Results 1 to 12 of 12
  1. #1
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    378

    Edit Earlier Posts

    Hi everyone,
    In the thread "MCC Bullet Marathon?" I wish to change the title such that the "?" is removed. But there is no edit button at the bottom of the post: may I ask why this is? And what can I do about it?

  2. #2
    CC Grandmaster Adamski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Penrith, NSW
    Posts
    9,081
    There is an Advanced Edit option which allows you to change the title. Go to "Edit" then to "Go Advanced".
    God exists. Short and to the point.

    Secretary of, and regularly arbiter at, Rooty Hill RSL Chess Club. See www.rootyhillchessclub.org.

    Psephological insight. "Controversial will only lose you votes. Courageous will lose you the election." Sir Humphrey Appleby on Yes Minister.

    Favorite movie line: Girl friend Cathy to Jack Ryan in "Sum of all Fears". "What kind of emergency does an historian have?".

  3. #3
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    378
    Quote Originally Posted by Adamski
    There is an Advanced Edit option which allows you to change the title. Go to "Edit" then to "Go Advanced".
    Yes but for some reason there is no button allowing me to edit at all!

  4. #4
    CC Grandmaster Garrett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    the City
    Posts
    3,210
    if it is over 24 hours since the post then I don't think you can edit.

    Don't know if this is relevant or not.

    cheers Garrett.

  5. #5
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    40,325
    Outside the edit window posts can only be edited by an admin or mod. I've edited the title.
    Moderation Requests: All requests for, comments about, or questions about moderation of any kind including thread changes must be posted in the Help and Feedback section and not on the thread in question. (Or by private message for routine changes or sensitive matters.)

    ACF Newsletter Information - All Australian players and administrators should subscribe and check each issue for relevant notices

    My psephology/politics site (token chess references only) : http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/ Politics twitter feed https://twitter.com/kevinbonham

  6. #6
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    378
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham
    Outside the edit window posts can only be edited by an admin or mod. I've edited the title.
    Thank you. But may I ask why it is not possible to edit posts from >24 hours ago?

  7. #7
    CC International Master ElevatorEscapee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    2,167
    ^^ I agree with the poster above.

    Whilst I understand that the 24 hour "posters can't edit their own posts" rule has been in force for quite some time now, I wonder if is this a moderation decision or simply a default setting for vBulletin.

    Sometimes I cringe when seeing a post I made a couple of days previously which has an obvious typo, and it seems incongruous to me that I can't go in and edit it to make a simple correction... after all, it's my own post!

    Is there a genuine reason for preventing such editing? For instance, are people afraid that whatever they are responding to will be edited, thereby making their response look stupid? (This would partially explain the rather unnecessarily repetitive "quote", "quote", "quote", habits that people have here, overusing the "quote" function to reproduce what everyone can read just by looking at the post above.)

    Or is this simply a default setting from vBulletin? (I notice that the 'other' site has a similar policy).

    In any case, if there is the ability to change the time limit, I would encourage it to be changed to allow the original posters to edit their own posts regardless of the time elapsed from their original post. This would also lessen the workload of the moderators by them not having to respond to requests based on timing delay issues.
    "On my chess set, all the pawns are Hamburglers" ~ Homer Simpson.

  8. #8
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    40,325
    We have made a deliberate decision to retain an edit window though the length of the window has been varied in the past.

    We think the edit window is important so that posters remain accountable for what they have posted (with the exception of stuff said in the heat of the moment that a poster quickly decides is a bad idea). If there is no edit window silly posters (not that we have too many of those anymore) can back-edit to distort the record of the debate.

    It is also a good protection against the common spammer trick of posting a seemingly normal post then editing in links days later.

    If someone wants something edited after the window has expired then we're generally happy to do it (though if someone wants hundreds of typos expunged as opposed to the odd one then they should type more carefully in future!)

    This would also lessen the workload of the moderators by them not having to respond to requests based on timing delay issues.
    Thanks for the concern but I strongly prefer the workload to the alternative.
    Moderation Requests: All requests for, comments about, or questions about moderation of any kind including thread changes must be posted in the Help and Feedback section and not on the thread in question. (Or by private message for routine changes or sensitive matters.)

    ACF Newsletter Information - All Australian players and administrators should subscribe and check each issue for relevant notices

    My psephology/politics site (token chess references only) : http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/ Politics twitter feed https://twitter.com/kevinbonham

  9. #9
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    378
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham
    We have made a deliberate decision to retain an edit window though the length of the window has been varied in the past.

    We think the edit window is important so that posters remain accountable for what they have posted (with the exception of stuff said in the heat of the moment that a poster quickly decides is a bad idea). If there is no edit window silly posters (not that we have too many of those anymore) can back-edit to distort the record of the debate.

    It is also a good protection against the common spammer trick of posting a seemingly normal post then editing in links days later.

    If someone wants something edited after the window has expired then we're generally happy to do it (though if someone wants hundreds of typos expunged as opposed to the odd one then they should type more carefully in future!)



    Thanks for the concern but I strongly prefer the workload to the alternative.
    What's the problem? If people edit their posts to change to the record of the discussion then they are only compromising their own integrity...on the other hand, disallowing the correction of typos after 24 hours is a huge problem: people are made to look like fools because they are unable to change a siple mistake.

    Of course if people do modify their posts and change the nature of them then these can simply be treated as violations of forum rules.

  10. #10
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    40,325
    Quote Originally Posted by jhughes
    What's the problem? If people edit their posts to change to the record of the discussion then they are only compromising their own integrity
    Not if it had already been compromised to a greater degree by what they had written and wished to remove.

    ...on the other hand, disallowing the correction of typos after 24 hours is a huge problem: people are made to look like fools because they are unable to change a [simple] mistake.
    But we can change it for them. Though I don't actually think that making a typo error in a post generally makes someone look like a fool anyway. Except if someone does it while flaming someone else for making typo errors, in which case they shouldn't be allowed to change it.

    Of course if people do modify their posts and change the nature of them then these can simply be treated as violations of forum rules.
    Not really sure I'd want to go down that road. I know from another forum I'm a mod on (where there is no limit on edits) that some posters find the temptation to engage in cover-ups very strong. Even if you make the practice possible but have a rule restricting when it can be used, they might say that their edit outside the window was only fixing a typo and there might not be any way to test that. Indeed on that forum we sometimes get cases of posters posting just to quote an embarrassing or stupid post made by someone else, just to make sure the original poster can't "retract" it in any way. I can do without that sort of thing being necessary here.
    Moderation Requests: All requests for, comments about, or questions about moderation of any kind including thread changes must be posted in the Help and Feedback section and not on the thread in question. (Or by private message for routine changes or sensitive matters.)

    ACF Newsletter Information - All Australian players and administrators should subscribe and check each issue for relevant notices

    My psephology/politics site (token chess references only) : http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/ Politics twitter feed https://twitter.com/kevinbonham

  11. #11
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    378
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham
    Not if it had already been compromised to a greater degree by what they had written and wished to remove.



    But we can change it for them. Though I don't actually think that making a typo error in a post generally makes someone look like a fool anyway. Except if someone does it while flaming someone else for making typo errors, in which case they shouldn't be allowed to change it.



    Not really sure I'd want to go down that road. I know from another forum I'm a mod on (where there is no limit on edits) that some posters find the temptation to engage in cover-ups very strong. Even if you make the practice possible but have a rule restricting when it can be used, they might say that their edit outside the window was only fixing a typo and there might not be any way to test that. Indeed on that forum we sometimes get cases of posters posting just to quote an embarrassing or stupid post made by someone else, just to make sure the original poster can't "retract" it in any way. I can do without that sort of thing being necessary here.
    But surely there is a big difference between things like correcting typos and grammatical mistakes and then changing the tone of the discussion completely? How could it possibly result in a dispute?

  12. #12
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    40,325
    Quote Originally Posted by jhughes
    But surely there is a big difference between things like correcting typos and grammatical mistakes and then changing the tone of the discussion completely? How could it possibly result in a dispute?
    Well, suppose A makes a post attacking B. B, who isn't a regular poster, finds the post weeks later and replies to it angrily but doesn't directly quote it. As soon as A sees B do that, A immediately edits his post so it looks like B's reply is misrepresenting A and barking up the wrong tree, thus making B look foolish. There is an edit stamp showing on A's post showing it was edited after B replied, but A says he just noticed a typo and didn't change anything that mattered. Some people who saw the post when first posted reckon that A has indeed changed the text significantly, but A says that he did that not long after posting, to tone it down. Unless the original was captured by a search engine or Wayback in its original form many days after it was posted, it may be impossible to establish that A substantively altered the post after B replied.

    Now, this may all sound unlikely or extreme but it is actually mild compared to some of the cases of deliberate deception we have seen here in the past.
    Moderation Requests: All requests for, comments about, or questions about moderation of any kind including thread changes must be posted in the Help and Feedback section and not on the thread in question. (Or by private message for routine changes or sensitive matters.)

    ACF Newsletter Information - All Australian players and administrators should subscribe and check each issue for relevant notices

    My psephology/politics site (token chess references only) : http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/ Politics twitter feed https://twitter.com/kevinbonham

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Charles Robert Darwin 1809-1882
    By antichrist in forum Religion and Science
    Replies: 150
    Last Post: 04-09-2013, 02:18 PM
  2. Comments/waffle on Best posts of 2003
    By Paul S in forum Australian Chess
    Replies: 207
    Last Post: 14-07-2011, 09:47 PM
  3. Quick Edit
    By skip to my lou in forum News / Announcements
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 17-06-2004, 11:14 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •