Impossible to edit after 24h - That's quite short.

[Rja4000]

Could we extend to 3 days ?

It's quite short when you try to share a "review with measurements" like this one
and somehow correct it after "Peer review"

(Typically, "peers" are much more clever and knowledgeable than me. I'm not their equal. But that's the common wording, I think)

 

[Promit]

Agreed.

 

[Sancus]

Hm, is there really a limit? Does being a forum donor circumvent it maybe? I can still edit posts I've made months ago even today, for example.

Yes, I'm correct. Here is the explanation of the limit.

 

[Chrispy]

I just tried on a post that was over a month old, no problem. Or does it only affect new posts?

 

[Matias]

@amirm did this come with the update as well?

 

[RayDunzl]

Reputable folks might "ask" an admin for such a privilege.

I did.

 

[restorer-john]

I have no problem with 24hrs. You write something, you post it and people read and reply to that post. Going back in time to edit a post changes the entire landscape of a thread.

If you make a mistake, own it and post a correction. Easy.

There's been plenty of members who constantly edited and changed posts after the fact, which was infuriating to those who posted afterwards. Historical revisionism in threads is not conducive to a coherent conversation.

 

[AdamG]

@amirm did this come with the update as well?

I can answer, this has been this way for some time and predates this update. See post 3 link for clarification as posted by @Sancus above. The 24 hour time cut off for editing posts exists for all Members with the exception of Donors and Members with custom Tags that include unlimited edit time.

 

[Doodski]

I have no problem with 24hrs. You write something, you post it and people read and reply to that post. Going back in time to edit a post changes the entire landscape of a thread.

If you make a mistake, own it and post a correction. Easy.

There's been plenty of members who constantly edited and changed posts after the fact, which was infuriating to those who posted afterwards. Historical revisionism in threads is not conducive to a coherent conversation.

I add a period or correct a spelling mistake sometimes but I don't change the conversation no matter how dumb I looked in the comment. It's just not right to do that.

 

[restorer-john]

I add a period or correct a spelling mistake sometimes but I don't change the conversation. It's just not right to do that.

Same for me. Speeling spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, but not rewriting.

 

[raif71]

Sometimes 24 hours seem to last a whole season

 

[Doodski]

Same for me. Speeling spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, but not rewriting.

I've seen peeps change the entire intention and flow of their comment and that is confusing to have to go back, re-read and adjust my head space. Perhaps a virtual reprimand is in order.

 

[Rja4000]

Well, you of course need to keep things coherent.
As an example, specify in text that you changed it.
But, especially if one tries to assemble a coherent piece of information, being able to improve the text is helpful.

At least, the original thread creator should be able to update the original post longer.
That's the very principle of "peer review".

If that's meant to conter people doing bad things, 24h is way too long already, anyway.
They would do it in the first few hours.

And also: this should be known when you post.
I got a message when too late.

 

[JSmith]

I've seen activity on forums before where disgruntled members come back and start editing all their posts, basically removing them and ruining the flow or information in threads... so it's a good idea and pretty standard to have a time limit on editing posts.



JSmith

 

[Rja4000]

I've seen activity on forums before where disgruntled members come back and start editing all their posts, basically removing them and ruining the flow or information in threads... so it's a good idea and pretty standard to have a time limit on editing posts.



JSmith

I understand that.

But where do you put the priority ?
Preventing bad things from bad-behaving people or helping good will and information quality improvement?

 

[JSmith]

But where do you put the priority ?

I agree 3 days is more reasonable than 24 hours, however some forums have much less than 24 hours for standard members.

On a case by case basis I'm sure mods/admin will be more than happy to unlock editing on a certain post after this time or edit it for the member.

I'm just glad that after the forum software update, those silly reaction choices are gone and just back to a like or thumbs up. Downvotes never work well, tend to be abused and are too much like FB.

Xenforo is capable of having many more emoticons though, so it would be nice to see some more of those activated, as the current selection is fairly basic and limited.



JSmith

 

[Chrispy]

You could just donate to the forum....

 

[Rja4000]

Yeah,
I did that once or twice.
I don't care not getting a "forum donor" flag, though.

 

[Chrispy]

Yeah,
I did that once or twice.
I don't care not getting a "forum donor" flag, though.

Then maybe ask nice like Ray did

 

[Rja4000]

Yes
That sounds like the best option.

I still think original poster should be allowed more time though.
But OK