No, but it’s a perfect example of the sort of thing I’d have edited, if I could have. 
How much editing could an editor edit, if an editor could elect edited editing?
Plus, think of all the perfectly good jokes which have come out of typos! Didn’t anyone read the Threadspotting a few days ago about the mod trading cards?
And the whole Og thing (and another that always tickles me, but shouldn’t be mentioned here)
So if someone makes a really bad typo, or a mistake that distorts the content and could cause the entire point of the post to be lost (it happens, I’ve been lurking here for a while, and I’m on several other message boards), the poster frequently follows up with one or more posts explainging and cringing in embarassment and so on and so forth (along the lines of “I better point out my own error before someone else beats me to it”). Don’t these unnecessary follow-up posts of explanation slow things down as much as an editing option would?
If someone makes a serious typo that distort the content (like “not” for “now”), the alternatives are to cringe and apologize, as you suggest, or to ask a Moderator to please fix it. We’re usually happy to do so.
But that’s just once in a while. People don’t bother to post an apology for an obvious typo (like “teh” instead of “the”)Minor typos, minor editing would be happening all the time if we allowed it. It’s a volume problem. There just aren’t anywhere near as many follow-up explanation posts as there would be edits.
Why does it sound like ‘for a modest fee’ should be added to the end of that.
Anyway instead of editing what about the ability to append a post. Maybe like this:
Appenended to post 3-22-2003 10:30
Such appending will allow you to correct what you need or to add anything that your post left out in a way that is obvious to the readers. This will allow you continuity of thought for the reader.
If appending allows you to change what was already written, it is editing. Editing a post would automatically generate a line like that. Check any thread edited by a moderator. While that does announce that the post has been modified, it does not indicate what was changed. Thus, a poster could rewrite their nasty or stupid argument, then claim they edited to fix a spelling mistake. Only the folks who read it before know differently, and only those who copied the previous post have a record of it.
If appending just allows you to put new material at the bottom of the post, and not change any text already there, then it is no different than a followup post, except is posts in the previous message. Not worth much, and may be more complicated. Plus, that would have to be a feature installed by vBulletin, not SDMB.
I have seen editing allowed on other boards. If unchecked, it leads to everyone posting the full content of the previous argument (rather than short excerpts) as protection against later revisions. That clutters up posts, and makes threads take up more memory.
I assume that appending is putting new material at the bottom, and the advantage (as cited by kanicbird) is the logical flow. You could put your correction right next (that is, at the bottom of) your prior post. Currently, you might not notice for several posts, so there is a continuity problem.
Current:
Poster A: Mr Rogers was a sniper in Vietnam.
Poster B: I was in Vietnam and never saw Mr Rogers
Poster C: I saw Mr Rogers on TV
Poster A: D’oh! I meant “was NOT a sniper in Vietnam.”
Proposed:
Poster A: Mr Rogers was a sniper in Vietnam
Appended 3/21/03 at 7:22 AM: D’oh, I meant “was NOT a sniper in Vietnam”
Poster B: Poster B: I was in Vietnam and never saw Mr Rogers
Poster C: I saw Mr Rogers on TV
That is exactly how I ment to propose it C K Dexter Haven now if I can olny find that append button ;).