FRIHOST FORUMS SEARCH FAQ TOS BLOGS COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Restricting of editing posts after some time





Bondings
I would like to restrict the time you can edit posts to a short time (a few days or so), with some exceptions like the marketplace and the contests forum.

Most of the time there is no need to be able to edit your posts after a few days, definitely if the marketplace and contests forums are left out. In the other cases, I guess you can contact a staff member.

Why do I want to do this?

  • In heavy debate topics, with "you said this" arguments where previous posts get edited and similar. If you know that editing isn't allowed after a few days, this might solve a few of these issues.
  • Spammers writing normal posts, but editing it afterwards to a spam post when the topic is far down the list of new topics.
  • The same as the spammers, but instead users posting nonsense in old posts to gain points.
  • Users who don't want (or lose) hosting and remove their posts (or replace them with offensive stuff) as a revenge.


What do you think? It has already been suggested by a few members and it seems like a good thing to do to me?
ocalhoun
I wouldn't be particularly for it, at least not since I've noticed any of these particular problems happening very often.

Bondings wrote:

*In heavy debate topics, with "you said this" arguments where previous posts get edited and similar. If you know that editing isn't allowed after a few days, this might solve a few of these issues.

In this case, I think it would be sufficient to have the, "This post has been edited by ___user___ <number> times, and last edited on <date/time>." message. I have noticed though, that this message doesn't always show up.
Sometimes it does, but other times it doesn't, even for posts I know are edited. I've yet to figure out any kind of rule to explain when it will show up and when it won't.

If it was reliable, then people who edited a post to cheat in a debate would still be able to do so, but they wouldn't be able to deny doing so if called out on it.
Quote:

*Spammers writing normal posts, but editing it afterwards to a spam post when the topic is far down the list of new topics.
*The same as the spammers, but instead users posting nonsense in old posts to gain points.
*Users who don't want (or lose) hosting and remove their posts (or replace them with offensive stuff) as a revenge.

Are these things happening?
I haven't noticed them, though I haven't been looking for them either.
(And the potential editing-for-points problem could be solved by disabling points for editing, or just disabling points for editing posts over a certain age.)

I'd be for it if any of these things were a major problem, but if they aren't, then it probably wouldn't be worthwhile.
sonam
I am agree with this suggestion. Few days is enough for editing. Maybe, if is not too hard for codding, to give someone who start topic possibility to edit post for longer time. But this is not important if need hard work. Very Happy

Sonam
Bondings
The first one, I agree can be solved by better editing notices. I also don't know why the edit message rarely is displayed and it annoys me too.

About the other issues, yes those are happening, although it's hard to say how often.

In any case, the spam one is a very clever approach (it is very hard to catch, unless you check edits which is not standardly done in forum software that I know of and is rather cumbersome to check) that has been gaining more use lately. I already have been finding spam in older topics, but I am not able to say whether or not this was caused by this kind of spamming. The point is, if I were a spammer, I would definitely go for this kind of spam, so I think this is something to watch out for (in all forums).

@sonam, the problem with the first post is that it is usually the most important one. We already had a few instances of topics that were broken by the first post disappearing (all text removed or similar). Or people trying to make a joke by changing the question asked in the first post.

Also, it should not take long to implement this change, so if it is really worth it or not doesn't really matter. What rather matters is if the advantages (solving those problems) outweighs the ability to edit the posts after the first few days.
deanhills
Bondings, the short answer to your question is YES I would like to see a time restriction, but also on edits by Moderators and deleting or spam canning of posts.

I started to work on a thread about the green and red edits in the Phil&Religion and Faith forums two days ago and was going to post it tonight in the Support Forum, yet this thread seems to be very appropriate for raising the issue? If you feel it is not appropriate for this Forum, can you please move it to the Support Forum or deal with it as you think fit.

Please forgive the passion of what follows, as it has been seriously bugging me for a very long time. It needs however to be discussed, as I don't think it is good for Frihost. It is most certainly not solving any of the problems.

I don't know about anybody else, but I'm fed-up with the red and green edits/censorship of posts in the Phil&Rel and Faith Forums. I now see signs of it coming to the World News and Politics forums as well. If the edits were fixing the problems, that would have been another matter, but as far as I can see they are just making matters worse. And there are just too many of them!

Personally I would prefer all the Moderator comments to be dealt with by PM. As the Moderator comments in colour inside posters' posts are distracting and make the threads look bad, they are also not solving the problems, more like making them worse. The edits are getting people's backs up instead of taking the sting out of things. Only if they are absolutely needed and a PM would not serve the purpose, I would much rather that the comments be made in a separate posting (in an understated black and white colour) and as non-judgmental as possible, the objective being to solve the problem with the least amount of finger pointing/judgment (preferably none at all) so as to motivate people to post with constructive purpose and not to get rid of them.

The edits are also very confusing, as sometimes they are re-edited after the fact, I just can't seem to keep track of them any more. So that is why I also think that it would be a great idea to put a time restriction on Moderator edits and spam cans of all posts as well. If need be you can always override the time restriction afterwards if this is proven to be necessary.

Editing/censoring the posts also interfere with the meaning of the posts. On the RARE occasion maybe there is a need for it, but to edit out paragraphs and edit posts to the point of almost obliterating them with the [..] just doesn't make the thread look good. If one tracks the Phil&Rel Proposal Thread and reads what is left of the posts that have been edited, the posters whose posts had been shred to ribbons became more and more defiant and it just took the worst out of their behaviour, to the absolute contrary of what the intention of the edits must have been.

I'm also confused by postings that just seem to be disappearing off the radar screen from the robust Phil&Rel forum no less. If it was just the odd one, then no sweat. But there are so many of them these days! Judicious spam canning is to be commended if and when REALLY necessary, but when posts with Moderator comment in them get spam canned as well, I get a different picture. I wanted to quote the last one by Pentangeli, which must have been made around 29 December in the the Phil&Rel Proposal Thread, and then discovered that his last posting together with the one where a Moderator had climbed into his previous post in an antagonistic lengthy red comment had disappeared. It did not disappear immediately but after a length of time, at least days, so yes, I would welcome a time embargo on edits of posts, including spam canning of posts. Especially when there are so many of them.

And while we are on this topic, we are time and again warned to report acrimonious type (troll) postings instead of responding to them, but how can one not help but respond when one's non-response be interpreted as backing out of the discussion and allowing the troller to win the debate. Reporting as the Moderators' answer of taking care of trolling is also creating a problem as the reports are not confidential, get to be discussed among Moderators and next thing we get warnings and remarks like "Frihost should not allow a small number of complainers to upset everyone else" and "if 'they' are unhappy they can go post somewhere else". It is in human nature to want to shoot the messenger who brings the bad news.
truespeed
I agree with limiting the time to edit a post for the reasons given by Bondings,i get a lot of spam on my forum,usually someone signing up,making a couple of posts then returning a couple of days later to add a signature to some spam site,the only reason they can't also edit the post is because i have removed that option.
Afaceinthematrix
ocalhoun wrote:

In this case, I think it would be sufficient to have the, "This post has been edited by ___user___ <number> times, and last edited on <date/time>." message. I have noticed though, that this message doesn't always show up.
Sometimes it does, but other times it doesn't, even for posts I know are edited. I've yet to figure out any kind of rule to explain when it will show up and when it won't.


I am pretty sure that it only shows up if it was edited after someone else responded. So if I edit this post immediately after posting it, then it won't show up. But if you come by and respond and then I edit it, then it will show up.

This makes sense because what's the big deal in retracting/editing what you say before someone responds to it? It's one thing to have someone possibly respond to what you say and then change content and then it's another thing to change it before you had any response... So you're, therefore, probably trying to edit grammar/spelling/etc. rather than changing some crap that you posted because someone called you out on it...

--------------------------------------

As far as the suggestion goes, I don't really care either way. But I know that moderators have the power to edit posts (which they should). They should always retain this ability, even on five-year-old posts. However, my biggest concern is that they should retain their editing power for all posts excluding their own. So if there's a problem with their post after a few days, another moderator can handle the issue. I wouldn't want them to be able to use moderator editing in order to retract something they said - which is what you're trying to stop here...

But I don't really care either way. I never edit my posts after about ten minutes after the original posting. I usually find spelling/grammar errors within that time frame.
Ghost Rider103
I think this is a great idea and I would definitely support the idea if it gets implemented.

Only thing I was worried about is how much time it would take to implement. However you say it doesn't take much time, so I say go for it.
Related topics
Les 5 messages
What softwares are good for biulding a webpage?
islam is...
Narrow scope of forums
Correct capitalisation of FriHost?
editing posts gets you POINTS?=wha??
What exactly is the post Limit?
Photoshop Morpheus
.: Tech Flash :. register and get 15 frih$
State your Political Philosophy! (1000 FRIH$ to the best!)
register and get frih$ *offer ended*
get 10 frih per post - upto 100 frih in total
best free antivirus plus firewall
Somebody Hacking Frihost?
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> General -> Suggestions

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.