contact a moderator and have them do the dirty deed for you.
Bro. Speed; your example is fine. But how many replies dealt with your initial post? That is the problem as I see it. Someone coming along days later and altering the post to their mood of the time or to comply with some cultic higher standard leaving all others with their @$$ hanging out is just wrong!
A simple new reply correcting or apologizing if there have been replies is a better approach than de-pantzing other posters.
We have some highly intelligent, highly educated, word smiths around here. But then we have the likes of me, uneducated and limited vocabulary. Some want us all to play the game according to their standard and that is mean and hurtful to those that have only been to the school of hard knocks for our higher education.
Oh my, how some think their words are their own precious possessions and they have unlimited rights to them. But, they are selfish in not considering what altering their precious "babies" does to all the precious words posted in a reply to theirs.
Da-birds comment was a smart-@$$ one, had it been dealt with properly it would have all been done by a moderator or left alone. :P
Since I agree with quite a bit of what you said there perhaps I'm moving closer in that direction but I still feel altering should be allowed if I deem necessary.
One HUGE difference about here and my life away from here is that yes I can't alter my words in real life so why should this be different. Well there are many things I can't do in real life I can do here when it comes to my growth obtained since I joined. And in that process I have deleted things I posted and you who read it know EXACTLY why I would have done that. Had I not been allowed that I would have left here LONG AGO due to the fact I couldn't reveal when my nerve allowed and be approached by those who cared to do so YET still be allowed to take away those words that after reading them made me scream due to exposure of my soul!
I continue to stand I would like my options; this is a world I opt to come to. And I do so for a few reasons one is my freedom. Plain and simple!
Its like the compliance issue over and beyond the normal minimal rules is a big issue with me.
I rather figured there remained a tad of residual. For me I learned and so that was then and now is now. If I held onto things that caused me difficulties well I'd of taken down the sword from the wall a lifetime ago. Yeah, dramatic…I tend to do that now and then. What the heck! B)
"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?"
Because it can be.
Honestly Mike, I can't believe that's the best arguement you can come up with. The whole point of the internet is that it's better and different than traditional forms of communications. Exploring new ways of handling the information in pleasant and accurate forms is part of progress.
Uhhhh, John, its Mark, not Mike ;)
And the point remains that either you should be able to stand by your words or not. If you can't stand by your words, you shouldn't speak them. I think that's a big part of the problem with the Internet, as a whole, is that you can state something in total anonymity with no accountability. Not that I have anything against that, but it does result in some people being meaner than they would if they were in a position where somebody could knock their block off (as would surely happen if they were f2f). When a person can make those posts, get people riled up, and then edit or delete the post, then that's inexcusable. In my mind, at least. The point is that people should think before they post.
I would fully agree with an 'edit' ability if we didn't have the ability to preview our posts before committing them to the board. But we CAN preview...and we should all preview...before hitting the "Add" button. Since we CAN "preview," there should be no need to "Edit" or "Delete."
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
Belle
I've missed comments that have generated a major part of the discussion on a thread because it was edited long after the fact. :(
I've also deleted posts that I regretted deleting after the fact.
I, too, think two hours is plenty of time to "get it right". If someone wants to clarify or change the entire meaning of their post, then I see a new post as being the best way to handle that so that people are "lost" when they come onto the thread.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
laleo
I didn't vote in the poll, but, so far, I like the time limits. When I go back to a thread, it says the same thing it said when I first read it, so if there is something in the thread that I was mulling over, or thinking about responding to, it's still there. If I post, my words mean something, and will be understood, in the context of the discussion.
satori: You said, "I'm sure there's a small, puritanical contingent of forum fascists lurking in the shadows . . . "
And to that I would say that there is a small contingent of forum anarchists hiding in the shadows, or hiding behind someone else's shadow, who take pleasure in subversion for subversion's sake, not because there is a greater good to serve, or a higher principle, but just for the fun of it. Unfortunately, having no time limits seems to invite passive-aggressive behavior.
Long ago, we had a similar discussion, and the poll (which was a simple "yes" or "no") was split almost 50/50 with a slight majority in favor of time limits. I think having time-limits will help with the continuity of the threads, and the flow of the forum. Addendums and clarifications can be added as the discussion moves along, where they make sense right where written.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wingnut
2 hour limit and the birds would have flown till the close of the old joint! :P
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LG
Unless a moderator removed them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
I think this says it best. While some misuse the edit feature, most do not. Most use it honestly and without malice or ego-centered ambitions of making themselves look better.
Speaking for myself only, I find the edit feature a useful tool. I agree with Satori about the *archiving* of posts, before the thread itself is archived. Until a thread is archived, I would like to be able to act as *moderator* on what I said.
For those who don't care about it, don't use it. :)
For those of us who would like the option, it would be nice to have it ((cough!!)) Available!!
:D :unsure: :D
David
Edited by dmillerLink to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
You two that voted "what am edit"..
well, you know who you are.. :D
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
While I agree with the original post remaining in substance I still find I've posted something and left the board only to return and read that it clearly wasn't worded well enough to make the point so have edited to clarify. For those times I'd like the limit of 2 hours removed as it was in the other board.
I have also removed a post and afterwards wished it'd remained and in my chicken moment I hadn't gone and deleted it. So I know I've personally abused the leave it there unspoken common courtesy so folks can understand the remainder of the thread. Where on occasion the person making first direct comment looks rather odd when the post their referring to is now gone. :unsure:
If one of us abuses that rule of deleting or altering posts then the useful tool of private messages that appear before you so you are more apt to look is a way you could ask that person to consider not altering as they do for the courtesy of the thread.
And Paw thanks for reading our input. This new place does have some nice options for sure.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
I voted against the limits.
Sometimes I forget to disable my signature, which is a big obnoxious banner ad I like to save for deliberate, shameless plugs. In at least one case (and I think only one), the sig remained and I didn't realize it until it was too late to remove. Fortunately, it was on an endless blather thread, which means the thread has moved three pages since my blunder. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
laleo
What does this mean? I don't get it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Laleo -- my guess is that no one would have stuck around very long.
I'm not sure of the meaning of that either, but that is what I think it to mean.
Wingnut -- did I get it right?? :unsure:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Psalm 71 one
I was wondering that, too, Laleo!
Since I come in sporadically, I have come into a thread, read comments people are making to someone about what they posted, and have NO idea what they are referring to, because the poster had edited their post. That is annoying!!!!
However, I also voted in favor of no time limit--because of the fact that I do come in sporadically. It takes me quite awhile to do a post, since I am a two-fingered, hunt-and-peck typist. Sometimes I post and run because the time I had to be here is used up because of posting. And I may not get back til the next day or two days or more. If I have an error in my post, or want to reword what I said, I would really like that option. I try to state why I edited when I do.
Recently, while in a seriously emotional state, I misunderstood a person's posts, and I called that person a name. Clarification was needed as to what we each meant to say, and we apologized to each other. I felt it was too ugly to leave my comments up, so I said in that post that I was going to go back and edit my nasties, and did--editing several posts. They'd been up long enough for plenty of people to see what I'd posted--there's no way I could hide that, but since everything was cleared up, why should they stay posted? Maybe others see that as misuse of the edit feature, though. . .
Are there certain forums where the misuse of the edit feature happens more than in others? (My guess would be political or religious debates) Should there be a time limit only in those?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jim
"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?"
Because it can be.
Honestly Mike, I can't believe that's the best arguement you can come up with. The whole point of the internet is that it's better and different than traditional forms of communications. Exploring new ways of handling the information in pleasant and accurate forms is part of progress.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
This here also drives home the point that not all editing is done to correct spelling, etc. Honest mistakes are made (I've made many myself), and the chance to go back and rectify matters only makes sense.
As Psalmie says -- she noted in her latter posts that she would go back to edit that which she considered objectionable. I've done the same thing in the past on the other board. There's a lot of things that factor into one's decision to edit a post, and not all entities are readily recognizable within a certain time limit. :)
David
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
:P
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Birds? Did someone mention birds flying in?
And Psalmie you just wanna erase your food fight mess so's you don't get dish duty! You don't fool us......
Edited by WhiteDoveLink to comment
Share on other sites
LG
He was referring to some pictures of vulgar gestures that were removed, one by the original poster and another by a moderator.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
Well Shell has legs that follow her around. I reckon I have fingers. :o
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brother Speed
What Kathy? Shell....legs? I have a tush that follows me, but that belongs in another thread I'm certain.
As far as editing, well for spelling errors I just start my post in a word processor and correct the spelling errors then post. That's a good thing because sometimes I've had to post again because the first post didn't take. Does that happen to anyone else? Or is it just my computer?
Anyway, this one time under the previous cafe options I posted a response to something and I thought that my response was very humorous; three hours later I thought that my response was crude, thoughtless, vulgar and demeaning so I deleted it. I felt that if I didn't delete it that I would owe someone a huge apology. So, I learned something important. And this two hour time limit is going to hold me to it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
I do think through my posts and even try to spell the words correctly (I copy and paste my posts often). Still I make errors due to the fact I speak differently than folks generally and even though my buddies here have grown use to me I still state things odd at times and just flat out need to change my wording.
I still agree to just delete for delete sake is not fair to the balance of the participants in the thread but even still I've been grateful when I could delete something that was too heated at original post point also. Although that is actually rare for me, I really do try to say what I mean and consider the impact if not being a total whacko in my head at the time.
And Shell is very forgiven of me when it comes to the subject of legs. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wingnut
Chatty, even in the real world I have to excuse myself and explain that well. I just talk funny!
I would vote for a 24 hour period, then if it is that important contact a moderator and have them do the dirty deed for you.
Bro. Speed; your example is fine. But how many replies dealt with your initial post? That is the problem as I see it. Someone coming along days later and altering the post to their mood of the time or to comply with some cultic higher standard leaving all others with their @$$ hanging out is just wrong!
A simple new reply correcting or apologizing if there have been replies is a better approach than de-pantzing other posters.
We have some highly intelligent, highly educated, word smiths around here. But then we have the likes of me, uneducated and limited vocabulary. Some want us all to play the game according to their standard and that is mean and hurtful to those that have only been to the school of hard knocks for our higher education.
Oh my, how some think their words are their own precious possessions and they have unlimited rights to them. But, they are selfish in not considering what altering their precious "babies" does to all the precious words posted in a reply to theirs.
Da-birds comment was a smart-@$$ one, had it been dealt with properly it would have all been done by a moderator or left alone. :P
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
Since I agree with quite a bit of what you said there perhaps I'm moving closer in that direction but I still feel altering should be allowed if I deem necessary.
One HUGE difference about here and my life away from here is that yes I can't alter my words in real life so why should this be different. Well there are many things I can't do in real life I can do here when it comes to my growth obtained since I joined. And in that process I have deleted things I posted and you who read it know EXACTLY why I would have done that. Had I not been allowed that I would have left here LONG AGO due to the fact I couldn't reveal when my nerve allowed and be approached by those who cared to do so YET still be allowed to take away those words that after reading them made me scream due to exposure of my soul!
I continue to stand I would like my options; this is a world I opt to come to. And I do so for a few reasons one is my freedom. Plain and simple!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wingnut
Awwww, the freedom issue! Point well taken.
Its like the compliance issue over and beyond the normal minimal rules is a big issue with me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
I rather figured there remained a tad of residual. For me I learned and so that was then and now is now. If I held onto things that caused me difficulties well I'd of taken down the sword from the wall a lifetime ago. Yeah, dramatic…I tend to do that now and then. What the heck! B)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
markomalley
Uhhhh, John, its Mark, not Mike ;)
And the point remains that either you should be able to stand by your words or not. If you can't stand by your words, you shouldn't speak them. I think that's a big part of the problem with the Internet, as a whole, is that you can state something in total anonymity with no accountability. Not that I have anything against that, but it does result in some people being meaner than they would if they were in a position where somebody could knock their block off (as would surely happen if they were f2f). When a person can make those posts, get people riled up, and then edit or delete the post, then that's inexcusable. In my mind, at least. The point is that people should think before they post.
I would fully agree with an 'edit' ability if we didn't have the ability to preview our posts before committing them to the board. But we CAN preview...and we should all preview...before hitting the "Add" button. Since we CAN "preview," there should be no need to "Edit" or "Delete."
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.