I made a change to the forum code a few minutes ago. (Hopefully I didn't introduce other new problems along with it.)
Members can only edit their posts for up to two weeks after making the original posts. Moderators and admins can edit any post at any time. So if you need to edit a post that's older than two weeks please contact a moderator.
+1. I always hate thinking there's a new addition to an old post only to find some dickweed decided to erase their post or delete a comma or something.
"Vegetarianism for me is about saying ‘yes’ to things - even meat." - Coupling
I've always liked the guys that would go back and edit their posts, to make it look as if they never said the stupid thing they said, after someone's called them on it
Weird. Not only can I not edit my own old posts......I also can not respond to old posts of others at all. If I hit the "quote" button on an old thread, it gives me the "can't do that" message. I assume you only intended to take away the ability to edit old posts and not the ability to respond to them?
And now, the links to enter the forums aren't working. LOL! I had to go in a round about wayto post this (if it even works). I guess Drew knows about this.
Edit. Never mind. It works now.
Edited by - randomprecision on 3/27/2007 11:54:30 AM
Drew, at first I thought this to be an OK, but I now question it. I just had the thought of editing my 'Get to Know your Reviewer Post', then realized that under the new system I would have to contact a moderator in order to do it (probably too much effort for me). Of course I could just add more with another post, but I'm not sure how many people interested in knowing the reviewer would continue to scroll on after reading the original post. Granted there may be little benefit to allowing posts like that to be edited months later, but when I think about it I don't really see much benefit to placing a time limit on editing. venkman's case was very obvious, but not typical. Restricting editing may not do much harm, but I doubt it does much good.
Analogous: 10 years ago or so during a Cleveland Browns game the fans tossed beer bottles onto the field after what they considered to be a bad call. It led to this big debate and I think implementation of of rules against serving beer late in the game. I saw it as beign one totally too big commotion over one incident. The debate did not include evidence of all those other games where beer bottles were not throuwn on the field.
Forgive my ignorance, but would it be possible to change forum code so that you could edit an existing post without bumping the thread to the top? So that anyone could edit their own posts at any time, but the threads they are in wouldn't be bumped unless they made an actual new post?
Or maybe could the ability to edit posts depend on whether the whole thread had been active or not in the last two weeks? It wasn't too long ago that a poll I had started months ago was active again, and I noticed that my thread-starting post had a missing word, or bad punctuation, or something like that. So I edited it to clarify. But I wouldn't have wanted to bother a moderator about fixing something like that. Again, sorry if my suggestions would be very hard or impossible to write code for.
"I pity pop culture, for it devours itself, and still wants more."
It's not hard to do that but what's the point in not bumping a thread upon an edit? We'd have no way to know that people are trashing threads which is how I perceive this behavior.
I originally thought about implementing it so any post in a thread that's been active within the past two weeks could be edited but then all someone would have to do is bump a thread with a garbage post in order to go back and delete the contents of their previous posts.
I almost wish you'd do away with the quote function, since so many people use it improperly in ways that seem annoying and eat up bandwidth for no good reason.
[Link]
the unknown pervert Deactivated User
I'd like to stay but I've got a plane to catch. 3243 Posts 5/06
Posted - Mar 29 2007 : 1:08AM
Skronk was putting your reply above the quote intentional or pure ironic bliss?
I wish quoting was required, actually....since so many people will respond with a really vague response without quoting anyone and you have no clue who they're talking to. I dunno. Maybe I'm old school. I started out on USENET when it was practically a crime to post without quoting something. Of course, netiquette changes all the time and I tired long ago of trying to keep up with what little nitpicky thing you aren't supposed to do now.
It would be easier for me to change the date range. I could set it back 30 days or 60 days instead of 14 days. Would that be enough time for most posts in trading?
I can think of a whole lot of things I said more than two weeks ago that I may one day regret and wish to erase, amend or qualify, but what the hell? If I didn't mean for it to be saved for posterity, I guess my dumb ass shouldn't have posted it.
With regard to the 'International Trading forum' there has been a debate about multiple threads by the same member recently. Sometimes a problem when old threads are revived by a new post.
I had resolved to use the same thread and simply edit it when necessary.
Personally i don't mind starting a new thread every couple of weeks (letting each thread slip down the rankings to obscurity first)...but it would be useful to be able to edit a particular post and let members know which items are sold.
I understand the need for the change, but this does put a damper on the "Porn Star/Site Index" updates, such as Leyden's excellent FTV Girls thread. Now he'll have to add a new post to the thread each time someone appears on that site, assuming nothing new has happened within 2 weeks. I liked being able to go to a single post that had all the indexed names, especially since I can't figure out a way to do a "show all posts for this thread" thing like with other forum software.
Steph explained to me that most other forums provide an option to view all of the posts in a thread on a single page. I could easily do this but I might want to cap it at threads less than 200 posts or something reasonable. We have crazy-long threads that would generate a few megabytes worth of page content if displayed on a single page. That's too much server load.
Hi Drew, yes, 180 days would be quite sufficient for the "index" type of threads. Thanks for accomodating these!
And it sounds like you've got the gist of the "show all posts on a single page" feature. I'm sure it could be problematic for extremely long threads in terms of server load, but it really is a nice feature for following the threaded conversations.
Lesbians Lessons - review by Danielmayu33216
Posted - Mar 26 2007 : 2:15PM
