Suggestion: More time to edit posts

[Aethelwine]

I appreciate 24 hours is generous in most circumstances, but I have just found myself a bit limited by it and I am not really seeing a downside to extending the 24 hours to a week limit.

I wanted to add an additional location to this post, add some bolding to make it clearer which continent the post was about and remove the reference to still working on it.

It is not a big deal I can see the sort of informational post I am making is not usual, but I do think it worthy of consideration. The limit might perhaps put people off from using the forum for similar informational posts.

Thanks

 

Edited August 7, 2022 by Aethelwine
grammar

[Kathlen Onyx]

The problem with that is that people will use that week to change the OP depending on the replies that they get. Removing content or adding.  If there was an add feature without compromising the OP that might work.

Edited August 7, 2022 by Sam1 Bellisserian

[LittleMe Jewell]

IMO, 24 is enough. I have sometimes wanted to refine a post after that time, I but typically don't see a really good reason for extending the time -- at least not one that would outweigh the negative of an increased time allowance.

[Persephone Emerald]

I think 24 hours is enough given how some might abuse the ability to change their post. We've already seen some posters completely change their posts within a few minutes of posting. Other's responding to them had copied their original post. Otherwise their responses wouldn't have made any sense.

[Aethelwine]

If someone is using the edit function to trick people into a response they can then capitalise on by editing their post and acting innocent, then I would hope the moderators would have an edit history to investigate that, but someone doing that seems unlikely to be doing it after 24 hours... much more likely to do be doing it in a much shorter timeframe. 

I think the cases where editing beyond 24 hours, like where someone is taking time to collect information in one place, the usage is more likely to be beneficial to conveying information and making use of the forum to that end. Maybe I am naive but I don't see the additional risk that it would increase the chance of someone using it for nefarious purpose.

I think the cases it would get used are likely to be rare anyway, so I don't have strong feelings on this. I just think it an idea with considering. On balance it seems to me like the benefits outweigh the risks.

[Rowan Amore]

1 hour ago, Aethelwine said:

If someone is using the edit function to trick people into a response they can then capitalise on by editing their post and acting innocent, then I would hope the moderators would have an edit history to investigate that, but someone doing that seems unlikely to be doing it after 24 hours... much more likely to do be doing it in a much shorter timeframe. 

I think the cases where editing beyond 24 hours, like where someone is taking time to collect information in one place, the usage is more likely to be beneficial to conveying information and making use of the forum to that end. Maybe I am naive but I don't see the additional risk that it would increase the chance of someone using it for nefarious purpose.

I think the cases it would get used are likely to be rare anyway, so I don't have strong feelings on this. I just think it an idea with considering. On balance it seems to me like the benefits outweigh the risks.

Adding information to go along with your original post by making another post is what people do.  If someone is following your posts, they'll see it.  

[Alwin Alcott]

If people first think, and after that post, 24 h is long enough in my opinion.
The thinking before hitting the submit button is the hardest part in the proces, (also mine)

[Silent Mistwalker]

You can always quote yourself...

[Silent Mistwalker]

Just now, Silent Mistwalker said:

You can always quote yourself...

to make any corrections. 🤐

[Kimmi Zehetbauer]

The ham radio board I help Mod on gives 4 hours to edit. If they miss they can always PM a staff person.  The 24 hours here is very generous, not many board give that much.

[LittleMe Jewell]

Another forum that I sometimes frequent only allows an hour for edits

[Aethelwine]

in contrast to others experience, a couple of forums I frequent seem to have indefinite time available for edits,  at least in cases where it is requested if not as a general rule.

There is one on vaping another for a game. The game forum allows for edits such that the original post can be updated to hold the most current version of the mod it holds along with the up to date description of the changes made and what it now does. The vaping forum has people making directories of currently available suppliers of flavour profiles of vapes, so the OP gets updated to remove out of date suppliers and updated to include new ones that come on the market.   In both cases these threads have been updated over the course of years.

Edited August 9, 2022 by Aethelwine

[Aethelwine]

10 hours ago, Silent Mistwalker said:

to make any corrections. 🤐

I did briefly consider that, had I more than one or two things to add then doing that and editing it in to a whole might have been a solution, but it is not as elegant as simply granting more time to edit posts. 

[Love Zhaoying]

On 8/7/2022 at 3:23 PM, Sam1 Bellisserian said:

The problem with that is that people will use that week to change the OP depending on the replies that they get. Removing content or adding.  If there was an add feature without compromising the OP that might work.

I've seen lots of cases on this forum, not so much lately, where some Forumites felt obliged to quote someone's post: because their post would change so much, that the intervening replies didn't make sense without it.  I don't know if letting someone change their original thread post long after the first posting would make this problem worse.

[MoiraKathleen]

I agree with @Aethelwine that for certain types of posts - such as the one she referenced as an example - it would be beneficial to be able to add on to an existing post past the 24-hour limit for editing.  For posts that are an informational list of entries I can see the benefit of having all the items in the same post as opposed to needing to create a new post further down in the thread with additional entries when those entries would be best grouped with entries in an earlier post.

For those Forumites who feel obliged to quote someone's post when responding to it in case of later edits, you can continue to do so - just like you currently are doing.  

[Codex Alpha]

This post is no longer needed, as other forum members  have 'documented' it on my behalf, and they feel that once I hit enter, I should not be able to edit it, as I may be 'doing it for nefarious reasons' which is a common accusation of others who try to participate in the forums here, and always the basis to call for greater restrictions against SL users.

 

 

Edited August 9, 2022 by Codex Alpha
I don't need to say why. I'm not on a development or legal team

[Love Zhaoying]

48 minutes ago, Codex Alpha said:

This is a product of how some replies are constructed, what trigger words they pick out, or over-analyze every single nuance and phrase , how they interpret it in their own minds, how they imagine 'implications' and 'intent', political persuasions and triggers, how strong their vocabulary and comprehension is, their attention span, and whether they truly read the post they replied to in full before reacting and replying (with a quote in an attempt to 'lock' someone in while they proceed to tear them apart in their response).

I speak for myself when I am one of those who will edit their posts to clarify, bold a main point,  depending on responses. Because I can, and it should be my right to - and including deleting the topic myself if it goes south (but of course that's gone too).

One doesn't 'win' or go 'ahha' by quoting an OP or other post. If it's edited it would be the habitual quoter who causes a break in the discussion in an attempt to override the original post.

In general it's best to not participate in communities who tend to do that to other posters, nor any community who would love to exploit an errant post or misuse of words - and not let the OP rephrase or reword or clarify their positions - and then proceed to tear them apart (especially on sensitive issues).

I couldn't care less if people wanted to edit their posts, clarify their posts, or even delete them. Forums are for discussing of ideas and once you get the idea, it's consumed. A topic doesn't  have to be a court document for people to peruse through, reference later in some interpersonal dispute or gang action. It would only matter if it was an informational wiki, tutorial or other.

Note: I've been on many internet forums in the past, and some of them were so combative with each other, each reply had to include a quote of the prior, and so the forum turned into everyone quoting each other - trying to 'lock them in' so they could 'win' the debate or discussion by hopefully catching their opponent in a slip up.

Not allowing an individual control over their own topics, with a time limit or not, is pretty draconian - just because it happens doesn't make it right - similar to denying people ability to close their accounts on a platform (or even change their email address) - trying to 'lock them in' for one reason or another.

Those who call for anything else are usually the people who run chats like they are in a court case practicing law where every word someone says counts, and they must be proven guilty, or that poster to prove their own innocence or good intent, just because someone decided to take offense or issue with it.

This is why in modern times I trend to NOT post, as every single letter will be used against you nowadays - with no nuance, context, insight and sometimes forgiveness extended.

Thank you for your well-considered response!

[Theresa Tennyson]

1 hour ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Thank you for your well-considered response!

Well documented now, too...

[Love Zhaoying]

6 minutes ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Well documented now, too...

I had a lot of positive feedback to his reply, but rather than replying to individual points with feedback, it seemed better to just be positive. 

Edited to add: It is actually a pet peeve of mine if someone replies to my post but does NOT quote me. Because, I'm very likely to miss their reply due to not being notified! Sometimes you have to wonder, do people reply without quoting for some specific reason? I guess it's rude to ask.

Edited August 9, 2022 by Love Zhaoying

[Madelaine McMasters]

If the purpose of a forum is to be instructional or to catalog or track information (Answers), it makes sense to have edits open indefinitely, with a change log. I think that covers your desire, Aeth. Making the changes viewable without cluttering the current version might be non-trivial. Ultimately, informational posts would be editable by more than one (qualified) person. That's similar to how the Wiki works (or once did).

If the purpose of a forum is to afford general discussion, long term unlogged edits probably asks for trouble.

A happy medium might be to allow uncatalogued edits within some short period (an hour or so), after which edits are logged for view by all. This allows removal of emotionally charged content after the poster cools off, but prevents malicious manipulations. Logged edits could also show up in "Unread Content", making sure that updates to informational posts are seen.

I imagine my idea is well outside this forum's capabilities.

[Solar Legion]

When one considers that there are those who have (and will) change their post after getting backlash in such a manner as to make said backlash seem disconnected (especially if one has not used the quote function when replaying) ... Yeah, twenty four hours is more than enough time to make your edits (or to try to change the narrative).

Pity that one cannot Report such actions and have the edited post reverted ....

[Love Zhaoying]

8 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

Logged edits could also show up in "Unread Content", making sure that updates to informational posts are seen.

I imagine my idea is well outside this forum's capabilities.

Yet..moderators can see our edits, I've been told! (By a mod.)

[Love Zhaoying]

It could be worse, at least quotes are static / don't change when a post is edited!

[Madelaine McMasters]

15 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Yet..moderators can see our edits, I've been told! (By a mod.)

Yes, I imagine moderators can see our edits... if they look at our posts. There's ample potential for subterfuge to escape their attention. There's good reason for LL to wish to minimize the attention moderators must give us.

Allowing edits indefinitely affords us the ability to keep informational posts up-to-date. Logging those edits publicly is the sunshine that disinfects.

Edited August 9, 2022 by Madelaine McMasters
Added "publicly".

[Rowan Amore]

3 hours ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Thank you for your well-considered response!

Priceless!  Considering you managed to get a prime example of why it's set at a certain time limit.