Discussing UK law. Links: swarb.co.uk | law-index | Acts | Members Image galleries

No edit rule

Stuff about using this board

No edit rule

Postby diy » Wed May 20, 2015 8:49 am

Can we re-think the no edit rule? As a dyslexic it often takes me several goes to explain myself in written word to level that even vaguely represents how I have constructed it in my head. In addition sometimes you realise that there is unnecessary identifiable information not needed for the discussion of law. Lastly, as I continue to research the facts in parallel, I find my questions change slightly as I get closer to the real matters.

I appreciate that we don't want replied to posts being edited, but the no edit rule is problematic. Happy to consider any suggested work-arounds.
My suggestions are not legal advice
User avatar
diy
 
Posts: 2327
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:06 pm

Re: No edit rule

Postby atticus » Wed May 20, 2015 9:10 am

A time limit was set after which posts cannot be edited after one person chose to go on a spree of deleting everything he had posted, making many threads incomprehensible.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 18642
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: No edit rule

Postby diy » Wed May 20, 2015 9:14 am

Yes I appreciate that and I don't have an answer, but we seem to have gone down the route of setting a 20mph speed limit across the town, because a drunk driver in a stolen vehicle crashed at 80mph in the old 30 limit.

Can the time limit be increased?
My suggestions are not legal advice
User avatar
diy
 
Posts: 2327
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:06 pm

Re: No edit rule

Postby shootist » Wed May 20, 2015 9:17 am

atticus wrote:A time limit was set after which posts cannot be edited after one person chose to go on a spree of deleting everything he had posted, making many threads incomprehensible.


Whereas you manage to make many threads incomprehensible without deleting or editing anything. :lol:



(Look, it's a joke, OK. )
"I do not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death my right to be offended by it."
User avatar
shootist
 
Posts: 3169
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 9:40 pm

Re: No edit rule

Postby atticus » Wed May 20, 2015 9:19 am

With friends like you ...
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 18642
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: No edit rule

Postby Slartibartfast » Wed May 20, 2015 6:09 pm

diy wrote:Can we re-think the no edit rule? As a dyslexic it often takes me several goes to explain myself in written word to level that even vaguely represents how I have constructed it in my head. In addition sometimes you realise that there is unnecessary identifiable information not needed for the discussion of law. Lastly, as I continue to research the facts in parallel, I find my questions change slightly as I get closer to the real matters.

I appreciate that we don't want replied to posts being edited, but the no edit rule is problematic. Happy to consider any suggested work-arounds.


Fair request, diy - we ought to be able to trust each other.
I have extended the edit time to 60 mins, hopefully people won't take the mickey.
"Judicial tergiversation is not to be encouraged"
User avatar
Slartibartfast
 
Posts: 3745
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 5:06 pm

Re: No edit rule

Postby diy » Thu May 21, 2015 6:28 am

Thank you



this post was edit by diy 16 times :D
My suggestions are not legal advice
User avatar
diy
 
Posts: 2327
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:06 pm

Re: No edit rule

Postby Andrea Borman » Fri May 22, 2015 5:30 pm

I think the option for members to delete posts should be disabled because some people abuse this. As some members will go back on a binge and delete or edit out their posts which can mess up a thread I also think that post edit time should be limited to 10 minutes for the same reason.

If you have unlimited time edit you will get spammers and rule breakers going back to changed their posts. As well as some members who have broken the rules by editing to re post links or names that moderators have deleted. Where as if you have only a short post edit time limit this cannot happen.

I say we limit post edit time to 10 minutes as I used to do when i had a forum. You only need to edit once to correct any spelling or typo errors. That's what I do. Then if you want to add or change any information to a thread then make another post updating it. You could also disable post edit altogether as some forums do, but then if you make a spelling mistake you canot go back and correct it. But there is no need to have post delete enabled since members can edit.
Andrea Borman.
User avatar
Andrea Borman
 
Posts: 156
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 9:29 pm
Location: England

Re: No edit rule

Postby atticus » Fri May 22, 2015 5:50 pm

Well said, Andrea.

And welcome back.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 18642
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: No edit rule

Postby Andrea Borman » Fri May 22, 2015 6:02 pm

atticus wrote:Well said, Andrea.

And welcome back.

Thanks. I would love to post more on here except it's not very busy right now. But yes post edit time should be 10 minutes. Which is enough time for members to go back and do a quick check on their posts. Then correct their spelling errors and that's it. As that's all most people want to do.
Andrea Borman.
User avatar
Andrea Borman
 
Posts: 156
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 9:29 pm
Location: England

Next

Return to Board Management

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron