IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
New restriction: users cannot edit posts after 1 hour
Jan S.
post May 16 2009, 23:58
Post #1





Group: Admin
Posts: 2549
Joined: 26-September 01
From: Denmark
Member No.: 21



We have had a number of episodes where some member decides to delete all his posts by removing the content. This can often deface threads as there is now parts of the discussion missing and we end up having to spend a lot of time cleaning up.
To avoid this regular members can now only edit their posts in the first hour. Developers can still edit their own posts without restrictions.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
2E7AH
post May 18 2009, 18:34
Post #2





Group: Validating
Posts: 2424
Joined: 21-May 08
Member No.: 53675



Maybe the regular user should have the option to modify his post with appending the edit data, while not being able to change the original post
The reason for asking this is that maybe sometimes regular user don't want to popup the topic in forum, just by editing minor or not so relevant thing

[edit] but still having the option to edit the post (like me right now)

This post has been edited by 2E7AH: May 18 2009, 18:37
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Jan S.
post May 18 2009, 18:42
Post #3





Group: Admin
Posts: 2549
Joined: 26-September 01
From: Denmark
Member No.: 21



What you suggest is not possible with the forum software. If something really needs editing regular users will have to contact a moderator.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
lvqcl
post May 18 2009, 21:32
Post #4





Group: Developer
Posts: 3362
Joined: 2-December 07
Member No.: 49183



Does this restriction applies to upload forums? If yes, is it possible to remove this restriction for them?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Jan S.
post May 18 2009, 21:52
Post #5





Group: Admin
Posts: 2549
Joined: 26-September 01
From: Denmark
Member No.: 21



Yes. No.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Alex B
post May 20 2009, 11:13
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 1303
Joined: 14-September 05
From: Helsinki, Finland
Member No.: 24472



I just stumbled on this restriction when I tried edit a typo (it is just a missing article, nothing very important.)

However, I have a few times edited things like changed image or sample links in some of my replies that I consider important and valuable for the community (for instance, in posts that contain my personal test results or codec comparison tables for Sebastian Mares' listening test threads).

I am not personally happy about this new restriction, though I understand very well the reasoning and need for it.

I wonder if it could be possible to add a new user category that would allow long time members who can be considered as important contributors to edit their posts. Members like Sebastian Mares would definitely belong to this category and perhaps some "less important" guys like me could then request this status. smile.gif

Thanks for your attention.


--------------------
http://listening-tests.freetzi.com
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
carpman
post May 20 2009, 16:44
Post #7





Group: Developer
Posts: 1310
Joined: 27-June 07
Member No.: 44789



I agree with Alex B, for slightly different reasons.
I'm not a developer, but I released an auto-rating formula for foobar2000, which has different release versions etc. It would be embarrassing for me to have a "developer" status (I'm no programmer), but I will need to make first post edits for release changes and additions. So would it be possible to either do what Alex B suggested, or provide rights on a per thread basis (in my case I'll only need editing rights for one thread).

Thanks,

C.


--------------------
TAK -p4m :: LossyWAV -q 6 | TAK :: Lame 3.98 -V 2
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Yirkha
post May 20 2009, 20:45
Post #8





Group: FB2K Moderator
Posts: 2359
Joined: 30-November 07
Member No.: 49158



We've also talked about another possibility regarding this - use the [! Report] button next to the post and send the changes to a moderator.
I know many reasons why it isn't optimal, how silly it feels, and even that the report form specifically says it's not for this usage, but we're not here only to ban people after all.


--------------------
Full-quoting makes you scroll past the same junk over and over.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Axon
post May 21 2009, 03:09
Post #9





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 1984
Joined: 4-January 04
From: Austin, TX
Member No.: 10933



This does blow - I've wanted to do corrections 1-2 days after a post - but I'm comfortable with the ask-a-mod workaround.

Any chance that the edit limit be extended to something like 5 days?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Yirkha
post Jun 5 2009, 21:19
Post #10





Group: FB2K Moderator
Posts: 2359
Joined: 30-November 07
Member No.: 49158



Related quote from a random other thread:
QUOTE (durch @ Jun 5 2009, 22:12) *
Can't edit my post, so I have to make a new reply.
(additional info follows)
Although some people might take this as a limitation, it's a good thing in this situation.
The original post was from 5 hours ago, so if it was just edited, people would blindly miss the added part, because the the topic would not appear in the recent topics list again.
ETA: And moderators can merge the posts later if needed anyway.

This post has been edited by Yirkha: Jun 5 2009, 21:20


--------------------
Full-quoting makes you scroll past the same junk over and over.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
chrizoo
post Feb 7 2010, 22:01
Post #11





Group: Members
Posts: 345
Joined: 25-March 08
Member No.: 52274



QUOTE (Jan S. @ May 16 2009, 23:58) *
We have had a number of episodes where some member decides to delete all his posts by removing the content. This can often deface thread as there is now parts of the discussion missing and we end up having to spend a lot of time cleaning up.
To avoid this regular members can now only edit their posts in the first hour. Developers can still edit their own posts without restrictions.


while I understand the abovementioned intentions, I think more harm is done than prevented! You say "This can often deface thread". This happens occasionally. How about the every-day defacing of threads now, due to missing editing. For example see my own thread here, which I wanted to update as the discussion folds out :

QUOTE (chrizoo @ Feb 7 2010, 18:05) *
Hi everyone.

[text of OP]

....................................................................................................
.........

I will update this section with pros/cons for both sides:

single album file

PROS:
  • little gain of HDD space/reduction of fragmentation (little relevance to me, personally)

CONS:

standalone files

PROS:
CONS:

Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
chrizoo
post Feb 7 2010, 22:05
Post #12





Group: Members
Posts: 345
Joined: 25-March 08
Member No.: 52274



And why don't you just ban the offenders and undelete the postings in these rare occasions. Why do you want to punish everyone for a few bad apples ?!?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
greynol
post Feb 7 2010, 22:25
Post #13





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10000
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



Creating threads where the original post will change to reflect what is being discussed is not an everyday occurrence.

Furthermore, these types of posts are actually discouraged in favor of contributing to our wiki which can be edited by anyone that requests an account.


--------------------
I should publish a list of forum idiots.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
greynol
post Feb 7 2010, 22:27
Post #14





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10000
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



QUOTE (chrizoo @ Feb 7 2010, 13:05) *
undelete the postings

Not currently possible.


--------------------
I should publish a list of forum idiots.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
chrizoo
post Feb 7 2010, 22:38
Post #15





Group: Members
Posts: 345
Joined: 25-March 08
Member No.: 52274



QUOTE (greynol @ Feb 7 2010, 22:27) *
QUOTE (chrizoo @ Feb 7 2010, 13:05) *
undelete the postings

Not currently possible.


see:

QUOTE (Jan S. @ May 16 2009, 23:58) *
We have had a number of episodes [...] and we end up having to spend a lot of time cleaning up.


Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
chrizoo
post Feb 7 2010, 22:45
Post #16





Group: Members
Posts: 345
Joined: 25-March 08
Member No.: 52274



QUOTE (greynol @ Feb 7 2010, 22:25) *
Creating threads where the original post will change to reflect what is being discussed is not an everyday occurrence.
But is intelligent. And useful for subsequent readers years afterwards... (instead of harvesting bits of arguments in a 7 page thread). Besides, the alleged reason for this restriction (users gone rogue and deleting all own postings) is by all means not an everyday occurence either.

So my question is still: Why do the moderators want to punish everyone for a few bad apples ?!?


QUOTE
Furthermore, these types of posts are actually discouraged in favor of contributing to our wiki which can be edited by anyone that requests an account.
The OP (which is summarized to reflect the whole thread's outcomes / knowledge) can be copied or at least be used as a starting point for a wiki entry. And just because a wiki article is written doesn't mean it's useless to summarize a forum thread. Plus, it is helpful WHILE the thread is written, to have a good overview of the main arguments.

This post has been edited by chrizoo: Feb 7 2010, 22:49
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
greynol
post Feb 7 2010, 22:51
Post #17





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10000
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



QUOTE (chrizoo @ Feb 7 2010, 13:45) *
But is intelligent. And useful for subsequent readers years afterwards...
...assuming the people will actually read them rather than just asking the same question over again. No offense, but the post you authored is discussed on almost a weekly basis and will probably continue to be discussed on almost a weekly basis despite what appears to be an attempt on your part to create some kind of go-to de-facto topic. Again, that's what the wiki is for.

This post has been edited by greynol: Feb 7 2010, 22:55


--------------------
I should publish a list of forum idiots.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
greynol
post Feb 7 2010, 22:54
Post #18





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10000
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



QUOTE (chrizoo @ Feb 7 2010, 13:38) *
see:
QUOTE (Jan S. @ May 16 2009, 23:58) *
We have had a number of episodes [...] and we end up having to spend a lot of time cleaning up.

Fine, not without a lot of effort and still not always possible. Take it from me, chrizoo, I've taken on the task of doing this before.


--------------------
I should publish a list of forum idiots.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
tpijag
post Feb 7 2010, 22:58
Post #19





Group: Members
Posts: 2349
Joined: 19-May 08
Member No.: 53637



Exactly

This is an anonymous, albeit, moderated discussion forum.

I will wade through posts if I decide for myself whether it is worth the effort to continue.

What I will not do is trust some random OP and their executive summary as to the salient points subsequently discussed.


terry
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
chrizoo
post Feb 7 2010, 23:23
Post #20





Group: Members
Posts: 345
Joined: 25-March 08
Member No.: 52274



QUOTE (greynol @ Feb 7 2010, 22:51) *
QUOTE (chrizoo @ Feb 7 2010, 13:45) *
But is intelligent. And useful for subsequent readers years afterwards...
...assuming the people will actually read them rather than just asking the same question over again. No offense, but the post you authored

when I said "is intelligent and useful for subsequent readers" I meant the principle in general. Not my posting specifically. And not my posting at all.

I think for the purpose of this thread, all of this is off-topic anyway, but since you mention it, I will reply:
QUOTE
... is discussed on almost a weekly basis
yes, thanks to the links you posted I've realized that now. I use the search function, but don't forget that you are in the business for a long time and know your way around ... people like me sometimes don't even know how to formulate a title for my *OWN* thread ... so let alone finding similar other threads tongue.gif


QUOTE
...assuming the people will actually read them rather than just asking the same question over again. No offense, but the post you authored is discussed on almost a weekly basis and will probably continue to be discussed on almost a weekly basis
yes, but you don't realize that your attitude only fosters this very same situation you denounce.


QUOTE
despite what appears to be an attempt on your part to create some kind of go-to de-facto topic. Again, that's what the wiki is for.
on a Wiki there is no interactive discussion with an intense exchange as here. Considering a group-brainstorming (just that for this topic it has been done already). Plus:
QUOTE
The OP (which is summarized to reflect the whole thread's outcomes / knowledge) can be copied or at least be used as a starting point for a wiki entry. And just because a wiki article is written doesn't mean it's useless to summarize a forum thread. Plus, it is helpful WHILE the thread is written, to have a good overview of the main arguments.



QUOTE (greynol @ Feb 7 2010, 22:54) *
Take it from me, chrizoo, I've taken on the task of doing this before.
of course I believe you. i just thought my quote might be of interest to you.

Anyways, I would hope you re-consider this restriction in favour of an alternative answer to this problem.

This post has been edited by chrizoo: Feb 7 2010, 23:37
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
chrizoo
post Feb 7 2010, 23:33
Post #21





Group: Members
Posts: 345
Joined: 25-March 08
Member No.: 52274



QUOTE (tpijag @ Feb 7 2010, 22:58) *
What I will not do is trust some random OP and their executive summary as to the salient points subsequently discussed.
nobody forces you, terry. It is additional very helpful information, but if you want to skip it, just skip it.

Sometimes, when reading a thread I come to a posting somewhere at the end, that kind of summarizes the main points and I'm very thankful for this.
Plus - as I said - it's not just useful for subsequent readers but also for those who contribute to the thread WHILE it is written, so as to have an overview what has already been said - in a concise form. I don't count the number of times when points get repeated three and more times ....

Anyway, I think I've said more enough on that subject. Do whatever you want, I just wanted to give my point of view. Because it is sad that everyone is punished by this limitation of expression just because of a few "bad posters" (who nevertheless had contributed information worth its weight in gold smile.gif. Most of the forums I know don't need to resort to these measures, and even if they do, they usually exempt the first posting.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Akkurat
post Feb 8 2010, 00:30
Post #22


REACT Mod developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 929
Joined: 14-November 07
From: Finland
Member No.: 48750



QUOTE
[random OP and their executive summary] is additional very helpful information

Well, it depends.. if it really summaries the topic correctly.. which might be hard due to e.g. subjectiveness and lack of knowledge.

Wiki is Wiki, forum is forum, anyone is free to discuss Wiki topics here in the forum, be it existent or to-be-created Wiki pages. I don't think that we need a mix-up of those. Forum is for discussing. Consensus can be made in the "end" of the discussion and then transferred to Wiki. My 2c's.

Also you have to understand that updates to posts don't fire up email notifications nor RSS updates! This is important. Who has the time to manually watch over what gets changed and not?! This would be a problem if we want to correct possible false statements. Even with this 1 hour edit limit, one sees user comments how they've missed edits to previous posts.

Personally I don't like (late) edits to posts at all.. though I've rights to do those as a developer. 1 hour is good enough IMHO.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
chrizoo
post Feb 8 2010, 00:39
Post #23





Group: Members
Posts: 345
Joined: 25-March 08
Member No.: 52274



Akkurat,

your points are valid and I agree with them, but since you seem to reply to me, they are mute/off-topic because I only pled for modification rights concerning the thread's first posting, not in general.

And as far as "Wiki is Wiki, forum is forum" is concerned, that's not an argument, just the way you want things to be, but you have pointed that out yourself anyway.

This post has been edited by chrizoo: Feb 8 2010, 00:40
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Akkurat
post Feb 8 2010, 05:32
Post #24


REACT Mod developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 929
Joined: 14-November 07
From: Finland
Member No.: 48750



QUOTE (chrizoo @ Feb 8 2010, 01:39) *
your points are valid and I agree with them, but since you seem to reply to me, they are mute/off-topic because I only pled for modification rights concerning the thread's first posting, not in general.

Certainly not OT. All of my points apply to first posts as well as any subsequent posts. Also look at the topic name. Off-topic?

QUOTE (chrizoo @ Feb 8 2010, 01:39) *
And as far as "Wiki is Wiki, forum is forum" is concerned, that's not an argument, just the way you want things to be

It's how I like it to be, and it's how many many others want it too. And it's an argument IMHO. These web applications have been created to satisfy a need and this is the current way they operate. Let's look at what wiki and forum actually mean today. "A wiki enables documents to be written collaboratively", while "An Internet forum, or message board, is an online discussion site". What's the difference? "Wikis, unlike conventional forums, typically allow all users to edit all content, including each other's messages".

You're basically looking for a feature in a forum software that already exist in wiki: a talk page (also known as a discussion page) (+ a wiki page of course to accompany that). I haven't seen nor participated in any HA wiki discussions. I guess mainly because we have this wonderful forum to satisfy that need much better.. and AFAIK, there are only few that have wiki rights. Here's the dedicated wiki forum here in HA. Note that there was only 3 topics that had posts made to last year. Dunno why. Is HA wiki so good, or are people not interested, or don't they know about it? smile.gif

As for your point of:
QUOTE (chrizoo @ Feb 8 2010, 00:33) *
...it's not just useful for subsequent readers but also for those who contribute to the thread WHILE it is written, so as to have an overview what has already been said - in a concise form. I don't count the number of times when points get repeated three and more times ....

I believe that the discussion itself presents the actual content much better than a "one-sided", have to quote tpijag, "executive summary" in the first post. Also, I believe that it's the participants responsibility to check out what is being discussed before launching into action. Seriously, how do you properly participate in a discussion if you only have read the summary?! Who do you answer to? Or do you just post general stuff based on what you read from the summary? It's like participating in a book reading club when you've read an abstract of a book while others have read the full story.. I hate analogues but there it is. smile.gif

Note that I'm not against trailing summaries at all. Unfortunately the reality is that people do not write those. Trailing summary is ok because it's always a "new" post to all and easier to address.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Jan S.
post Feb 8 2010, 13:39
Post #25





Group: Admin
Posts: 2549
Joined: 26-September 01
From: Denmark
Member No.: 21



QUOTE (Akkurat @ Feb 8 2010, 05:32) *
and AFAIK, there are only few that have wiki rights.


More than 200 people now and everybody else that asks.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 29th August 2014 - 18:38