Typophile

Misuse of 'edit' feature

Luke

In my opinion this feature is detrimental to discussion.

Things are said and that is that. You can retract or change opinion, but to overwrite (or delete) a previous comment is disengenuous and unhelpful for discussion. Besides, you can’t do it in speech as much as you might want to!

In a previous thread a message was removed that essentially changed the conversation and appearance of what I was saying. So much so, someone emailed me to say they were offended by what appeared to them was bullying, when in fact it was v. much the opposite.

Let’s edit this feature out

just me? ok...

I second that.

I disagree. This topic has come up before, ever since the update last summer which has caused edited posts to drop to the bottom and therefore out of context.

It was a long tradition on the Type ID board for people to post a quick ID and then go back in and add the link. The edit feature was very important there.

I often reread my posts and edit for spelling, grammar and clarity. I only (now) do this when there isn’t another post after mine, but there have been MANY times when I’ve wished I could change or add something and have refrained for fear of the thread not making sense.

Additionally there have been times when I’ve said something in the heat of the moment and later regretted it. In those cases where I edit for content, I always indicate that I have done so.

My suggestion would be to allow the edit feature as before, where the comment remains in its proper order in the thread, but for there to be a way for readers to know that the comment has been edited.

Since this will probably become an opinion poll, I vote FOR edit. Many times I hit post, and then see a typo as the file goes into the ether. I hate typos, and like the ability to correct such for a short time.

>>In a previous thread a message was removed that essentially changed the conversation and appearance of what I was saying. So much so, someone emailed me to say they were offended by what appeared to them was bullying, when in fact it was v. much the opposite.
<<

Dux; I guess the moral of the story is you should cut and paste a quote from the message you’re responding to in your own message. Unfortunately that will make the threads longer than they’d need to be.
But you’re right, otherwise someone who doesn’t agree with you could edit their comment after you’ve replied and completely change the meaning of your response.

Jason C

I’d vote for being able to edit for a period of time (24 hours?).

Editing makes perfect sense for typos/spelling/clarification, but not so much for being able to go back to a month old conversation and start changing the entire history of the discussion (which has happened).

What Patty said.

The problem with that, Patty, is that it can really change the whole conversation.

Bob: You are a jerk.
Sam: No, YOU are a jerk.
Bob: You are a really stupid jerk.
Sam: No, you are the stupidest jerk face ever!

Bob may regret that a year later and change the whole conversation:

Bob: You are a fine human being.
Sam: No, YOU are a jerk.
Bob: I don’t know why you are being so hateful. I find you to be pleasant and caring.
Sam: No, you are the stupidest jerk face ever!

(Kind of unfair to Sam).

OK, yea, maybe a stretch, but I think the point is there.

I vote for edit staying around. At one time or another we’ve all written something that came out backward and read horribly, and only realized it five minutes later. Being able to go back and fix it real quick keeps Typophile pretty civilized.

One suggestion I do have is that edits be tracked with comments regarding the nature of the edits so that moderators can spot people who abuse the feature. I frequent a few other forums that handle edits this way, and it keeps people in line.

i reserve my right to edit anything i write if given the opportunity. if my words in digital archives are going to outlive me you can bet i’m going to optimize them as time and reflection allow.

not sure if the edit in question was a self-edit or admin imposed ?
no reason for the latter beyond de-flaming, but that doesn’t seem to be a problem among this erudite group.

what exactly does it mean to “abuse the feature” ?
as far as i can tell in this GUI i have no ability to edit anyone else’s posts, and i’m not a coder. self-editing for accuracy and clarity makes sense to me, possibly with some sort of notice : “edited”.

Aluminum, that is why I think it’s important that it be made clear the post has been edited.

Bob: (edited) You are a fine human being.
Sam: (edited) I humbly bow to your excellence, sir.

(editor’s note: this post has now slipped out of order. Ironically it seems that if you put the word “edited” btw carats it disappears. I had to change it to parens)

I have no problem with typophiles being able to edit offensive comments and return the debate to th

Captured from web.archive.org on 6 Jul 2008. view this capture