(August 5, 2011 at 8:19 pm)Dotard Wrote: It's your world, do as you see fit.

All changes are going to create a wave of whiners. They'll get over it.

But is the change even required? Maybe there is some incident I didn't notice that's the reason for this, but otherwise I can't see the point.

Thanks, Ed!

---

(August 5, 2011 at 8:37 pm)edk141 Wrote: But is the change even required? Maybe there is some incident I didn't notice that's the reason for this, but otherwise I can't see the point.

Required? Not necessarily. However, we are always trying to think of ways to make the forum better. This could be one of them, so we're giving it a shot.

I just deleted my first post in this thread thinking it wouldn't work.. guess the delete restriction wasn't implemented? Sorry about that, although as it's quoted doesn't matter that much.

(August 5, 2011 at 8:53 pm)edk141 Wrote: I just deleted my first post in this thread thinking it wouldn't work.. guess the delete restriction wasn't implemented? Sorry about that, although as it's quoted doesn't matter that much.

Thanks for the troubleshoot. It might not have changed yet. Tiberius would know.

I have to delete my own posts due to prematurely posting (usually by accident, sometimes by having a last moment thought of a way something can be interpreted which I need to immediately retract and redesign from the ground up, and it shouldn't be sitting on the forum for any length of time at all)

And when it comes to editing, sometimes I'll come back to a thread about an hour after posting it, see some ridiculous mistake (a sentence is chopped in half, a spelling mistake on par with 'bestiality'), and fix it on the spot. It would be annoying to have a mod comment on the bottom of a good 10% of my posts (I'm sure I do this at least that often when I enter into serious discussions). It's just a pain in the ass all around... I'd have to tell some other person to go fix it instead of fixing it myself. (Edit: Only I've been careful to make it so I don't need to add anythi-wait. Oh. i just did it) (Edit2: Twice, smilies don't belong in this serious a criticism... would make it lose credence, you see) (would-be-edit3, but I caught the GSP before I clicked saved changes) (Would-be-Edit4: didn't finish the sentence) (Have I made this point yet?) (edit5: Code error)

I only preview long posts, and those mostly to make sure I got the [ brackets] [ /brackets ] right. I've probably made some terrible mistake in this post by now that I'd normally see somewhere between right after posting and after returning to this thread after sixteen others... and under this new rule I wouldn't be able to fix it without hassle, and hassle's just bad no matter what.

This rule also doesn't apply at all to a number of members (me, in example). I've never deleted a post to escape an argument, and I wouldn't ever delete a post to escape an argument I'm already in (though I have when I decided to get in on an argument and as I post realize I don't want to... if it's down for 5 seconds it stays down, for better or worse) ... and what is the point of winning an argument if I'm wrong and know it?

I think far more apt would be to have this as a restriction for anyone under an arbitrary postcount, that way the 'faster' and more prevalent posters aren't unnecessarily punished for things they wouldn't do in the first place. This is, after all, mostly a problem with random trolls that pop in and start trying to cause mayhem by their 100th post, and usually far far far far far far sooner (1-5). The few instances when this isn't the case should be handled individually, and not as a massive rule that gets in the way of normal forum browsing.

TL: DR? Go back up and read it, slacker I think this rule is entirely misguided in what it's attempting to accomplish, and a needless hassle that doesn't need to be dealt with by the members who have to wait until a mod graces the forum to fix a sometimes vital mistake, and a hassle that the mods simply don't need to deal with.

---

(August 5, 2011 at 7:19 pm)Shell B Wrote:

(August 5, 2011 at 7:07 pm)edk141 Wrote: edit: Sounded a bit shitty now I think about it, I just mean that I think it's unfair to take away privileges that are occasionally abused at the expense of everyone who doesn't abuse them.

We're not really taking away a privilege, as much as making an adjustment in the hopes that it will keep the forum cleaner. As Tiberius pointed out, you can still have mods edit for you.

NTS

One of the privileges of this forum, as I see it, is that those who have earned enough respect can do whatever they want to their posts (so long as it's within the few rules, ie porn)... and are as a general whole so because they don't do shit like deleting their own posts to win an argument (I mean seriously... who was that neurotic? Not even I am that crazy... and purple hair suits my personality for heaven's sake)

---

(August 5, 2011 at 7:26 pm)Tiberius Wrote:

(August 5, 2011 at 7:07 pm)edk141 Wrote: I just mean that I think it's unfair to take away privileges that are occasionally abused at the expense of everyone who doesn't abuse them.

Not many people delete their own posts, and if they do, it's usually for a bad reason. We are simply trying to make sure that the amount of deleted posts doesn't get to a ridiculous number. We want people to treat the forums with respect; putting effort into their posts and standing by them. It isn't a place where you can post random thoughts with the expectation of being able to remove them at any point down the line.

It would be a disrespect to the forum for some of the posts that pass through my first judgement of "this is an acceptable response" to not be immediately deleted. It is exactly that I respect the forum and many of it's members that I tone down the outrageousness of some posts. My ability to delete posts works perfectly with my thinking process (I lay something out (post), retract it when I realize it could be so much better or shouldn't have been said in the first place (delete), lay it out in different wording or as a different idea (repost), see that there are improvements to be made and add these (edit), and later come back and see that a word is misspelt pointlessly (edit 2 hours and sometimes years later)).

Other forums, with rules like the suggested one, would have me on occasion post things that are offensive even to myself when I think about it in a different way. And then I wouldn't be able to delete that post on my own... and then a mod has to look at it and might not even delete it for all I know. It could even be that on whatever-forum I broke a rule with the post and they decide that warning/banning me is a fine option on top of that.

I trust you guys for the most part... but rules like these don't do anything positive to trust of anyone (not mods of the posters they might begin to resent after a while, not the posters who might worry about what the mods might do)

Quote:Likewise, most of the editing done to posts takes place well within the 20 minute limit. Most people edit mistakes they spot immediately when they look over the post they just submitted. If 20 minutes causes too many problems, then we can always increase it to something more useful.

We're willing to be flexible, as long as users are willing to be respectful.

It can only create agitation and drama in whoever it affects that isn't onlevel with a troll, who it might also create agitation and drama in, but we don't give a left ankle about troll's feelings.

I do agree that most of the time the editing is done within 20 minutes... but I know that sometimes I come back even years later and fix something (obviously with an editnote after so long)... so it's not like any time limit would catch all of the edits people perform.

Note: i certainly wouldn't mind if edits were tracked or something so that we know what was changed... but that just sounds trivial for the most part.

---

(August 5, 2011 at 8:19 pm)Dotard Wrote: It's your world, do as you see fit.

All changes are going to create a wave of whiners. They'll get over it.

As the status quo being upset slowly and acidly dissolves every pillar built and the bridge collapses... but yeah: I guess we can adapt wings magically

---

(August 5, 2011 at 8:37 pm)edk141 Wrote: But is the change even required? Maybe there is some incident I didn't notice that's the reason for this, but otherwise I can't see the point.

I too am very interested in what spurred this idea onto the table. All the forums I know of with time limits on editing have people complaining about it, constantly. And that's without even the mods being swamped by the additional idea of more random work a user can do themselves.

The idea is good and if it speeds things up all the better. An hour or two would be nice to allow more grace time. Is the degradation in performance effected much by doing that?

I usually edit on the spot... like Sae says.. I only really preview long posts. Previewing is just too annoying to use all the time. Some forums enforce preview - I'd predicted that you wouldn't go for that. I also edit and add in extra thoughts quite a bit... but only immediately after posting.

Enforcing preview would be hell on bad internet connections. Absolute hell.

And that isn't meant in a good way, you damn people with like 50 Mbps

Ok, given your feedback I have increased the amount of time you have to edit your posts to 2 hours. I think this is quite a fair amount of time to edit posts in. If you need to edit a post after the 2 hour time period, contact a member of staff.

We will monitor all requests and if they get too many, we'll reconsider implementing this. I doubt very much that it'll turn out that way though.

And I still think it doesn't affect the people who it should effect (ie: trolls) well enough, and it still gets in the way of the better members (ie: I still can't go back to my recent post in the members photo thread and fix it, because it's been a good 6 hours at least), and good members can come back to necro threads and clean their mistakes up for future readers. I certainly don't want to cause the mods any particular pains over this, much rather just leave a post broken or with several moderate mistakes than bug someone myself.

Really, when it comes to implementing this sort of thing... I think the best course of action is to only affect the low end of the poster-spectrum. These are the only people who make trouble over this kind of thing with the exceptions of very few others (ie: recently emporeon) that shouldn't be handled by a blanket rule that affects everyone's ability to post well all the time (not being able to delete is a pain, seriously).

Also, a crude 'post delete' can still work in editing and removing everything but enough characters to post. While it's certainly less clean than the simple delete button, it is an available(albeit aggravating all around) option. Why this is particularly annoying: it bumps a thread and affects the overview box and todays posts and new posts. Nevertheless, it is possible.

Another notation on the 2 hour time thing... there are times when I have to drop whatever I'm doing immediately and assist in a work-related emergency. Plenty often I am then given another job right after the emergency that I need to perform, and by the time that's done it is time to go out in the boat and pick out the slackies (and turn nets), and we get in for 30 minutes for bathroom or a bite to eat and hop back out to pull nets. On our 66 tote day and 48 tote day, we had to roundhaul many of our nets due to having so many fish in them, meaning another several hours spent picking our nets clear... only to set again a few hours later with most of us not able to sleep.

When shit happens and one just clicked the post button as they were on their way out the door... it is not unlikely that they will be gone for several hours in a work related fixing of this, rarely a whole day or more, but it can happen. And yet, all a troll needs is a single response before they change what they say in a post, and from posters like me this can come in minutes, if not seconds.

Wholly: it doesn't solve any problems (other than them deleting posts, but as I said above there are ways to basically do this) and it adds new annoyances to the forum (which affect you more if you work sporadically and have a 'how about this way?' thought process). I suggest rather an arbitrary post count where you have limited privileges... which makes far more sense from the get-go.

Quote:Ok, given your feedback I have increased the amount of time you have to edit your posts to 2 hours.

Good, a reasonable compromise I think,bringing us in line with other well run forums.