Every time I see someone type ‘ETA:’ in an edit I think…
“Estimated Time of Arrival”
I know exactly what they mean, but still my brain looks and says “Estimated Time of Arrival”.
I use ‘edit:’
Just saying.
Not once, ever. Just sayin’.
I agree that it’s not particularly obvious, and I’d never seen it on other boards, not that I hang out at many others. I use “on edit:”, or nothing if it doesn’t really matter.
Agree 100%. It doesn’t help that ETA was the first acronym I ever remember learning. My dad works in the airline industry and used to work on an NHRA car in his off-time; both industries use the term frequently. I hate it for “Edited to Add” - “Edit” is one more letter and conveys meaning a lot better.
I also hate FTW for “for the win.” FTW meant something very different to me until 2 or 3 years ago.
I’m guilty of using ETA. I use it because pretty much all of the message boards I’ve visited use it as an acronym, and I thought it was more or less standard, like LOL or OMG. I didn’t think about possible confusion and have no problem using edit instead, so I’ll try to remember to do that.
“Fondle the Wookiee”?
“Fuck The World”
I read Taking Care of Business when I was 10 or 11 and thought it was a cool acronym as a rebelious youth.
Well, if one titles their edit…
it needs neither.
I somewhat agree. It’s mostly for when you add a sentence or paragraph, though, so people know what you added. If you’re just correcting typos there’s no need for it.
So how do people know what you added?
Fut The Whuck?
See post #7
I know “Google is your friend” is obnoxious, but what do you call littering a thread with pointless Q&A on shit that isn’t all that hard to frigging find on your own?
eta: not that this thread isn’t a little silly. Seriously, you don’t find a distinct difference in meaning between “Edit” and “edit to add”?
Because what I add is after the “ETA:”? :dubious: I suppose, I could just start typing out “Edited to Add:” to avoid any confusion.
That would probably be a good idea. I don’t know how many times I’ve re-read and puzzled over posts with ETA somewhere within them. They seem to very rarely contain an exact time of arrival for the post, poster or reader thereof. It’s most confusing.
All joking aside, I think “eta” should be used when you are quite technically and specifically adding a bit of text for some reason. “Edit” should be used when what you add actually modifies the context of the post. extreme eg: (in middle of a paragraph) Edit: reading "Whatsisname’s linked article makes me retract this statement".
Then, AFAIK I’ve been using it correctly by those standards.
Oh, yes. I agreed with your first post. That’s what that “all joking aside” bit was about. I think my definitions are pretty intuitive - especially on an argumentative board like this.
I don’t normally put any remark on any edit I make, becaue so far it’s always been a minor typo fix or word change. But I also don’t like ETA, or how everyone seems to want to indicate every edit they make when they make it. Other boards don’t bother with that kind of stuff, I really don’t think we need it here, even if we are mostly anally retentive sticklers for accuracy.
I have read this post 5 or 6 times and for the life of me I cannot figure out what you are trying to say. Can you or someone else please help me out?
Sorry, I was a little “tired” and grumpy when I wrote that. I just hate it when threads turn into acronym guessing games when a) it’s already been explained and b) it’s really simple and quick to just look it up yourself.