Editing time

[Mildew]

Hi Admin(s).
The other night I started a thread over in the Australian section to list those suppliers who ship to our great country. It has been "stickied" as it is an important part of our e-cig experience and as members have posted their recomendations I've updated the list in the first post.
A couple more posts with suppliers were added today, but when I went to update the list the edit button was gone - it would appear you have a time limit set on editing posts.
Now this poses an issue, whereby new members will take a look at the thread and see that the first post gets updated as suppliers are added - maybe they will read the first couple of pages but will then go away assuming it is only the 8 or so suppliers already listed who ship here..
Along with many of your other posting limits, I have to say this is simply frustrating and counter-productive. Please look at this in the eyes of your members rather than those of administrators (who don't see these constraints) and consider overhauling this rather restrictive system.
- Dirk

 

[rolygate]

OK, this is a valid point so let me lay out the issues. Currently the edit time is 24 hours or similar.


Points in favour of an extended edit time
People can update info posts.
Less frustration.
Useful materials can be added.
Wrong info can be deleted.
Changes can be made to data that needs updating.

Points against an extended edit time
Very few people appreciate the problems that changing the first post in a thread can cause.
Only the mods are normally aware of all current site issues that may affect such changes being made.
Changing a post can completely alter the relevance of subsequent posts.
Changing the first post in a thread can destroy the whole thread's logic.
Changing a post's information can render a subsequent post illogical or even apparently irrelevant or plain wrong - and annoy subsequent posters greatly.
Threads can be actively sabotaged.
Good information can be removed.
Information that is useful to members but later seen as not disclosed in the best interests of the OP might be removed.
Information that was posted on the site and becomes the joint property and copyright of ECF can be removed due to disagreements.


I have always found that the best policy in every respect is to reduce the edit time to 20 minutes as an absolute maximum. If that isn't long enough to correct typos or incorrect statements then the material should never have been posted in the first place.

As regards later factual corrections, information updates, or valid changes - all things that may well have a valid reason for being done - then there are ways to do this that don't risk corruption of threads or annoying subsequent posters. These all imply getting a Moderator involved at some stage, to work with you on edits. No matter how good some people's intentions or methodology are, there are many more who cannot be allowed the full and free ability to change content on ECF, for dozens of reasons.

Since it is not possible to allocate extended editing rights to individual users (unless they are made Moderators), people simply need to ask a Moderator to work with them on edits.

Hopefully you can now see why the edit time is restricted.

 

[Elendil]

Dirk, you can only edit a post for a short time after posting. (48 hours, I think)

If you need a post edited you can PM me or any mod and we can edit for you. I know TimTam is from Australia as well and would likely be around the same time you are time-zone wise




EDIT: Sniped by roly...........

 

[Mildew]

So it comes down to not trusting members to do the right thing. I honestly thought the membership here was above all that.
No worries - I'll let the mods update the post as the fit.

 

[Timtam]

We have 31,786 members. If 5% of them are idiots, then that is 1590 bad apples. We need to do everything we can to stop attacks from members who want nothing more than to just annoy us.

 

[AngusATAT]

Mildew, MrDismal has been helping out with moderation in the Australia forum. I'm sure he would be glad to help you out.

 

[8-Ball]

It makes it near impossible to create an educational or archival thread where you want the most recent, accurate information to be in post #1. Often times information takes time to come in, or to be organized in a readily understandable or useful format.
Restricting the ability to update post #1 in a thread relegates the reader to go through sometimes hundreds of posts to gather all of the information. Often, they give up or lose interest or simply become confused about what the OP had intended.

I am in the process of compiling all of the DIY recipes in Tips and Tricks (as well as some other sources), making them all math consistent and set up against a 10ml sample size. I was going to add relevant links, sources, tips, etc. as I found them and keep the first post in the thread updated with the most current list.

I've spent days putting this together only to find that I couldn't update my posts.

I've got to tell you something else. I'm not going to ask for a mod to update the content I've been volunteering to develop on my own dime and time (Often times I'll stay up and attempt to post in the middle of the night)... I don't have time to locate, PM, explain what I'm trying to do to a mod, then wait for them to do what I've asked. What a complete waste of time. Writing this is a complete waste of time. I find it condescending to treat members in this fashion.

Bottom line: I've got some great info to share and ECF excludes itself from it due to onerous restrictions.

 

[progg]

A somewhat effective strategy -- quote the post you wish to emend.

 

[rolygate]

8-Ball, you don't seem to have got the message.

We'd love you to be able to update post 1 with useful info. But there are a percentage of people who will destroy, or who have no common sense. While those people exist (which is for ever), an unlimited license to edit post #1 cannot possibly be given.

With the software we have, it's not possible to allocate this privilege on an individual basis. So, no matter how valuable it is to have good posts updated by the original poster - since this would have to be allowed for all - IT CAN'T BE ALLOWED as not everyone is sensible.

If you can't take 5 minutes to ask a Mod to do it for you then it has to be assumed your contribution has little value. Everybody else just PMs or emails a Mod and it's done. What's the problem?

 

[8-Ball]

8-Ball, you don't seem to have got the message.

We'd love you to be able to update post 1 with useful info. But there are a percentage of people who will destroy, or who have no common sense. While those people exist (which is for ever), an unlimited license to edit post #1 cannot possibly be given.

With the software we have, it's not possible to allocate this privilege on an individual basis. So, no matter how valuable it is to have good posts updated by the original poster - since this would have to be allowed for all - IT CAN'T BE ALLOWED as not everyone is sensible.

If you can't take 5 minutes to ask a Mod to do it for you then it has to be assumed your contribution has little value. Everybody else just PMs or emails a Mod and it's done. What's the problem?

Thinking like yours is the problem.

It is apparent that you know more than all. I'll just shut up now and be a good little foot soldier.

 

[AngusATAT]

Unfortunately, it seems you've cherry picked a couple of lines out of his post to object to, and missed the entire meaning of it. Plus, you're acting like this is something the ECF is doing just to upset a few people, when the reality is that limiting the editing time for posts is pretty much an online forum standard, and is even a default setting for the majority of forum software.

The bottom line is, it would be a lot more trouble than it is worth.

 

[8-Ball]

Unfortunately, it seems you've cherry picked a couple of lines out of his post to object to, and missed the entire meaning of it.

The bottom line is, it would be a lot more trouble than it is worth.

and here I was thinking the reverse was true.

Bottom line... no skin off my back.

 

[AngusATAT]

and here I was thinking the reverse was true.

That's because you're only seeing it from your point of view, and have no idea the kinds of issues the forum staff would have to deal with if we made the change.

We've already had one loser at life trash the e-cig wiki. Imagine what those ...... could do to the forum if we allowed it. Or do you think everyone is an online angel?

 

[8-Ball]

That's because you're only seeing it from your point of view, and have no idea the kinds of issues the forum staff would have to deal with if we made the change.

We've already had one loser at life trash the e-cig wiki. Imagine what those ...... could do to the forum if we allowed it. Or do you think everyone is an online angel?

I'm actually not. I own and run a motorcycle forum using vbulletin. I understand what you are saying and I understand idiots. What we have done is set up specific user groups where we allocate certain privileges to that group (like editing first posts) to those who have the ability and the wherewithal to contribute research or information that requires that the most current information be in the first post (sort of a very limited moderators group). The rest of the posts are generally used for adding information so that it can be distilled and and added to post 1.

Some folks find solutions, others simply put up road blocks.

Our goal was to provide the best information to our members. Lets face it, some folks simply post. Others do research and are capable of contributing more in depth information to others.

The problem as I see it is that since you've had some run ins with ......, your solution is to consider everyone a ..... and run the forum accordingly. I guess I just don't agree with that.

Its not my forum. Your rules. However, there are answers beyond what you've offered here.

 

[AngusATAT]

The problem as I see it is that since you've had some run ins with ......, your solution is to consider everyone a ..... and run the forum accordingly.

Actually, you're incorrect. Our solution is to provide solutions that are beneficial to our membership, and don't have the potential to be abused.

This isn't my first rodeo. I've owned and ran several forums. I've seen trusted members "go off the deep end" and run amok on forums. I've seen it here quite a few times, as well. Certain types of people also decide they no longer wish to be a part of the forums, and "go out with a bang" by causing as much trouble as they can before being caught and banned. This forum is also one that comes under attack from members of other forums. They create multiple accounts using proxies and sit around and wait for their moment to cause issues. It's hard to believe that so-called adults would act in such a manner, but it happens.

Once we get the wiki straightened out and redone, it sounds like it would be a good solution for your project. You can edit info to your heart's content.

 

[8-Ball]

Actually, you're incorrect. Our solution is to provide solutions that are beneficial to our membership, and don't have the potential to be abused.

This isn't my first rodeo. I've owned and ran several forums. I've seen trusted members "go off the deep end" and run amok on forums. I've seen it here quite a few times, as well. Certain types of people also decide they no longer wish to be a part of the forums, and "go out with a bang" by causing as much trouble as they can before being caught and banned. This forum is also one that comes under attack from members of other forums. They create multiple accounts using proxies and sit around and wait for their moment to cause issues. It's hard to believe that so-called adults would act in such a manner, but it happens.

Once we get the wiki straightened out and redone, it sounds like it would be a good solution for your project. You can edit info to your heart's content.

Dead horse... got it...

I haven't played with the Blog feature. Can one edit a blog entry once it has been up for whatever your time limit is...? One solution could be to place some information there where I can update it.

How many ...... have abused the blog?

Edit to add:

Man... it sounds like you've been beat down hard and have lost a lot of enthusiasm for the community.

 

[AngusATAT]

Man... it sounds like you've been beat down hard and have lost a lot of enthusiasm for the community.

Not really. For the most part, this is a great community with some very awesome members. I've seen acts of kindness and charity that make me proud to be part of it.

I'm just in the unique position to see some parts of "online life" that most members don't get to see. In fact, it's a point of pride that lots of the bad things I see aren't seen by the membership, which means we're doing our job.

We haven't really had too many issues with the blog feature. I think it's because folks who want to cause issues want to do so on the forums where it will be seen by as many members as possible. Unfortunately, I believe that the blogs follow the same editing time rules as the rest of the forum.