Turn On the Ability to Edit Posts

[Drazick]

Would you please allow editing of posts?

It is something basic in any forum.
Not being able to edit posts is really very harsh thing to do.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Would you please allow editing of posts?

Editing can be done within 6 hours of posting

 

[Drazick]

Why is that?

I found a mistake few days later, why not have the ability to edit?

Those are not legal contracts.

 

[Merlin3189]

But it can be confusing if earlier posts are edited after you've read them.
What's wrong with simply adding a new post with the correction at the time you discover your error?

 

[Drazick]

Clutter?

Any respond by others can include "Quote" if they are afraid the context will be changed.
Yet again, those are not legal contracts, can't see situation when someone tries to fail other by editing after responses are made.

The forum crowd doesn't seem to be that kind of people.

 

[Merlin3189]

Clutter - yes. There's often plenty of that anyhow. I'm not sure whether, every bit of clutter avoided helps, or whether the odd correction post now and again would be a negligible drop in the ocean?

Not allowing you to avoid an occasional bit of clutter, is hardly something I would describe as harsh.

I hadn't thought about any legal aspect or underhand debating tactics. As you say, not likely here.
My thought was simply that, coming into a discussion, one follows through the story. This is often difficult enough with people going off at tangents and following different threads of thought. If a correction breaks what logic there was in a sequence, that just makes it harder to follow. Maybe *you* would make your corrections in such a way that readers would see the original and that it had been retrospectively altered, so that they understood the context of the following posts. But would others?

Perhaps the 6hrs could be extended when the post is still the last in the thread. Once people have responded to it, even the 6hrs could be too much?

When I need to post a correction or admission of error (all too often, I'm afraid) I like to think that I'm showing not just my fallibility, but also an element of integrity.

I've not actually noticed whether I get an alert when someone edits a post in a thread I'm watching. If I do, is the edit highlighted in some way? A new post correcting an old one can achieve this.

 

[jtbell]

In the past, when we had a longer editing period on posts, some people unfortunately abused it by "emptying" their posts after receiving answers/help. This was a particular problem in the homework-help forums, where some people wanted to cover up attempts to cheat on exams, or prevent other students in their classes from taking advantage of the help that they were receiving.

 

[Bystander]

The forum crowd doesn't seem to be that kind of people.

... for just that reason.

 

[berkeman]

Clutter?

Any respond by others can include "Quote" if they are afraid the context will be changed.
Yet again, those are not legal contracts, can't see situation when someone tries to fail other by editing after responses are made.

The forum crowd doesn't seem to be that kind of people.

When in doubt, click the Report link on your post, and ask the Mentors for help editing your post. If if looks to us like that would be confusing to subsequent posters, we will recommend that you just post a follow-up correction. Or we can add "strikethrough" as part of the correction, to make it more obvious that the post has been updated.

 

[Drazick]

Again, in order to prevent people from emptying their "Question" the writer has simple solution - Quote.

It is much more elegant.
I, for one, don't like being treated as potential run away.
I guess other doesn't care.

People should own their posts and be able to edit them anytime freely.
Those who want their answer to never lose context can quote or add in their post what the answered about.

This my opinion, I always starts with giving people credit and taking it only after they did something to lose it.
I would like to be treated like that as well.

 

[Ibix]

As others have noted, people do abuse the freedom to edit their posts. You may not be one of them, but how can anyone tell a priori? Effectively, the administration has decided that the community is more harmed by people maliciously deleting posts than by second posts saying "sorry, typo above".

There's nothing wrong with being wrong. Everybody makes mistakes. Just post a correction.

If you disagree you're going to have to provide a mechanism to deal with cheaters without adding to the mentors' workloads.

 

[Drazick]

There is a simple and already built in.
If you answer a question and you're afraid its context will be changed (Deleted, data will be altered, etc...) just use the Quote button.
It can be added to guidelines, someone who answers and Home Work question, please use the Quote button.

This works perfectly on other questions sites (StackExchange, Quora, etc...).

By the way, another way to overcome it is allow people to post as Anonymously making the post a Wiki or something like that.

The post belong to the one who posted it.
Would you like that an image you posted on Facebook would become and moderated by Facebook?
I find it very wrong thing to do, removing the control on the post from the one who posted it.

 

[Ibix]

Are you saying that if I quote your post, my copy of your text is my property to do with as I wish? Also note that you need everyone to take action to police your system. And you object to "clutter" with second posts but need everyone to quote whole posts every time, even though 99 times out of a hundred the posters were honest?

An image posted on Facebook isn't meant to be part of a learning resource. There's no harm in letting it be taken down or changed. And it is personal information that might become a security risk under some circumstances. Here, you are asking for comments and responses, and people can find those answers later and use them in their own learning. In this context, editing can be abused as already noted. And the rules specifically discourage personally identifying posts, if memory serves.

I think we aren't going to agree and that you are worrying about nothing, so I shall duck out now.

 

[jtbell]

personal information that might become a security risk under some circumstances.

We've sometimes changed someone's username or removed personal details from posts on request, to address concerns about privacy. So if that's an issue, people should feel free to contact us (preferably using the "Report" button on a suitable post) and describe their situation.

 

[phinds]

@Drazick judging from your number of posts, exactly half of which have been in this thread, you have perhaps not been on this forum long enough to get the full import of how much the mentors' actions make this the excellent forum that it is. They annoy people sometimes, yes, but again, THEY are the reason this forum is what it is and they, and Greg, are not remotely cavalier about the decisions made to keep this forum excellent. You need to agree to disagree about this issue and move on to using the forum to help you learn.

 

[russ_watters]

People should own their posts...

It is important to recognize that in most places on the internet, including here, you do not have exclusive ownership of the information you post.

 

[davenn]

Would you like that an image you posted on Facebook would become and moderated by Facebook?

they are moderated ... you are VERY naïve if you think they are not

 

[mfb]

Specifically for photos and video uploaded to the site, Facebook has a license to use your content in any way it sees fit, with a license that goes beyond merely covering the operation of the service in its current form. Facebook can transfer or sub-license its rights over a user’s content to another company or organisation if needed. Facebook’s license does not end upon the deactivation or deletion of a user’s account, content is only released from this license once all other users that have interacted with the content have also broken their ties with it (for example, a photo or video shared or tagged with a group of friends).

From here

 

[Ryan_m_b]

There is a simple and already built in.
If you answer a question and you're afraid its context will be changed (Deleted, data will be altered, etc...) just use the Quote button.
It can be added to guidelines, someone who answers and Home Work question, please use the Quote button.

This works perfectly on other questions sites (StackExchange, Quora, etc...).

Quoting every post would add to the clutter of a thread and still wouldn't stop the flow being broken and confused by abusive edits. At the end of the day having a limit on edits, whilst annoying in some situations, is far better for the general membership than unlimited edits.

By the way, another way to overcome it is allow people to post as Anonymously making the post a Wiki or something like that.

People already can post anonymously by making an account not related to their real personal details. I'm not sure what you mean by making the post a wiki, are you advocating all members being able to edit all posts? That definitely opens itself up for abuse.

The post belong to the one who posted it.
Would you like that an image you posted on Facebook would become and moderated by Facebook?
I find it very wrong thing to do, removing the control on the post from the one who posted it.

Legally that's not true. Virtually all websites and companies retain ownership of the content posted there by the users. If you mean morally that's a wider question, but again it comes down to a balancing of rights: should the right to edit a post outweigh the right of current and later readers to benefit from the thread? Given that our stated purpose is education, and historical threads aid in that immensely, the latter clearly trumps the former.