Not being able to edit your posts

[spoonitnow]

Not being able to edit your posts after a while is some bullshit.

[MadMojoMonkey]

I definitely second that one.

Why is there a 15 minute time limit? What is the logic behind this anyway?

[Penneywize]

WB Spoonitnow

[bikes]

i swear every one of your posts you make i expect you to have some zinger directed at me

[Pascal]

What do you want to edit more than 15 mins after you posted?

[eugmac]

I think the argument is that people can go back and change posts that have already received replies, and it screws up the chronology of the posts. The disadvantage is that you can't write dumb shit, and then pretend it didn't happen a few hours later.

[MadMojoMonkey]

What do you want to edit more than 15 mins after you posted?

It was a bother in the physics monkey thread, because sometimes the difference between a confusing and a succinct explanation is the choice of a single word.

Sometimes I just want to add an afterthought that occurred to me.

Also, if the post is the last one in the thread, then how can it effect continuity?

[Pascal]

Sorry, was more asking out of curiosity than like "prove it to me" just cos I've never had to edit a post longer than 15 mins after. =)

Anyone else got thoughts? GMML suggested it and I'm sure he'll chip in when he sees this.

EDIT: IMO 15 min edit is normally long enough and double posting if you want to add something after longer than that is fine. I think some of the negatives are that you can go back and change old posts etc which have been replied to already and no one can see it's happened. Also can stop threads getting bumped when new info is added if it's just edited in. Mods & admins can edit indefinitely and can always change/add something for you if you ask by PM at the moment.

[Eric]

Yeah, there are pros and cons.

[rong]

So has something happened where people have edited a post and its pissed off some admins?

[boost]

it's not the end of the world, but I just always liked that there was no time limit like there is on 2p2 and other forums. I don't think it was being abused, so I don't really get the change. But it's not really anything to get worked up about.

[rong]

Boost surely the change must make you curious, no?

[bikes]

So has something happened where people have edited a post and its pissed off some admins?

when in doubt it's my fault probably

[Pascal]

So has something happened where people have edited a post and its pissed off some admins?

I think GMML saw it somewhere else when browsing the interweb and thought it was a good idea. No conspiracies here.

[givememyleg]

so let me ask:

- is 15 mins not enough time?
- would 24 hours be better?
- shorter/longer than 24 hours?
- or does the whole idea suck?

at some point, it becomes meaningless to allow edits. like on a post that is 5 months old, it shouldn't need to be edited. in the past the only major event i can think of is when aokrongly went through and edited all of his posts to "..." or something.... not that his posts were anything amazing, but ya know.

[supa]

I think the argument is that people can go back and change posts that have already received replies, and it screws up the chronology of the posts. The disadvantage is that you can't write dumb shit, and then pretend it didn't happen a few hours later.

Yeah, pretty much if it takes longer than 15 minutes to figure out you wrote something dumb then you should have to live with it.

[boost]

so let me ask:

- is 15 mins not enough time?
- would 24 hours be better?
- shorter/longer than 24 hours?
- or does the whole idea suck?

at some point, it becomes meaningless to allow edits. like on a post that is 5 months old, it shouldn't need to be edited. in the past the only major event i can think of is when aokrongly went through and edited all of his posts to "..." or something.... not that his posts were anything amazing, but ya know.

Well, I guess we wander into the domain of "who do the posts belong to?" I remember googling my name and through a series of posts it could easily be tied to this screen name. By editing my posts in that series I was able to at least obscure my identity if not make it impossible for a googler to figure out who was who. Obviously this is not a super common situation, but it just illustrates that having access to the content I have created only seems fair. It seems that there hasn't really been a problem, and so I don't understand why a solution was implemented that impedes our control over the content that we have created.

So to answer the question, "who do the posts belong to?", I think, without referencing the terms of use, that the posts do belong to the forum. However, I can't see why the forum would want to limit our control over the content.

[daven]

this change don't matter much either way. To me, anyway
2p2 have had this for ages

on a related note - it's funny when you quote a post that has an image in it, then people delete the image from imageshack cos they're embarrassed that they posted it in the first place and want to remove the proof/history
on a related note - historically the best way to keep the content of some posters/posts in a thread was to quote them
on a related note - thank god 'rep' has disappeared
on a related note - i occasionally want to edit an old post in my op thread when i find that a link to a song on youtube has disappeared. This isn't very important.

Mods & admins can edit indefinitely and can always change/add something for you if you ask by PM at the moment.

meaning mods & admins can edit their own posts anytime? but the rest of us can't. cans. worms. but like i said above, it don't matter none

[BankItDrew]

OMG I CAN'T EDIT A POST I MADE 7 HRS AGO

[!Luck]

24 hours makes more sense, since that's enough time for mind altering substances to leave your body

[kmind]

so let me ask:

- is 15 mins not enough time?
- would 24 hours be better?
- shorter/longer than 24 hours?
- or does the whole idea suck?

at some point, it becomes meaningless to allow edits. like on a post that is 5 months old, it shouldn't need to be edited. in the past the only major event i can think of is when aokrongly went through and edited all of his posts to "..." or something.... not that his posts were anything amazing, but ya know.

24 hours would be better imo but no longer than like 2-3 days because of aok

[jyms]

AoK didn't completely edit everything thanks to the wayback machine hehe.

FTR Texas Hold'em Strategy Poker Forum :: View topic - The Psychology of Losing - Know Thyself!!

[givememyleg]

i've never really considered who "owns" the posts, but i guess ftr since it's a public message board? but in the example you gave, i and any other mod would be more than happy to go back and edit to remove any personal information or things you would prefer not to be public.

perhaps something more like 12-24 hours would be better instead of 15 mins?

[jyms]

Ya, sometimes I notice I fucked up only after I get responses and that may take more than 15 mins. I can edit other posts when asked, so it's not a problem if someone needs things done after the time has passed

[Eric]

this change don't matter much either way. To me, anyway
2p2 have had this for ages

How long does 2p2 give people?

[Pascal]

i've never really considered who "owns" the posts, but i guess ftr since it's a public message board? but in the example you gave, i and any other mod would be more than happy to go back and edit to remove any personal information or things you would prefer not to be public.

T&C cover this and say user still owns post:

USER'S GRANT OF LIMITED LICENSE

By posting or submitting content to this site, you: grant pwnMarketing, Inc. the right to use, reproduce, display, perform, adapt, modify, distribute, have distributed, and promote the content in any form, anywhere and for any purpose; and warrant and represent that you own or otherwise control all of the rights to the content and that public posting and use of your content by FlopTurnRiver.com or pwnMarketing, Inc. will not infringe or violate the rights of any third party.

I guess "right to use, reproduce, display" means that if you did edit something and remove it FTR would have the right to put it back up.

Pretty sure it's different to a lot of other forums which do take ownership. Here's an example from another forum:

||Ownership of Content Submissions||
All legal content, information or any other form of member submission, that conforms with the site rules/terms of service, immediately becomes exclusive property of xxxx

[givememyleg]

How long does 2p2 give people?

15 mins, i believe.

[rong]

If you edit, does the 15 min window restart?

[a500lbgorilla]

Are we creating a problem by fixing a problem that didn't exist?

[jyms]

Ya I think this is just one of those little things that maybe we should just discuss in the mod forum before doing. It's never gonna hurt asking a bunch of people that have been here for a combined 50+ years and care about the forum what we think before just making a change. Hell, Xianti used to spend hours in discussion about fonts and we never minded

[givememyleg]

If you edit, does the 15 min window restart?

idk, try it for science.

[givememyleg]

Are we creating a problem by fixing a problem that didn't exist?

blasphemy in the ears of an engineer.

[givememyleg]

i changed this to 24 hours instead of 15 minutes. let's try it out and see if this helps. if there are still those among us who are upset, we can re-evaluate.

[spoonitnow]

I just made a post about it because I'd seen 4-5 people (I forget who or where) who mentioned that they weren't a fan of it, but it hadn't really been brought up in front of everywhere.

[Keith]

I can think of a couple of situations where threads have worked better by having the ability to edit available.

One would be threads along the lines of the BC headsup tournament where the original post could be updated with people entered, paid, matchs in each round etc and results.

A second would be blogs and operations where people set some goals at the start of the OP and then update the OP when those goals are completed.

[jyms]

Most mods can help with that though. So long as it's not a daily edit it shouldn't be a problem

[spoonitnow]

i swear every one of your posts you make i expect you to have some zinger directed at me

lol nah man it's cool

[BennyLaRue]

White people problems.

Let's talk about the fonts because Xianti was probably on to something. This font doesn't make me feel anything and I think it should.

[kiwiMark]

I'm thinking nudey ladies instead of vowels.

[BennyLaRue]

I'm thinking nudey ladies instead of vowels.

That wouldn't make us all feel something positive. For example, bigred.

[kiwiMark]

You haven't heard my plan for the consonants yet

[eugmac]

I agree that Verdana is pretty boring, but it's friendly. It won the award for being the most readable or some shit, so it wins the accessibility award. It's also ubiquitous. I'm not normally for Arial/Helvetica, but actually maybe for a poker forum with cold, rational discussions it's not such a bad idea. It might also reduce the number of irrational flamewars and such though, which is certainly bad for entertainment value. I do really have an above-average interest and knowledge of fonts, and have considered typography a field that I might in an alternate universe pursue professionally. Most people don't notice fonts.

[givememyleg]

i'm gearing up for april 1, 2013, going to update ftr's font to comic sans site wide. it'll be grand!

[bikes]

lol nah man it's cool

i can never tell what level you are on either.

[Pascal]

i can never tell what level you are on either.

Spoiler: Show

[spoonitnow]

i can never tell what level you are on either.

Sent you a PM with my Skype name, let's chop it up

[KoRnholio]

I like the idea. Maybe change it to 30 mins or an hour at most though.

[Pascal]

To bring this up again - thoughts on having a message under the post if it's edited longer than 1 minute after being posted saying something like:

"Edited by Pascal at 14:28 on 14th October 2012. Reason: bad grammar"

So that people can see you've edited your post?

[donkbee]

To bring this up again - thoughts on having a message under the post if it's edited longer than 1 minute after being posted saying something like:

"Edited by Pascal at 14:28 on 14th October 2012. Reason: bad grammar"

So that people can see you've edited your post?

this is best imo

[MadMojoMonkey]

Agreed

[Galapogos]

To bring this up again - thoughts on having a message under the post if it's edited longer than 1 minute after being posted saying something like:

"Edited by Pascal at 14:28 on 14th October 2012. Reason: bad grammar"

So that people can see you've edited your post?

You're a goddamn genius.

Actually wait, I'm gonna hold onto that particular praise until you fix the newest post bug. For now, you're a good man.

[chemist]

1 minute??

It doesn't matter if nothing has been posted after it.
then it can be edited any time really.

If it is not the last post then editing could make follow on posts confusing.

For instance if I was praising Pascal,
and follow on posts disagreed,
so I decided to edit out my praise, giving Reason: Bad grammar.

This isn't going to help with the previously mentioned problems of chronology or denial.

Of course I would like to be able to edit my posts, but I wouldn't like other posts to be changing, so I put up with the limitations.
and try to take the time to think and proof read before posting.

Mostly I don't see a problem with asking the mods to do things, in the few cases where there might be some good reason to make changes, rather than a later correctional post.


But I think there are some specific requirements not applicable to most ordinary posts, like the physics monkey thread, or some other poster led threads although not all random threads.
Is it possible to make a moderator for just a single thread perhaps in these cases?

[MadMojoMonkey]

Is it possible to make a moderator for just a single thread perhaps in these cases?

I'm not sure I can be trusted with such powers.

For instance, I was actually a bit offended when pictures of various vacuums were posted in the physics monkey thread. Of course, that is just silly. I appreciate your sense of humor; I was just being a grouch when I saw that my 'serious' thread got 'derailed'. Really, though, it's all good... expected, even.

[Pascal]

I imagine most people won't bother giving reasons, but at least they'll know the post has been edited. If you read the last post in a thread then go back when someone replies and notice that the 2nd to last post has an edit note on it, you can re-read it to see what's changed as it might have changed the meaning of the post.

For instance if I was praising Pascal,
and follow on posts disagreed,
so I decided to edit out my praise, giving Reason: Bad grammar.

At the moment you can do this for up to 24 hours and there won't even be a note that you edited the post. Before, you could do this anytime you wanted, so I think we've made an improvement. I think we can have it so moderators/admins can see past versions of posts before the edit, so if someone did call you out on changing your post we could verify it.

I don't think a moderator for a single thread is really going to be necessary in any case. If you want to edit the initial post, just PM me the edited post and I'll replace the original for you. Giving moderator powers to people who don't know mod procedures etc opens up problems which MMM quite rightly pointed out.

Also, I said from 1 minute after because I make plenty of tiny grammar mistakes that I only notice when I read it after quick replying and then quickly edit. If you change the post within 1 minute it's more than likely no one has seen it anyway, and it's hard to change anything substantial in that time frame.