Google sponsored links
In a recent thread, someone complained that another forum user had edited posts. I thought it might be useful to have a thread in which regular A&S posters (or non-regular A&S posters) could explain how they edit their A&S posts (if at all) and whether they leave notes about the edits.
Personally, I'll edit any post without leaving a note about it if I think that no one has relied on it to make another post. No harm, no foul. If I think that someone has relied on the substance, I will note that I changed the substance in small type at the end of the post. If someone has quoted a post and I notice a typo, I will correct the typo and make a note of it at the bottom of the post, otherwise, I correct typos without leaving a note.
A few times (it's been awhile), I'll read a recent post, decide that it was too snide, and delete it. Then, I haven't left a note, but, in the future, I'll probably will leave a note explaining the deletion.
This is an archived thread, you can find the full version of this thread, with images, links and more content
here.
Ready to buy? Check out these two online bike stores:
-
http://www.nashbar.com (you can find the latest bike nashbar coupons in
this thread)
-
http://www.performancebike.com (you can find the latest performance bike coupons in
this thread)
Cya on the forums,
- The BikeForums Team
-
http://www.bikeforums.net
Tyically if I edit my posts it is for grammar, spelling, or a possible clarification. If it is a major edit (that would change or possibly be considered a change to the orginal meaning of the post I will leave a note.
Aaron:)
I edit for grammar and typos for the most part. Sometimes I may want to rephrase or add something, in which case I usually denote it with an 'Edit:'
Editing is a good thing, the issue I have is when people go back, sometimes days, weeks or months later to make edits and deletions so they won't get caught contradicting themselves.
now chippy, dont take all the fun out of using hindsight to see better out of one's ass and correct your opinion when getting caught in a contradiction!
LMAO! I actually editted that!
Editing is a good thing, the issue I have is when people go back, sometimes days, weeks or months later to make edits and deletions so they won't get caught contradicting themselves.
I moderate on another board (Airstreamforums) We had a real problem with this. What we did was limit the edit time to about 30 minutes after the intial post. If somone really, really wants to edit something out after the time limit they can PM or email a moderator to do it for them.;)
Aaron:)
I used to think I was crazy when I could swear somebody said something so then I would go back over these rather lengthy threads, usually in response to some kind of "prove I ever said that" sort of challenge, and couldn't find where it was said. Now I hear that some people actually edit their posts so they can do that to you. Those types of people go on my ignore list.
I edit my posts but only immediately afterwards if I see a typo. And if you read anything I write very carefully, you'll see I leave a lot of typos. I just don't edit after the fact very often.
I tend to edit only for typos, spelling, grammar, and, occasionally, clarification. All this is usually done right after the post posts. Very seldomly have I deleted a post, and only right after posting when I found I misread a critical comment I'd responded to or the post was too strongly worded. I'd have no problem what-so-ever with a 30 minute time limit for editing.
I've actually seen one poster here (on one of the helmet threads) which went back and deleted a week's worth of posts when his argument got too snarled. This is improper, I think. Another poster here tends to delete his OP post, leaving a thread with no head.
Some boards will automatically add "last edited by -enter user name- on -enter time and date" at the bottom of the post, so you can't get away with not indicating that an edit was made. On boards like this one that don't have that feature, I have seen other users quote posts solely to preserve the content of that post in its original form.
I think if one is making a major change to a post, or adding additional information then they should indicate EDIT:then add the new or changed info. If it is only spelling or grammar clarification then there is no need to bother.
I'll go back and edit typos or misspelled words (did I spell misspelled correctly???). Sometimes I'll add something to a message. If the post is more than a few minutes old I'll add <edit> text </edit>.
I edit my posts for stupidity. :) If anyone thinks it's unfair, all they have to do is to "reply w/ quote" and they'll have all the content they need to make a rebuttal.
I'll go back and edit typos, grammar and sentence structure if I notice that something isn't right. Unless someones already quoted it in a reply in which case I leave as is to prevent (further) confusion.
If I edit something after a fair bit of time (which varies, largely based on the amount of activity in the thread) I'll usually add an 'edit:' near the end of the post explaining that it was in fact edited and possibly why.
Then again, I don't usually get involved in vitriolic banter as I prefer to get my jollies off riding my bike not arguing with people I've never met over the Internet. :P
Just a note - the Google toolbar allows you to spell check the field you're editing. If you find you're editing for spelling a lot, consider using it and save yourself some extra effort.
Just spelling, grammar, & typos.
I edit my posts for spelling and clarity.
everbody quotes so much on here that it would be very difficult to cover your tracks by editing. Few times I've seen people do it inappropriately they get ridiculed.
I edit for clarification (rarely), typos (most common), and grammar (meh, sometimes).
It irritates me to no end when someone will delete their entire OP or take out droves of information just because it caused controversy and they're getting their ass handed to them (N_C).
EDIT: I also try to always leave a note when I've edited a post and why I edited it.
I'd fully support a time limit on editing posts.
I often edit for spelling, grammar and clarity, almost always within minutes of posting. On very rare occasions I will make a correction based on someone pointing out an error, and will acknowledge doing so one way or another (e.g., either separate post, or an "edit" comment in the original post).
I have never and will never go back and change the content of a post to change what I said in order to counter someone's claim that I said something that I wanted to deny, or something like that.
I used to think I was crazy when I could swear somebody said something so then I would go back over these rather lengthy threads, usually in response to some kind of "prove I ever said that" sort of challenge, and couldn't find where it was said. Now I hear that some people actually edit their posts so they can do that to you.
As someone who is often accused of saying things I know I have never said, I take issue with this.
Diane, with all due respect, given that you often respond in a way that clearly shows you misunderstood or greatly stretched the meaning of the words to which you are responding, even when you quote those words in your post, this is not surprising.
If you think anyone takes the time and effort to go back and find and change posts to get out of "prove I ever said that" challenges, given, as merlin pointed out, how often one's words are quoted in other's posts, perhaps you are a tad crazy.
I moderate on another board (Airstreamforums) We had a real problem with this. What we did was limit the edit time to about 30 minutes after the intial post. If somone really, really wants to edit something out after the time limit they can PM or email a moderator to do it for them.;)
Aaron:)
I hope they don't do that here. As I understand it, if there ever were a dispute, the mods have the ability to see the edit history of any post. I wouldn't want to have to pester a mod to clarify a 31-minute-old post. This is a self-regulating problem. If someone tries to get away with too much too often, they will eventually be caught.
I edit mostly for clarification or to add additional information. It's a benign type of editing. If I post, and then see that I misunderstood the topic, I might delete my post's content right away and then post a more suitable reply in its place, which I don't feel any misgivings about that either. If I post and then notice a spelling/grammar issue, I'll correct it without announcement.
Anyway, I see no harm in leaving posts editable permanently.
Typo's, spellign grammar, and if O add a thought, I annotate it with EDIT:http://www.palomides.net/images/smiles/monkes.gif
Some boards will automatically add "last edited by -enter user name- on -enter time and date" at the bottom of the post, so you can't get away with not indicating that an edit was made. On boards like this one that don't have that feature, I have seen other users quote posts solely to preserve the content of that post in its original form.
I think if one is making a major change to a post, or adding additional information then they should indicate EDIT:then add the new or changed info. If it is only spelling or grammar clarification then there is no need to bother.
This forum site used to, back a year or so ago. I don't know what happened. I wish they would turn it on again.
I once deleted 99% of my posts on a thread I started--including the original post. I had something to say about a situation I thought was wrong, and the thread denegrated into childish name-calling. Almost everyone who posted had something constructive to say--even if I didn't agree--but at least it was thoughtful and not some hot-headed childish knee-jerk response. But a couple of people made it into something entirely different, so I deleted most of my posts, and gave it to them to do whatever they wish. I felt it wasn't worth continuing along those lines, so I abandonded it, and took all my stuff with me! But I can't re-iterate enough that most of the posts were very good. It just took a few for me to quit it. And as an aside, I have seen no posts from either of these people since.
I often edit for spelling, grammar and clarity, almost always within minutes of posting. On very rare occasions I will make a correction based on someone pointing out an error, and will acknowledge doing so one way or another (e.g., either separate post, or an "edit" comment in the original post).
I have never and will never go back and change the content of a post to change what I said in order to counter someone's claim that I said something that I wanted to deny, or something like that.
As someone who is often accused of saying things I know I have never said, I take issue with this.
Diane, with all due respect, given that you often respond in a way that clearly shows you misunderstood or greatly stretched the meaning of the words to which you are responding, even when you quote those words in your post, this is not surprising.
If you think anyone takes the time and effort to go back and find and change posts to get out of "prove I ever said that" challenges, given, as merlin pointed out, how often one's words are quoted in other's posts, perhaps you are a tad crazy.
I call BS
I like to go in and edit Chipcoms post. Just to mess with his head! :p
This is how I edit my posts; if the typing area is not wide enough for a car and cyclists to share, I edit my posts so they are down the middle of the area. Isn’t that the way we are supposed to edit?
(Seriously I never noticed that I could go back and edit so I haven’t.)
. Maybe we should all post
. to the right as far as
. possible............
I can't explain it, but there is something about the way I write that causes many people to read into it things that I did not mean. They're the ones convinced I go back and change my posts when they can't find what they "swear" I wrote earlier. Ultimately, I recognize it's my problem to solve. But the harder I try to be precise about exactly what I mean, the more this seems to happen. So I don't know how to solve it. What gets me is that there are a few people with whom I don't have this problem.
What gets me is that there are a few people with whom I don't have this problem.
Yes, the few "perceptive" individuals who have posted a statement that you interpreted as "brilliant" for "supporting" one of your theories, or accepted one of your wacky "premises" for the purpose of debate.
HH posts enough that if he made improper edits to his posts, he would have been caught by now. In any case, if you think he's cheated, you might be able to convince a mod to show his edit history. If they won't do it without his consent, ask for his consent.
Edited to remove typo. Irony noted.
HH posts enought that if he made improper edits to his posts, he would have been caught by now. In any case, if you think he's cheated, you might be able to convince a mod to show his edit history. If they won't do it without his consent, ask for his consent.
What's "improper" or "cheated"? IAW what rules? Why should mods care or not if HH or anybody else edited their own posts as they saw fit? Who cares?
HH posts enought that if he made improper edits to his posts, he would have been caught by now. In any case, if you think he's cheated, you might be able to convince a mod to show his edit history. If they won't do it without his consent, ask for his consent.
Not only that, but I'm essentially saying the same theoretical things over and over, just in different words and adjusted to be effectively illustrated with respect to whatever particular situation we might be discussing.
Anyway, I don't get why people spend the time to come to this forum, look at the words that others post, but not really read them. Actually, even that would be fine. But then they take the time to write about their lazy (mis)interpretion of what the other said...that's what I don't get. Why not take the little extra effort it takes to actually understand what that person actually meant, instead of starting a debate with essentially an imaginery position, being called on it, then thinking they're crazy when they're unable to find the words they would swear they had read earlier?
This forum needs an enema.
Grammer and typos I take care of whenever I find them. A really stupid original post I will delete and leave a note to the moderators as to why. When I have been called on a dumb post. a few times, I own up to it in a following post and delete the OP. I am not keen on controversy so I tend to avoid hot button topics.
Previous -
Top -
Next
Copyright 1999 - 2007
BikeForums.Net - All rights reserved.
Common bike forum topics in clue bicycles, cycling, mountain biking,
cycling jerseys, shorts, socks, shoes and bike equiptment selection.