Editing old posts
- ClosetIndexer
- Contributor
- Posts: 267
- Joined: 27 Feb 2012 02:20
- Location: Vancouver, BC
- Contact:
Editing old posts
Sorry if this has been asked before; a quick search didn't turn up anything.
I would like to request/suggest that the restriction on editing old posts be removed. I understand the logic behind preventing the wholesale change or removal of information once it has been cataloged, replied to, relied upon, etc. However, when I find a factual error in an old post of mine, I would like to be able to correct it, in case someone finds that post in the future (through a forum search, or even a general Google search), or even has bookmarked it, and relies on that wrong information. Currently my only option is to bump the old thread, which 1) is annoying to everyone, and 2) could even be detrimental if more people read the wrong info but don't get to the newer entry with the correction.
Even when the case is not a factual error, but rather just a greater understanding, I like to be able to update my old posts with new relevant info at the bottom - again for future readers, as well as for myself to refer back to. I imagine most would agree this is beneficial if anything.
The problem I assume is when people go back and substantially change the content of posts, rather than adding an update, beyond simply correcting an error. Personally I don't expect this would happen often enough to outweigh the benefits above. If I'm wrong though, maybe there's a middle ground. The ideal would be something like, instead of preventing editing altogether, allowing the 'update' of an old post only. Such an update would be added at the bottom of the post (not the thread) without bumping the thread. Slightly less ideal would be the ability to just reply to a thread without bumping it. Unfortunately I didn't find any preexisting phpBB extensions for either of these, but I wouldn't think the second at least would be TOO difficult. (That said, the simplest thing would just be to allow editing, perhaps adding a forum rule against wholesale modification of old posts.)
Anyway, this site is a huge public good either way, and this is a minor issue. But since it's just a minor configuration change, if there's no serious reason not to do it, I'm hoping you'll consider it. Thanks!
I would like to request/suggest that the restriction on editing old posts be removed. I understand the logic behind preventing the wholesale change or removal of information once it has been cataloged, replied to, relied upon, etc. However, when I find a factual error in an old post of mine, I would like to be able to correct it, in case someone finds that post in the future (through a forum search, or even a general Google search), or even has bookmarked it, and relies on that wrong information. Currently my only option is to bump the old thread, which 1) is annoying to everyone, and 2) could even be detrimental if more people read the wrong info but don't get to the newer entry with the correction.
Even when the case is not a factual error, but rather just a greater understanding, I like to be able to update my old posts with new relevant info at the bottom - again for future readers, as well as for myself to refer back to. I imagine most would agree this is beneficial if anything.
The problem I assume is when people go back and substantially change the content of posts, rather than adding an update, beyond simply correcting an error. Personally I don't expect this would happen often enough to outweigh the benefits above. If I'm wrong though, maybe there's a middle ground. The ideal would be something like, instead of preventing editing altogether, allowing the 'update' of an old post only. Such an update would be added at the bottom of the post (not the thread) without bumping the thread. Slightly less ideal would be the ability to just reply to a thread without bumping it. Unfortunately I didn't find any preexisting phpBB extensions for either of these, but I wouldn't think the second at least would be TOO difficult. (That said, the simplest thing would just be to allow editing, perhaps adding a forum rule against wholesale modification of old posts.)
Anyway, this site is a huge public good either way, and this is a minor issue. But since it's just a minor configuration change, if there's no serious reason not to do it, I'm hoping you'll consider it. Thanks!
Re: Editing old posts
You might want to consider your post for a finiki topic. Most threads are more blather whereas finiki is the permanent repository. On another forum that allows old post modification, some posters abuse it. I would not support it here.
For the fun of it...Keith
- Bylo Selhi
- Veteran Contributor
- Posts: 29494
- Joined: 16 Feb 2005 10:36
- Location: Waterloo, ON
- Contact:
Re: Editing old posts
Valid concerns to be sure. And yes, it was abuse of editting that gave rise to placing the restriction.kcowan wrote:You might want to consider your post for a finiki topic. Most threads are more blather whereas finiki is the permanent repository. On another forum that allows old post modification, some posters abuse it. I would not support it here.
But now consider this scenario:
Someone creates a thread about a particular topic and/or someone makes a insightful post(s) on that topic. Discussion ensues, information gets added, ideas get refined, etc. The thread grows—including lots of extraneous noise, blather, digressions, etc. Yet the meat of the thread deserves to be preserved and maintained for the benefit of others. So in due course someone creates a finiki article on this topic. Now they'd like to go back to the original thread/post simply to add a comment to advise those who find that thread via forum search (a) that the discussion has been distilled into a finiki article and (b) to provide a link to it.
How should they go about doing that?
Sedulously eschew obfuscatory hyperverbosity and prolixity.
Re: Editing old posts
If it's important enough, they should ask a moderator for help.Bylo Selhi wrote:How should they go about doing that?
finiki, the Canadian financial wiki
“It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong.” [Richard P. Feynman, Nobel prize winner]
“It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong.” [Richard P. Feynman, Nobel prize winner]
- ClosetIndexer
- Contributor
- Posts: 267
- Joined: 27 Feb 2012 02:20
- Location: Vancouver, BC
- Contact:
Re: Editing old posts
In some cases that does make sense, certainly, but there are plenty of threads that contain useful thoughts or analysis that are too niche, personalized, opinionated, etc. to be appropriate for a wiki post. For example, I recently realized the MERs I'd posted in an old bh thread with 3F regression results for some Vanguard funds did not account for acquired expenses, so added a note at the bottom. The thread was certainly too specific for a wiki post (IMO anyway), but I know people do refer back to posts with regression results fairly frequently. Plus even the wiki doesn't solve the problem that someone may find the post instead of the wiki and rely on the info, nor that it makes the forum less useful as a personal reference. I realize that last may sound trivial, as that's not the point of the forum. But consider, one strong motivation for taking the time to format and phrase analysis or research in a way appropriate to to post in the first place is that one has the ability to refer back to it later. My personal IPS has a ton of links to fwf and bh. If I have to keep track of the things I've written that were wrong in a separate manner, it becomes potentially more convenient to just use my private notes. (Not saying that I'm planning that myself or anything - I appreciate feedback and like to try and help others - just trying to illustrate why it's something to consider.)kcowan wrote:You might want to consider your post for a finiki topic. Most threads are more blather whereas finiki is the permanent repository. On another forum that allows old post modification, some posters abuse it. I would not support it here.
One other suggestion would be to allow by default but disallow for any user found to be abusing the privilege, if that turns out to be a concern. ISTM though that in most cases if someone can be trusted to write posts worth keeping, they can probably be trusted not to mangle them too.
Re: Editing old posts
The ability to modify posts ad infinitum can create considerable discontinuity in threads. Something is said, there are responses to it, and then it becomes disjointed if one or more earlier posts are substantially edited and readers are trying to make sense of it a week or month later. IMNSHO, it is one thing to be able to edit one's own material for a day or two (as currently permitted) for errors, omissions, clarity, grammar, spelling and punctuality, but not indefinitely.
finiki, the Canadian financial wiki The go-to place to bolster your financial freedom
-
- Veteran Contributor
- Posts: 5923
- Joined: 27 Feb 2005 07:14
- Location: Canada
Re: Editing old posts
Agreed, and I think one day should certainly suffice. I've seen threads where posts have been edited after I've read them and the entire context is changed.AltaRed wrote:The ability to modify posts ad infinitum can create considerable discontinuity in threads. Something is said, there are responses to it, and then it becomes disjointed if one or more earlier posts are substantially edited and readers are trying to make sense of it a week or month later. IMNSHO, it is one thing to be able to edit one's own material for a day or two (as currently permitted) for errors, omissions, clarity, grammar, spelling and punctuality, but not indefinitely.
ltr
- ClosetIndexer
- Contributor
- Posts: 267
- Joined: 27 Feb 2012 02:20
- Location: Vancouver, BC
- Contact:
Re: Editing old posts
Fair enough. I personally feel that a rule against deleting or substantially modifying (rather than adding to) old posts should be sufficient, along with removing the privilege for users who abuse it, but what I think understandably doesn't count for much!
So one last question: If I do find an important mistake in an old post of mine, is it acceptable to necro an old thread to correct myself?
Thanks for listening.
Edit (lol) : One more question. What if I could get you a simple mod that would allow old, uneditable posts to be 'updated' instead? ie, user clicks edit and gets a notice that old posts can't be modified, but they can add an update at the end instead, with an edit box to do so. Would that be a best of both worlds solution? If it would indeed be used I could look into that further. It should be a pretty straightforward mod to write.
So one last question: If I do find an important mistake in an old post of mine, is it acceptable to necro an old thread to correct myself?
Thanks for listening.
Edit (lol) : One more question. What if I could get you a simple mod that would allow old, uneditable posts to be 'updated' instead? ie, user clicks edit and gets a notice that old posts can't be modified, but they can add an update at the end instead, with an edit box to do so. Would that be a best of both worlds solution? If it would indeed be used I could look into that further. It should be a pretty straightforward mod to write.
Re: Editing old posts
If you feel strongly about one of your old posts, ask a Moderator to make the desired changes (as suggested by Adrian) and see how that works out.
For the fun of it...Keith
- ClosetIndexer
- Contributor
- Posts: 267
- Joined: 27 Feb 2012 02:20
- Location: Vancouver, BC
- Contact:
Re: Editing old posts
Just took a look for fun, and indeed there is a 2 minute modification that could be done to allow old posts to be added to, but not changed. This post in the phpBB forum explains exactly how to do it. I hope the powers that be will consider this! Would free up mods' time, and if you wanted, could let you even reduce the full edit period further, since users will still have a way to add information to older posts when necessary.
https://www.phpbb.com/community/viewtop ... #p12967862
https://www.phpbb.com/community/viewtop ... #p12967862
- The Management
- Administrator
- Posts: 437
- Joined: 15 Feb 2005 23:09
Re: Editing old posts
ClosetIndexer,
Factual errors (and typos) bedevil us all, all the time.
Management philosophy has been to stay with "software out of the box" to minimize operational and maintenance issues.
However, as has been suggested, should a factual error absolutely need correcting after 48 hours, there are two avenues: 1) add a new post, quoting the portion of the original post that contains the information to be corrected and then add the updated information, or 2) PM the Moderators to make the desired changes.
Caveat: if debate has ensued on the basis of wrong numbers or assertions, that has to be corrected with a follow-on message, not a revision of the original post.
Beyond that, if there is new information, or a substantial revision, the proper course is a new post, just as, for example, academic papers get revised at SSRN (e.g., with Fama/French regressions.) It's all good.
And, we certainly encourage you to contribute to finiki!
Factual errors (and typos) bedevil us all, all the time.
Management philosophy has been to stay with "software out of the box" to minimize operational and maintenance issues.
However, as has been suggested, should a factual error absolutely need correcting after 48 hours, there are two avenues: 1) add a new post, quoting the portion of the original post that contains the information to be corrected and then add the updated information, or 2) PM the Moderators to make the desired changes.
Caveat: if debate has ensued on the basis of wrong numbers or assertions, that has to be corrected with a follow-on message, not a revision of the original post.
Beyond that, if there is new information, or a substantial revision, the proper course is a new post, just as, for example, academic papers get revised at SSRN (e.g., with Fama/French regressions.) It's all good.
And, we certainly encourage you to contribute to finiki!
Missing Edit button in posts
I went back to correct a typo in an earlier post (made 2 days ago), but there was no Edit button. Does the Edit function disappear after some time? I know that happens on some sites, but not usually after such a short time period.
- Peculiar_Investor
- Administrator
- Posts: 13271
- Joined: 01 Mar 2005 14:52
- Location: Calgary
- Contact:
Re: Editing old posts
Per Forum rules you have 48 hours to edit, then the edit function is no longer available.
5. Any poster can edit or delete their own post after submitting it, so comments made in haste can be rephrased or deleted within 48 hours. The edit button is at the lower right side of your post and the Delete X button is to the right of your post. Please add a line indicating the nature of your edit.
finiki, the Canadian financial wiki New editors wanted and welcomed, please help collaborate and improve the wiki.
Normal people… believe that if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. Engineers believe that if it ain’t broke, it doesn’t have enough features yet. – Scott Adams
Normal people… believe that if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. Engineers believe that if it ain’t broke, it doesn’t have enough features yet. – Scott Adams
Re: Editing old posts
Ok, but perhaps 48hrs is too little.Peculiar_Investor wrote:Per Forum rules you have 48 hours to edit, then the edit function is no longer available.5. Any poster can edit or delete their own post after submitting it, so comments made in haste can be rephrased or deleted within 48 hours. The edit button is at the lower right side of your post and the Delete X button is to the right of your post. Please add a line indicating the nature of your edit.
- parvus
- Veteran Contributor
- Posts: 10014
- Joined: 20 Feb 2005 16:09
- Location: Waiting for the real estate meltdown on Rua Açores.
Re: Editing old posts
Originally it was 24 hours.
Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muß man schweigen — a wit
finiki, the Canadian financial wiki Your go-to guide for financial basics
finiki, the Canadian financial wiki Your go-to guide for financial basics
Re: Editing old posts
64 minutes ought to be enough for anyone.
-- Not Bill Gates
-- Not Bill Gates
Re: Editing old posts
I am sure there is a good reason to have a limit (although many sites do not), but a week may about right for those who don't spend 24/7 here like some of us seem to At least long enough to get over a long weekend.parvus wrote:Originally it was 24 hours.
Re: Editing old posts
IIRC, some disgruntled FWF member deleted all his posts before leaving the forum.