Edit Facility

[Bromptonaut]

HAving posted something in the Accountability of Ministers thread I'd like to edit it (for clarity). TThe edit facility seems to be missing (or to be time limited)?
Is this intentional?

 

[Shaun]

Currently limited to 20 mins for new members and 60 mins for anyone who has made more than 1 post (althought the account upgrade hadn't triggered for your account at that point so I've manually applied it).

 

[mjr]

Why? How could this be changed? It seems wrong to never let people correct what they post if it proves to be incorrect.

 

[classic33]

Why? How could this be changed? It seems wrong to never let people correct what they post if it proves to be incorrect.

Reply, quoting your original message, pointing out what you got wrong and your correction(s).

 

[Shaun]

Why? How could this be changed? It seems wrong to never let people correct what they post if it proves to be incorrect.

Arbitrary software setting. If you want to change it, start a thread in Site Set-up, get a concensus, and post back here in site support with what you've decided and I'll update it.

 

[mjr]

Reply, quoting your original message, pointing out what you got wrong and your correction(s).

That seems very poor because any correction may be quite some distance from the error, so some who see the error won't see the correction before sharing or replying to it; and some edits may be to remove something preemptively that the mods should remove (under whatever rules are agreed), thereby reducing moderation workload.

Personally, if (when?) I fluff phrasing and offend someone in a way I didn't forsee, I'd probably like to stop it offending more people, regardless of whether it's so naff that the mods should remove it for me.

 

[classic33]

That seems very poor because any correction may be quite some distance from the error, so some who see the error won't see the correction before sharing or replying to it; and some edits may be to remove something preemptively that the mods should remove (under whatever rules are agreed), thereby reducing moderation workload.

Personally, if (when?) I fluff phrasing and offend someone in a way I didn't forsee, I'd probably like to stop it offending more people, regardless of whether it's so naff that the mods should remove it for me.

That incorrect information, your example, if far back may never be read. Highlighting incorrect information would be a better idea. It may also raise fresh questions, based on any corrections made.

 

[Milkfloat]

I use the edit button quite a bit, mainly to fix a typo but also to add examples or evidence, to my claims. This is usually done within the hour. Allowing a longer period to edit might open up accusations of revising history or removing gaming the system.

 

[classic33]

It was an ex member who was most prolific in asking for posts that had been edited, to show that they had been. A valid point in my opinion, as no sign of editing made any further posts quoting it appear as they had done the altering.

 

[Banderill]

Another forum I use has a 10 minute window. After that you have to contact the moderators and ask them to edit. I suppose if you know people can edit, you make sure you quote all posts when replying.