Reason one - person posts about something on the web but forgets to provide a link. With the ability to edit the OP the person could add the link.
If it were possible in vbulletin maybe what would suit the SDMB would be an ability to add notes to an OP without being able to change the OP. Notes that are clearly marked as additions. IMO this would save a lot of posts and time for dopers.
What is the main reasion against the ability to edit a post/thread within 5 minutes of it’s creation? (I am sure it’s a good one)
IANAM but IIRC the reason editing isn’t allowed is because of the potential for abuse by people who decide to change their arguements after the fact.
I’m all for editing… I know the preview should be enough but sometimes you just don’t see a mistake in a post until it’s been put through. It’s kind of annoying posting a new message just to point out that that last question mark should have been a period…
Your idea is a good one… a 5 minute edit window would prevent the feared abuses. I hope it merits consideration from the admins.
WADR I predict most moral reconsiderations of OPs would take longer than 5 minutes. expecially when you consider that on average the post that reveals the OP’s obvious mistake or discrimination takes well longer than 5 minutes to arrive, so a strict enforcement of the 5 minute rule (which I am sure is possible in the current version of vbulletin) would ensure that such edits are not possible.
It’s very annoying when someone posts a rather useless message explaining that that last question mark should have been a period. I understand the need for a follow-up post if someone’s original post was truly confusing, but follow-up posts pointing out obvious spelling or punctuation errors which most other posters should be able to figure out on their own is just a waste of space.
This does seem to be a reasonable idea, but I suspect there’s just too much trouble involved. And there’s still the chance people will abuse this feature by continuously adding to their original post. (A limit on the number and size of additions would definitely need to be considered if such a feature was implemented.)
Even in five minutes, a post can gather several replies. People would think “I’ve already read the OP” and skip over it…and skip over the edited comments, too. Editing also puts a strain on the server.
Right now, I don’t see us implementing any major changes until we find out if this subscription basis will hold up over the long run…the long run being “more than a year or so” in this case.
However, I am not the final decision maker in this area, so TPTB might very well decide to allow editing tomorrow.
While on the surface it might seem like a good idea, I think it’s better that we do not allow editing. This forces people to check their posts more carefully, and hopefully, use the preview feature more. If you can’t find your mistake by using the preview button, then chances are, you aren’t going to find it in five minutes of it actually being posted either. And no one wants to read your unedited garbage while you are fixing your unpreviewed mistakes.
You want an idea of how short a window we’d need here? Once, I posted, waited through the “thank you for posting” screen", and got sent back to the thread… And by the time I saw the thread again, there was already a reply to me. There’s no possible edit window which would be short enough to deal with that.
I therefore vote against editing. If it’s a minor mistake, folks here are smart. They’ll be able to figure it out. And if it’s one of those rare major mistakes which would make a post confusing or inaccurate, you can follow up with another post or ask a mod to edit for you.
I don’t care about typos. But sometimes, it would be really nice to be able to edit other people’s posts. Any chance of that? I’ll pay an extra subscription fee . . .
One positive effect of not allowing editing: we don’t get people jumping on typos. Agreed, it’s annoying to see someone post, “Sorry, the word ‘do’ should be ‘does’ in my last post”. But it’s ever more annoying to see half a dozen OTHER people saying, “Hey, the word ‘do’ should be ‘does’ is Fred’s last post.”
The knowledge that everyone makes typos and that there’s no going back has made life much less focused on carping about spelling and grammar.
As noted, if you’ve made a serious typo (like leaving out the word ‘not’, for instance, or typing ‘Bush’ when you meant ‘Kerry’), communicate with a Moderator and we’ll usually be glad to fix it for you. And everyone will be able to see that it was fixed, since Moderator edits are noted in the post.
In a case as described in the OP, what’s so much better about being able to edit in the link as opposed to just adding a reply “Here’s the link: www.xyz.com”?
I think there should indeed be a window of some non-trivial duration of time for editing: it provides the imperfect poster (those of you who are perfect won’t need this, of course) with the ability to tone down some provocative language that the author may not have intended – or at that moment wasn’t calm enough to care about avoiding – until after submission. Like other imperfect beings, I’m not always capable of totally calm and tranquil re-re-re-consideration of my post, prior to submission, while I still feel strong enough about the topic in question to bother to reply at all.
And, contrary to some comments here, it really doesn’t matter much at all if people make additional posts within that window of time. For one thing, most new posts to a given thread after some arbitrary person’s post have nothing to do with that particular post anyway: they are responses to earlier posts. It is often hours or even days before one particular post gets a direct response, if ever. Sure, there are fast moving threads, but they are usually flighty, weightless things that shouldn’t provide an excuse to denying editing windows in all threads, or at least all boards. I’ll just conclude by pointing out that I’ve participated in many online discussion boards that provide editing of posts, and not only is it extremely rare that complaints arise, the benefits far outweigh the costs overall.
If strong feelings are present when someone makes a post, then they should put more effort into editing their post in order to convey exactly they mean. Actually, before the person even begins to type up a post, they should probably sit back and think about things for a bit; in order to fully understand their feelings and thoughts on a subject.
I know I don’t want others to misinterpret what I have to say, and do my best to choose the right words to best express my feelings and thoughts. Things are a lot easier if you explain yourself well in the beginning, rather than having to continuously explain yourself throughout a discussion, when you should actually be discussing the topic.
I post both here and on Randi’s boards, which allow editing within the hour. It’s kinda nice to be able to edit, but really I don’t think it’s worth much
Thank you for your insultingly smug, superior, and intolerant lecture. And I meant to say that.
Clearly, you are one of those perfect beings who have no need of an editing feature. But I cannot endorse your callousness to those of us who lack your supreme perfection.
Well I’m with **Beauty Personified ** all the way.
I always think carefully before I type into the reply box … then think again before I hit submit. And I don’t worry too much about the odd typo (in fact I :rolleyes: at people who post solely to correct something trivial and obvious). I post on other boards with an edit feature, but very rarely use it.
So on the whole I’m against such a feature here, because it is open to abuse.
I’ve found the preview button pretty inefficent. Takes a while to come up, takes a while to post, sometimes leads to a doubt post, too frequently a post gets lost in the process and needs retyping. It’s a bugger.
That’s why people ask for a short window edit, I bet.
If post-reply editing is a problem, real or imagined, why not have a “this post has been edited” attach to each such? Then it’d show, people would know.
