Edit After Reply: Is It Possible?

[Fredrik]

I think it would be great to be able to edit posts even after they got several replies. Has this never been allowed here, or was it allowed and people abused it? I would like to be able to add e.g. "This calculation is wrong, but I think I got it right in #22" or "Post #51 answered this question completely" to an old post.

It would probably be best if we could just add stuff to old posts, but I guess vBulletin doesn't have that feature. Are you guys completely against allowing edits after the first hour?

 

[cristo]

Whilst such a feature would be fine for those members that use it properly, there will be members who abuse the feature. This is the reason the editing period was shortened in the first place: members, especially in the homework forums, would edit their posts when they had been worked through the question, so the original post showed the solution. They would also go on and edit mistakes they had made in previous posts after they had had them pointed out by a homework helper. This made for very disjoint threads which didn't make any sense to anyone else that was reading them. Thus, we decided to restrict the editing period to half an hour.

Whilst I am not certain, I don't think that vbulletin has a feature to only add content to posts.

 

[Hootenanny]

I think it would be great to be able to edit posts even after they got several replies. Has this never been allowed here, or was it allowed and people abused it? I would like to be able to add e.g. "This calculation is wrong, but I think I got it right in #22" or "Post #51 answered this question completely" to an old post.

It would probably be best if we could just add stuff to old posts, but I guess vBulletin doesn't have that feature. Are you guys completely against allowing edits after the first hour?

You are allowed a 'grace period' of 30 minutes after you originally posted to edit your post. Previously the grace period was 24 hours, but as you say the editing system was open to abuse: people would edit their posts to make subsequent replies seem out of context or simply wrong. In some cases people were editing their original posts to remove or mutilate questions once they had been answered.

It was thought that 30 minutes was sufficient time for you to read through your post, spot and correct any errors. However, if you spot a serious error (no-one is going to make a fuss about spelling mistakes) in one of your posts use the report button to detail the correct and a mentor will make the correction for you.

Edit: It seems cristo can type faster than me :tongue2:

 

[robphy]

I think it would be great to be able to edit posts even after they got several replies. Has this never been allowed here, or was it allowed and people abused it? I would like to be able to add e.g. "This calculation is wrong, but I think I got it right in #22" or "Post #51 answered this question completely" to an old post.

It would probably be best if we could just add stuff to old posts, but I guess vBulletin doesn't have that feature. Are you guys completely against allowing edits after the first hour?

What, in principle, might be a good compromise is to
append to the first post a list of links to and optional titles of subsequent posts
in this thread by the original poster.
So, you [as the first poster] can alert readers of corrections, elaborations, solutions, etc...
without disrupting the temporal flow of the discussion.
I think it might make navigation a little easier... especially for a new reader visiting the thread.

It also might be interesting to represent the thread as a tree, or maybe a [partial] ordering of posts, based on the [quote ][ /quote] tags. This might reveal the nature of the discussion in the thread [especially long ones]. Is it a back-and-forth between two persons? or several such disjoint conversations? or something else?

 

[Fredrik]

It also might be interesting to represent the thread as a tree, or maybe a [partial] ordering of posts, based on the [quote ][ /quote] tags. This might reveal the nature of the discussion in the thread [especially long ones]. Is it a back-and-forth between two persons? or several such disjoint conversations? or something else?

I don't like tree-structured forums much, and I hate the ones where you can choose if you want to view a thread as a tree or not, but I agree that discussions in a vBulletin forum are sometimes more difficult to follow than discussions in tree-structured forums.

I never liked the fact that vBulletin removes all quotes inside the text I'm quoting. If there's any way the admins could change that, I think it would make the quality of discussions improve significantly. My experience is that most people don't even know what the discussion is about after a few replies back and forth when the comment that spawned the discussion isn't included. They're usually too lazy to go back and check what was said. This makes it very hard to have a discussion sometimes.

 

[pmb_phy]

Thus, we decided to restrict the editing period to half an hour.

A half an hour has proved to be insufficient. There have been many times that I had to edit a post because I later saw the formula was wrong. It can take a while to figure out what the problem is and a half an hour is not long enough. It has often resulted in my having to post the same material in another post entirely.

Please lengthen it to an hour.

Pete

 

[cristo]

A half an hour has proved to be insufficient. There have been many times that I had to edit a post because I later saw the formula was wrong. It can take a while to figure out what the problem is and a half an hour is not long enough. It has often resulted in my having to post the same material in another post entirely.

Please lengthen it to an hour.

Pete

If something like this happens then you can simply use the report button to ask a mentor to edit the formula.

 

[Fredrik]

I think it was changed to an hour a few days ago. At least I think the message I got when I tried to submit a change said that the limit is 60 minutes. (I think I clicked the edit button before my time was up, and then took too long to make the changes). I don't know if this was 30 or 60 minutes after I made the post. It was probably 60 minutes, because I see now that I made the next post 63 minutes after the first.

 

[Kurdt]

If you're making a large post it is probably better to use a text editor and then copy your final draft before posting. If there is latex in the post you can preview that at several websites (a couple of which are listed https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=8997&page=79") before posting. I also suggest once you post it you give it a quick read through to try and catch any mistakes quickly. If you've done all this and then still find a major mistake you can use the report button to alert the mentors that you need the post altering.

 

[robphy]

Another option may be to use the user blogs
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=240499
(I'm not sure if all of the LaTeX-related bugs have been worked out.)

 

[Fredrik]

I never liked the fact that vBulletin removes all quotes inside the text I'm quoting.

I went over to vbulletin.com to beg them to add this feature. It seems that I'm not the only one who's had this idea. It also turned out that this feature already exists. All you have to do is to edit a line in functions.php. Linky.

 

[cristo]

I went over to vbulletin.com to beg them to add this feature. It seems that I'm not the only one who's had this idea. It also turned out that this feature already exists, but you have to install it. Linky. (They say it takes 15 seconds).

Personally, i think such a feature would make the forums untidy. We'll end up with posts having upwards of three layers of quotes meaning we'll have to scroll down half a page to read the new content. I don't think this is something that is necessary, since if one wishes to read the post which is replied to in the quote, one can simply scroll up to the appropriate post. In the odd case where it is necessary to have, say, two layers of quote in a reply, one can put these in manually.

 

[Kurdt]

There's even a handy button to take you to the quoted post.

 

[Fredrik]

The problem is that people don't do that. Yes, I do that, but the people who would need it the most don't. I have many times gotten into ridiculous arguments with people who completely lost track of what we were talking about at some point. I think unnecessary arguments like that is a bigger problem than people who would use nested quotes when it isn't necessary.

Also, aren't people already pretty good at deleting irrelevant stuff from the texts they're quoting? You're only supposed to use nested quotes when there's something relevant in the quote inside the quote. Most of the time you would just delete it. I think people are actually better at deleting irrelevant stuff from quotes than they are at realizing when they should go back and read a previous post.

 

[robphy]

With all of the javascripting already in place, one might be able to
not show all of the nested layers of quotes at first glance...
but then allow it to be expanded upon on request.

 

[Moonbear]

Personally, i think such a feature would make the forums untidy. We'll end up with posts having upwards of three layers of quotes meaning we'll have to scroll down half a page to read the new content. I don't think this is something that is necessary, since if one wishes to read the post which is replied to in the quote, one can simply scroll up to the appropriate post. In the odd case where it is necessary to have, say, two layers of quote in a reply, one can put these in manually.

Yes, this is the reason we don't have embedded quotes. Especially novices leave all the embedded quotes (and deleting them out manually makes more chances to introduce errors to what was quoted).

The problem is that people don't do that. Yes, I do that, but the people who would need it the most don't. I have many times gotten into ridiculous arguments with people who completely lost track of what we were talking about at some point. I think unnecessary arguments like that is a bigger problem than people who would use nested quotes when it isn't necessary.

I disagree. If someone has lost track of the argument and can't refer back a bit to get back on track, that's their problem. Nested quotes get annoying very quickly.

Also, aren't people already pretty good at deleting irrelevant stuff from the texts they're quoting?

:rofl: Take a look at any forum that includes the nested quotes, and draw your own conclusion.

You're only supposed to use nested quotes when there's something relevant in the quote inside the quote. Most of the time you would just delete it. I think people are actually better at deleting irrelevant stuff from quotes than they are at realizing when they should go back and read a previous post.

I disagree. And, if the previously quoted content is really relevant, use the multi quote feature to preserve both of the quoted sections. If it's that important, it's worth the extra step of finding the originally quoted post and quoting that with the one you're replying to. In case you didn't know, the multi quote button works across multiple pages of a thread, so you can go back a page, click multi quote, go to the next page, click again for some other post, and when you're done with everything you want to quote, click the regular quote button.

As for people needing more than 30 min to edit, if one is making that many errors or that large of errors when posting to need so much time to go back and fix them, they really should spend more time either proofreading in the preview panel or composing offline, or perhaps simply thinking about what they're writing before they hit "submit." Sure, on a rare occasion, someone will realize an error later on (like a link that points to the wrong place), but that's easily remedied with a note of correction later in the thread, or by asking a mentor to fix the problem. If it's more than a really rare problem or minor typos, then spend more time thinking before sending.

 

[pmb_phy]

If something like this happens then you can simply use the report button to ask a mentor to edit the formula.

If it were that simple then I never would have posted this request.

 

[Hootenanny]

If it were that simple then I never would have posted this request.

How is that not simple, what's the problem with using the report button?

 

[pmb_phy]

How is that not simple, what's the problem with using the report button?

It could take a while for the problem to be corrected and in the mean time it could interrupt the flow of a conversation by requiring the poster to go back and repost the same thing thus interupting a conversation and allowing it to get a bit confusing. Plus its frustrating. Its not like a persom wants to wait until the problem is fixed so they can't be expected to sit by the post and wait.

As I said - not simple.

 

[Hootenanny]

It could take a while for the problem to be corrected and in the mean time it could interrupt the flow of a conversation by requiring the poster to go back and repost the same thing thus interupting a conversation and allowing it to get a bit confusing. Plus its frustrating. Its not like a persom wants to wait until the problem is fixed so they can't be expected to sit by the post and wait.

As I said - not simple.

Whilst that is true, I think that editing posts onces subsequent replies have been made would only leave to more confusion and further disrupt that flow of conversation. I have said this before, but in my opinion editing should not be allowed once a subsequent reply has been posted. The author of the subsequent post has based his/her reply on the original post and by editing the original post it may make the replies seem confusing and disrupts the flow of the whole thread. If clarification or correction is needed, then you should clarify your point or make your correct in a new post, this preserves the logical chronological order of comments and avoids any confusion.

 

[pmb_phy]

Whilst that is true, I think that editing posts onces subsequent replies have been made would only leave to more confusion and further disrupt that flow of conversation. In my opinion editing should not be allowed once a subsequent reply has been posted. The author of the subsequent post has based his/her reply on the original post and by editing the original post it may make the replies seem confusing and disrupts the flow of the whole thread. If clarification or correction is needed, then you should clarify your point or make your correct in a new post, this preserves the logical chronological order of comments and avoids any confusion.

The only corrections I am talking about are corrections to formulae, correcting Latex problems and spelling/notation errors. A hour of editing is sufficient to resolve them in my opinion. Not a half an hour. There are imes when I hit "Submit Reply" by mistake when I really mean to hit "Preview Post" (sigh - a sign of old age I guess).

Pete

 

[Hootenanny]

The only corrections I am talking about are corrections to formulae, correcting Latex problems and spelling/notation errors.

Whilst you may only wish to make minor corrections, there are users that would make more significant changes that alter the meaning of their OP, or indeed correct errors in their understanding pointed out later in the thread.

 

[pmb_phy]

Whilst you may only wish to make minor corrections, there are users that would make more significant changes that alter the meaning of their OP, or indeed correct errors in their understanding pointed out later in the thread.

Its for that reason that the poster should be allowed an hour, but not a day.

Pete

 

[Hootenanny]

Its for that reason that the poster should be allowed an hour, but not a day.

Pete

If the preview facility is used effectively I can't see why any corrections should have to be made after the comment has been posted. Incorrect latex is easy to spot (if not correct) whilst previewing and surely a read through of one's posts is sufficient to spot any significant errors.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Its for that reason that the poster should be allowed an hour, but not a day.

Pete

The time edit is set at 60min

 

[pmb_phy]

If the preview facility is used effectively ...

If you search the threads dating back to the moment that I first arrived you will notice that I never said that I was perfect. When a person posts so many times as to even loose track of them, and that person has a terrible memory like me, then errors will happen whether we like it or not. I'm not taking a guess as to future predictions of what ,y posting habits will be. I simply make mistakes. My memory is terrible and I accidently hit the sumit key when I mean to hit the preview key. Its a mistake. It happens. I'm not effective. So sue me! :)

Greg - Thanks.

Pete

 

[Cyrus]

Could we please do away with the edit time limit on the main areas: I.e. the aero/me forum. I was posting something and now I can't fix the tex anymore.

No offense, but this is really kind of silly that I can't go back and fix an equation 60 mins after the fact.

 

[Evo]

Could we please do away with the edit time limit on the main areas: I.e. the aero/me forum. I was posting something and now I can't fix the tex anymore.

No offense, but this is really kind of silly that I can't go back and fix an equation 60 mins after the fact.

What do you need to fix? If you send me the corrected post with a link to the original, I will replace the old post with the corrected version.

 

[Cyrus]

What do you need to fix? If you send me the corrected post with a link to the original, I will replace the old post with the corrected version.

Yeah, but the point is why? This is such a hassle for no reason. :grumpy:

I can see the point of the HW sections having a limit, but for the general sections this is just horrible.

 

[Evo]

Yeah, but the point is why? This is such a hassle for no reason. :grumpy:

Hey, we don't hassle members for "no reason".

The edit limit was for HH, but I believe it can't be restricted to just that forum.

 

[cristo]

Hey, we don't hassle members for "no reason".

The edit limit was for HH, but I believe it can't be restricted to just that forum.

I don't think that it should be restricted to HH anyway: there have been incidents in the past when members completely change their argument half way through a thread. Having an edit limit in place makes it clear that they are changing their minds, but without one, the member could go back and edit their posts completely, and claim something else. There is no record of threads that have been edited: that is, once a thread has been edited, there is no way for us to retrieve the old version. If there were such a function, then I wouldn't mind about post editing, but since there isn't, I an strongly opposed to open, or even extended edit periods.

 

[Cyrus]

Hey, we don't hassle members for "no reason".

The edit limit was for HH, but I believe it can't be restricted to just that forum.

Yeah, I know its there for HH. But it *really* stinks that I have to ask a mentor to do something as simple as edit a post just because its been more than 60 mins.

 

[Cyrus]

I don't think that it should be restricted to HH anyway: there have been incidents in the past when members completely change their argument half way through a thread. Having an edit limit in place makes it clear that they are changing their minds, but without one, the member could go back and edit their posts completely, and claim something else. There is no record of threads that have been edited: that is, once a thread has been edited, there is no way for us to retrieve the old version. If there were such a function, then I wouldn't mind about post editing, but since there isn't, I an strongly opposed to open, or even extended edit periods.

Maybe for certain sections yes. But can you show me one example of this in the engineering section I'm trying to post?

 

[Evo]

Yeah, I know its there for HH. But it *really* stinks that I have to ask a mentor to do something as simple as edit a post just because its been more than 60 mins.

You can also just post the correction in the thread and state that this replaces post #... Then you don't have to contact anyone.

 

[cristo]

Maybe for certain sections yes. But can you show me one example of this in the engineering section I'm trying to post?

Obviously not, since I hardly, if ever, go in there! Ok, well maybe if it were possible, then the ME forum could have a longer edit period, we'd have to ask russ or berkeman if they'd object to it. In the meantime, you can use either of Evo's suggested workarounds.