Bring back the Edit Button~ please

A place to suggest improvements or changes.

Bring back the Edit Button~ please

Unread postby chrispalasz » Mon May 04, 2009 3:44 am

Recently a change was made so that, after 30 minutes, a user is no longer able to edit their old posts.

Can we please undo this change? Here are my reasons for this suggestion:

1. If it's not broke, don't fix it. We haven't had any problems related to editing posts. There has been no foul play. So why impose restrictions where there has been no infringement?

2. It's like having a secret RULE on an almost-no-rules forum!
And the secret RULE is: "You can't edit your posts after 30 minutes!" Adding this feature restricts my right to edit my posts. If we're going to have rules against things that don't cause problems... then lets do it. If not - then let's not. But let's not have it half-half.

3. Everyone I can think of has been honor-bound into providing notation of edited posts at the bottom. For example, "Edit: blah blah blah". At first, I hadn't done this, but since one user explained it's bad manners not to, I've done it ever since.

4. There are several times when the edit button is needed AFTER a 30 minute time limit has expired. Sometimes users don't know there's a problem with their post UNTIL others have responded! Now, this may not seem like a big deal because you could say, "well, they can post a correction down the line" - BUT - posting a correction in a new post causes new readers of the thread to have to follow the mess and confusion until they finally read the correction! That totally doesn't make sense. ESPECIALLY in the case when the problem is in the OP!!!

Please! Take the edit button out of jail! Give us the freedom of editing and revision!
On Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/user/chrispalasz
Blog: http://www.teslinkorea.blogspot.com

~ "Beware the sound of one hand clapping"
~ "Evolution must be the best-known yet worst-understood of all scientific theories."
User avatar
chrispalasz
 
Posts: 772
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 12:50 pm
Location: Seoul, South Korea
Reputation point: 0

Re: Bring back the Edit Button~ please

Unread postby no28 » Mon May 04, 2009 5:15 am

Re: Searched for God?
Postby no28 » Tue Mar 31, 2009 5:27 am
by chrispalasz » Mon Mar 30, 2009 1:47 am
Last edited by chrispalasz on Mon Mar 30, 2009 4:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
*headdesk*
First, it's bad taste (in the very least) to change/edit a post that others have already responded to. It gives the impression to future readers or someone trying to catch up that one side or the other is disconnected from what's really going on and could be acting irrationally. If you want to reiterate something you've said, it might be a better idea to just respond with your corrections than to change/edit what you've said and pull the rug out from under those who have responded. It's actually pretty underhanded.
Second, your attitude did not seem to be cavalier, it was. But now that you've erased your tracks, I can't really back that up, now can i? Instead, we do appear to be over-reacting and unless we go back and edit our responses as well, by all appearances, you can back up that statement (we're over-reacting) without difficulty. At best, it's my word against your word and at worst, I look like I'm just flying off the handle again, willy-nilly and irrationally so.


chris palasz wrote:I don't agree that it's in bad taste. It might be evidence of tampering in some cases, or it might not. I don't recall editing my posts after they've been responded to, but if I have, I can assure you there have been no major changes - nothing that would effect the information in any significant way - and there has never been any 'covering of tracks'. My post is essentially the same as when I first clicked 'submit', and you have absolutely no proof of any intentionally deceitful activity either here or on any other thread within my posts. When it comes to word against word, I have the leeway. That's precisely the point, isn't it? How could I have proof when I didn't copy/paste/save the original? However, if at any time there comes a case of you feeling cheated in any way - I recommend that you stop talking to me. I, for one, would not engage in conversation with anyone whom I thought was intentionally using dirty tactics. Now, I can assure you that I'm not one of those people - but if you have strong enough doubts, that's my best advice. Either stop talking to me, or stop making those kinds of accusations without proof You edit away parts of the op, no-one has any clue what you changed ~ and then, instead of immediately answering this charge with "Here's what I changed..", you become defensive like this, or better, passive-aggressive!. A simple time stamp and edited mark just won't do. I must be honest: I am offended that you would accuse me of trying to cover anything up; and if it makes you feel any better... you couldn't have backed up your accusation had I never edited my comment at all. But you did edit, and to claim that I couldn't back up my accusation even if you hadn't edited is about the weakest claim I've ever heard! = TROLL :lol: :lol: :lol:


Great change to the "Edit" button.
I can work around any problems that might come up!
What a strange thing it is that to give proof to the lie that a god is love, one need only to resist coercion
User avatar
no28
 
Posts: 154
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 3:16 am
Reputation point: 0

Re: Bring back the Edit Button~ please

Unread postby roid » Mon May 04, 2009 5:42 am

*snigger*
User avatar
roid
 
Posts: 415
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 10:35 am
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Reputation point: 0

Re: Bring back the Edit Button~ please

Unread postby TheBlueFalconX » Mon May 04, 2009 7:51 am

I guess we shall have to post with a little more clarity of mind and understand that, mistakes HAPPEN during thought processes.

I may be a physics buff, but I do occasionally use the wrong formula or wrong constant for an equation. It happens. You correct it.

Corrections to posts can be made as a larger font size in a second post.





The only solution I can think of to this which involves keeping the edit button in play is THIS:

Any new additions to a post are restricted to a font colour which is NOT available in regular, first time posts.

But this leaves the problem of revealing any edits that involve REMOVING text.

I have a few ideas that could be employed, but nothing that seems reasonable as of yet.
I guess it takes a firm belief in the invisible magician to properly sell a gun online. Who knew?-Shawna
RSS YouTube
>>An empyreal poem possessing resplendent beauty of divine descent birthed by essence is an arcanum.<<
User avatar
TheBlueFalconX
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 7:01 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada
Reputation point: 918

Re: Bring back the Edit Button~ please

Unread postby chrispalasz » Mon May 04, 2009 8:08 am

TheBlueFalconX wrote:I guess we shall have to post with a little more clarity of mind and understand that, mistakes HAPPEN during thought processes.

I may be a physics buff, but I do occasionally use the wrong formula or wrong constant for an equation. It happens. You correct it.

Corrections to posts can be made as a larger font size in a second post.





The only solution I can think of to this which involves keeping the edit button in play is THIS:

Any new additions to a post are restricted to a font colour which is NOT available in regular, first time posts.

But this leaves the problem of revealing any edits that involve REMOVING text.

I have a few ideas that could be employed, but nothing that seems reasonable as of yet.


But... why are these the only options, in your opinion? There have been no dirty tactics up to now - why is there a sudden assumption that there WILL be some? What I'm saying is, where is there a need for a change?

In the situation listed by Geoff - he made a flagrant accusation which was unfounded and had zero support. And why did he do that? Because he was mistaken about something that I posted - not because I changed it.

And since that time (which was quite some time ago), I have always qualified my edited posts at the bottom, stating exactly what was edite.

So why not just leave things the way they were- which was good and happy for everyone?
On Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/user/chrispalasz
Blog: http://www.teslinkorea.blogspot.com

~ "Beware the sound of one hand clapping"
~ "Evolution must be the best-known yet worst-understood of all scientific theories."
User avatar
chrispalasz
 
Posts: 772
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 12:50 pm
Location: Seoul, South Korea
Reputation point: 0

Re: Bring back the Edit Button~ please

Unread postby TheBlueFalconX » Mon May 04, 2009 8:24 am

The only thing I can say is that people have been complaining about the abuse of the ability to edit posts, which has been deemed unfair and dodgy.

Whether it's because of you or who ever else no28 (and others) may state, it is a problem.

I can only recommend a few solutions.

Maybe when editing a post the editor should be FORCED to state a reason for the edit, in a minimum of 15 characters.


Edits can be used to be deceitful.


We will come to a solution on this which results in everyone having to be fair about their posts.
I guess it takes a firm belief in the invisible magician to properly sell a gun online. Who knew?-Shawna
RSS YouTube
>>An empyreal poem possessing resplendent beauty of divine descent birthed by essence is an arcanum.<<
User avatar
TheBlueFalconX
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 7:01 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada
Reputation point: 918

Re: Bring back the Edit Button~ please

Unread postby chrispalasz » Mon May 04, 2009 8:36 am

no28 wrote:Re: Searched for God?
Postby no28 » Tue Mar 31, 2009 5:27 am
by chrispalasz » Mon Mar 30, 2009 1:47 am
Last edited by chrispalasz on Mon Mar 30, 2009 4:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
*headdesk*
First, it's bad taste (in the very least) to change/edit a post that others have already responded to. It gives the impression to future readers or someone trying to catch up that one side or the other is disconnected from what's really going on and could be acting irrationally. If you want to reiterate something you've said, it might be a better idea to just respond with your corrections than to change/edit what you've said and pull the rug out from under those who have responded. It's actually pretty underhanded.
Second, your attitude did not seem to be cavalier, it was. But now that you've erased your tracks, I can't really back that up, now can i? Instead, we do appear to be over-reacting and unless we go back and edit our responses as well, by all appearances, you can back up that statement (we're over-reacting) without difficulty. At best, it's my word against your word and at worst, I look like I'm just flying off the handle again, willy-nilly and irrationally so.


It looks like how it is, Geoff. You were "flying off the handle... again... willy-nilly... and irrationaly so." In your own words.

chrispalasz wrote:I don't agree that it's in bad taste. It might be evidence of tampering in some cases, or it might not. I don't recall editing my posts after they've been responded to, but if I have, I can assure you there have been no major changes - nothing that would effect the information in any significant way - and there has never been any 'covering of tracks'. My post is essentially the same as when I first clicked 'submit', and you have absolutely no proof of any intentionally deceitful activity either here or on any other thread within my posts. When it comes to word against word, I have the leeway.
no28 wrote:That's precisely the point, isn't it? How could I have proof when I didn't copy/paste/save the original?


You could easily have had proof had you bothered to quote what you were responding to in the beginning! /facepalm

When I edit posts, I don't think about when I posted them. I fix errors that I've made. I don't change or delete existing content unless it's spelling, grammar, or tag (technical problems) related. Despite having had no prior complaints or precedent of such deceitful activity- you saw fit to make the accusation, probably in order to cover your tracks of carelessly misreading my post. (which, by the way, seems to be common practice by you - as you recently demonstrated when you thought I somehow called your wife dumb on the "Who Created the Creator" thread. I don't think you watched the suggested video or read the OP - just skipped ahead to my post - because you should've understood the topic of discussion and the arguments I was referring to, which clearly show that my comments had absolutely nothing to do with insulting your wife).

chrispalsz wrote:However, if at any time there comes a case of you feeling cheated in any way - I recommend that you stop talking to me. I, for one, would not engage in conversation with anyone whom I thought was intentionally using dirty tactics. Now, I can assure you that I'm not one of those people - but if you have strong enough doubts, that's my best advice. Either stop talking to me, or stop making those kinds of accusations without proof
no28 wrote:You edit away parts of the op, no-one has any clue what you changed ~ and then, instead of immediately answering this charge with "Here's what I changed..", you become defensive like this, or better, passive-aggressive!


Because, as I said, I don't remember what I edited. I don't pay attention to those changes - but since I'm in the habit of never changing (by way of deleting) the content of my original post except in the cases of spelling/grammar/tags, I can with an honest and clear conscience say that I didn't delete anything that was originally there to begin with.

I get defensive (like I am now) because you make ridiculous and unfounded accusations that have zero credibility or precedence. How can you have proof? As I said - quote me. I dare you. Quote me 100% of the time, and see where that gets you. I'll give you a hint: It gets you wrong - like you are now - and like you will be in the future.

chrispalasz wrote:A simple time stamp and edited mark just won't do. I must be honest: I am offended that you would accuse me of trying to cover anything up; and if it makes you feel any better... you couldn't have backed up your accusation had I never edited my comment at all.
no28 wrote:But you did edit, and to claim that I couldn't back up my accusation even if you hadn't edited is about the weakest claim I've ever heard! = TROLL :lol: :lol: :lol: [/b]


Well gosh, that sure is convenient for you that you didn't quote me and I didn't note my edits, now isn't it? Gosh... with all of my underhanded deceit - you must be a genius to be the first to spot it after months of talking on a forum (two forums, actually) of atheists who keep a hawk's eye view out for mistakes and are eager to point it out when a theist strays from the path of accuracy. :roll:

no28 wrote:Great change to the "Edit" button.
I can work around any problems that might come up!


And lastly - this isn't about what you can work around. This is about what is fair and unrestricting. Members of this forum originally came to this forum because they were breaking rules on another forum! And what is this edit button restriction? It's a rule - flat out - that the administration is enforcing upon the forum members. Is it necessary? Speaking of evidence - it has not been shown to be necessary or beneficial in any way.

If there truly AREN'T any rules - let there be no rules - and let this restriction be removed, and the original freedom be reinstated. If there ARE rules - then make rules. Don't let people bump - and don't let people derail threads - and don't let people purposefully insult each other instead of furthering the discussion on a thread...

But this is just hypocritical.

Edit: I edited my post! And I put my edit in orange! I added these parts for clarification and to provide evidence for what I'm saying since I'm sick of certain hot-headed and whimsical accusations coming back to haunt me when they're clearly wrong and can be shown to be so.

And see how I've learned from my mistakes and am now being preemptive in combating future complaints? Everyone can learn from mistakes and we can move forward without imposing restrictions.
Last edited by chrispalasz on Mon May 04, 2009 8:55 am, edited 2 times in total.
On Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/user/chrispalasz
Blog: http://www.teslinkorea.blogspot.com

~ "Beware the sound of one hand clapping"
~ "Evolution must be the best-known yet worst-understood of all scientific theories."
User avatar
chrispalasz
 
Posts: 772
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 12:50 pm
Location: Seoul, South Korea
Reputation point: 0

Re: Bring back the Edit Button~ please

Unread postby chrispalasz » Mon May 04, 2009 8:47 am

TheBlueFalconX wrote:Maybe when editing a post the editor should be FORCED to state a reason for the edit, in a minimum of 15 characters.


Well... this sounds like a good solution. Don't allow the user to submit the edited post until they fill in a box with their summary of what was edited. That makes sense - and if they don't fill in the box honestly - they can be called out on it. Other users, as I've said, DO have the freedom to quote posts they respond to - so there are no excuses for someone whining that a post was edited after their response and something vital was changed.

TheBlueFalconX wrote:Edits can be used to be deceitful.


While I like you solution, I don't agree with your reasoning. If a person wants to be deceitful - that is their prerogative. I wouldn't choose to be dishonest and change important content in my previous posts - but - what's the purpose in stopping another person from doing that when each user has the ability to hold every other user accountable on this issue by quoting text?

Heck - on the TAA forum - users can edit anytime AND even edit the time stamp of their own editing.

TheBlueFalconX wrote:We will come to a solution on this which results in everyone having to be fair about their posts.


You can never ensure that the content of posts is fair - and if the content doesn't have to be fair - imposing restrictions that don't solve anything won't be a fair solution to something that has never been shown to be a problem to begin with.
On Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/user/chrispalasz
Blog: http://www.teslinkorea.blogspot.com

~ "Beware the sound of one hand clapping"
~ "Evolution must be the best-known yet worst-understood of all scientific theories."
User avatar
chrispalasz
 
Posts: 772
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2009 12:50 pm
Location: Seoul, South Korea
Reputation point: 0

Re: Bring back the Edit Button~ please

Unread postby TheBlueFalconX » Mon May 04, 2009 9:01 am

You can never ensure that the content of posts is fair



I never said it had anything to do with post content.
I guess it takes a firm belief in the invisible magician to properly sell a gun online. Who knew?-Shawna
RSS YouTube
>>An empyreal poem possessing resplendent beauty of divine descent birthed by essence is an arcanum.<<
User avatar
TheBlueFalconX
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 7:01 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada
Reputation point: 918

Re: Bring back the Edit Button~ please

Unread postby TheBlueFalconX » Mon May 04, 2009 9:11 am

My own personal solution to this is simple, but the setting up of it may not be so.


-Bring back edit button
-All edits made are restricted to TWO specific colours, a dark and light one to combat a contrast problem due to site template.
-The Original post in and of itself cannot have anything removed from it, but only added into it.

I shall make an example below. And show the edit as a reply in this same post. Observe.
___________________________________________________________________________
==================================================================
The sped of light has been measured to that of 300,000,000 meters per second and is often denoted with the symbol c.
==================================================================
___________________________________________________________________________

the edit as seen by people after the fact wrote:___________________________________________________________________________
==================================================================
The speed of light in a vacuum has been measured to that of 300,000,000 actually 299,792,458 meters per second and is often denoted with the symbol c.
==================================================================
___________________________________________________________________________
I guess it takes a firm belief in the invisible magician to properly sell a gun online. Who knew?-Shawna
RSS YouTube
>>An empyreal poem possessing resplendent beauty of divine descent birthed by essence is an arcanum.<<
User avatar
TheBlueFalconX
 
Posts: 1526
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2009 7:01 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada
Reputation point: 918

Next

Return to Integration Station



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron
[Valid Atom 1.0]