Should there be a time limit on editing?

Discussion in 'Feedback' started by Baron, Nov 18, 2001.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Baron

    Baron ET Founder

    Some people say that you should be able to edit your post at any time. Others say editing should be limited to a specific time period, like it is on Silicon Investor and other message boards. What do you think?
  2. My initial reaction (as per my email to you) was one of discomfort with this new policy. But then I reflected on the new policy. I think, on balance, it is a good idea for the following reasons:
    1) it will prevent people editing / deleting their posts in 'response' to others valid criticisms or counterarguments ... this will serve to prevent troublemakers from changing their stories (or deleting them) part way through a thread
    2) It will allow us to more easily identify troublemakers, since they will not be able to hide their tracks by deleting their messages at a later time. The identification of a troublemakers will allow us to more easily utilise the 'kill' button and will allow the moderators to keep tabs on IP addresses of troublemakers hiding under multiple nicknames.
    3) The policy will not prevent people from clarifying their previous posts, since all they need to do is to add a new post of clarification.

    This new policy gets my vote, since I believe it will result in a higher quality forum overall.
  3. uh...I think I just voted for an hour limit, meant to vote for the 15 minutes. :O

  4. Magna

    Magna Administrator

    Candle makes some interesting points, but I don't like shifting an ongoing policy (that I had never seen a complaint) to allow "tracking" of the one or two troublemakers haunting the board. Yes, tradeRX and his obsessive need to try and reinvent himself with a new alias every 2-4 weeks is a nuisance, but like a tiger who can't change his stripes his demeanor quickly identifies himself to those interested in using the Ignore function. To tell you the truth, this mostly feels like a non-issue to me so I have to cast my vote with things the way they were, unlimited editing. I don't like to fix things that aren't broken.
  5. Perhaps there can be a compromise on this... maybe a 30 minute typo correction period should be used. 30 minutes should be adequate for practical purposes.

    People should be given an adequate length of time to rephrase their comments and/or make typo corrections. But the use of unlimited time for editing or even deleting a message leaves the system open to the sort of abuse that has been occurring over the last several months. People's comments should be "locked in" so that there is historical accountability for everything that each one of us has said. To allow people to modify and delete at their whim and fancy, for fear of looking "stupid" as a result of subsequent posters' comments or criticisms, dilutes the value of the forum... I, for one, would not feel comfortable posting a well-thought out comment in response to someone, only to later see that previous member's post mysteriously disappear or appear in a modified manner (making me look like I am contradicting myself and, even more frustratingly, making my post and the time spent on it a TOTAL waste of my time).

    We need historical accountability, but we also need adequate time to make typographical corrections. I believe that a 30 minute lock-out period for BOTH post editing and post deletions is an adequate compromise.
  6. Magna

    Magna Administrator

    I can certainly go with Candle's logic on his last post, and 30-60 minutes would be more than adequate. And the more I think about it, the more I like the idea of "locking" people into their posts (after they've had a reasonable amount of time to make any necessary adjustments). But 15 minutes is too quick, too abrupt a cutoff.
  7. VCM


    How about if post got no reply, then unlimited, if it got a reply, then 15 min.

  8. Magna

    Magna Administrator


    How about if post got no reply, then unlimited, if it got a reply, then 15 min.

    When you "Post a Reply" it's to the thread, not to a particular poster. So there would be no way of applying your suggestion.
  9. do you remember that guy that started the thread about swing trading and put a link to his site at the bottom.. and then when people pointed out that he was advertising he removed it and tried to say it was never there.. he was constantly going back and editing his previous posts trying to make it look like he had only the best of intentions.. im thinking it might not be such a bad idea to have some type of limits on editing posts.. actually, i think the problem could easily be solved my limiting new users ability to edit and then becoming increasingly flexible as their # of posts increase.. this would solve most of the problems with the exception of the ongoing TraderX saga.. but he doesnt post under that name anymore anyway..

  10. I agree with Magna. If it's not broke - why fix it. I vote for unlimited editing. I sometimes like to modify my posts to try to make them more clear or elaborate on a point.

    For the folks who try to drastically revise their posts, people will notice and call them them on it. Folks will still be held accountable for what they write.
    #10     Nov 20, 2001
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.