Now that we are paying customers and not just a bunch of lousy freeloaders, I want to agitate for a five-minute window to edit posts. I was told this is a feature already available actually turned off by the moderators in order to keep people honest. Letting people fix the HTML, typos, etc. within a few minutes wouldn’t give them enough time to cheat on their positions.
Wow. Could you imagine what an utter nightmare quick edit would be in a fast-paced Great Debate or Pit thread? I think 5 minutes would be plenty of time to let people cheat. I’ve clicked “Reply” plenty of times on posts lests then 5 minutes old.
There’s already a superb system in place to let you catch typos and errors. It’s called the “Preview Post” button.
Folks, quit yer whining about how editing would be a disaster for certain forums. Posters can’t “cheat” if editing is set up right.
Option 1: Don’t allow a post to be edited if there have been any replies to the thread since it was posted. Show a warning for anyone replying to the thread within X minutes after a post was edited, in case the editing occurs between Preview and Submit.
Option 2: Instead of simply changing the original text to the new, edited text, mark the deleted parts with strikeout and the new parts with some kind of insertion brackets (unless only the coding was changed). This will take some PHP programming, but it’s not all that difficult. I’ll write it if no one else wants to.
I have to admit, I’m not really for the quick-edit feature, but… I like this option 2, Mr2001. I agree that it shouldn’t be too difficult to code (the strikeout tag hasn’t been deprecated in HTML, right?).
Lack of the ability to correct errors is not always a bad thing if it makes us think about what we’re posting at the time. Along those lines… although there’s been many times I wanted to “undo” a post, I think it’s better this way, wherein we all are forced to live with our posts, good or bad.
I have some sympathy for your position, but why make things more complicated?
As others have pointed out, if people really want a five-minute editing window, the “preview” function works perfectly well. Hit “preview,” read through your thread, and even leave it for five minutes and come back to it if that makes you feel better. Then, when you’re sure that it looks good, and it’s what you want to say, hit the “submit” button.
The only time i make grammar, spelling or other errors that i would like to take back is when i fail to make proper use of the “preview” button.
How would editing or deleting a post be cheating? It’s the equivalent of recanting or conceding an argument. For example, if you disagreed with this post and I deleted it, so what? The claim would be off the table, which would be your goal in rebutting it anyway.
Seeing as how you’re from Austin, I’m inclined to agree with anything you say!
I’ve been on boards that had the “edit” function, and it can be abused. I’ve watched posters back off their original comments (boy, do I wish I could do the same!) - but it makes the following posts seem out of context, since they are replying to a moving commentary.
I’d like a five-minute edit option, if only to fix tag errors and whatnot. Just stick a “This message was edited at xxxxxx” blurb at the end of the revised message, so folks will know it’s been changed since originally posted.
It would allow a poster to say something idiotic, get called out on it, then change his post to something less idiotic, making the subsequent posts appear to be nonsense as they are no longer in context. Posters reading the thread after the edit would not be able to judge for themselves whether the post was really idiotic or not.
I agree that preview is there for a reason, if you’re concerned about typos etc, then preview, proof read, correct, preview again, then submit. It’s really not that hard.
That would only happen if (1) people were allowed to edit posts after others had replied to them, and (2) the original text was gone forever once it had been edited. Both of my suggestions would prevent this problem.
I think I remember reading somewhere that SDMB uses vBulletin code, and some agreement with vBulletin prevents them from adding anything to the code that runs the board. But I could be entirely wrong, of course.