Editing of posts is once again limited

[DocJohn]

After having 4+ months of experience with this and further discussion amongst the Community Team here, we've once again decided to place a time limit on members editing their own posts, a behavior that is consistent with the vast majority of online communities.

We have changed this from "unlimited" time to 12 hours because a few members have been abusing this privilege to 'change history' in controversial threads, or threads where things have gone in a direction the member didn't care for. It was creating very difficult and time consuming moderation situations where a post was reported for an issue, but then changed or removed by the original poster to make it look like there was no issue. Or a moderator would go in and remove something inconsistent with our community guidelines, only to find the poster goes back and changes it back later on. And so on. The Community Team can't do their job here if the floor keeps moving under their feet.

When some members abuse the privilege, we have to take action to stop threads from becoming nonsensical or inconsistent with the community guidelines. An online thread is a conversation or a discussion that occurs at a specific time in a specific place.

Specific posts can still be edited outside of 12 hours by a moderator or administrator if you so request via PM.

As always, thank you for your continuing support,
John

[Curious]

Thank you DocJohn. :)

For the members who post medical information (articles and such) that may need updating: by quoting your original post and adding the changes, your post will show as a new post. Members will then see the new information. Going back and editing old posts keeps in where it was. Not many go back and ever read old posts.

[Julie]

Thanks DocJohn.

[Chemar]

thanks Doc

this really was a needed change

just a reminder that for any member who wants something in a post of theirs edited....just PM one of us mods and we will review the request and make the edits for you where needed.

[loisba]

Much appreciated! I can remember on OBT people getting their feelings hurt over something, and going back and deleting all of their old posts, essentially erasing some very valuable information.

[Lara]

a few members have been abusing this privilege to 'change history' in controversial threads, or threads where things have gone in a direction the member didn't care for. It was creating very difficult and time consuming moderation situations where a post was reported for an issue, but then changed or removed by the original poster to make it look like there was no issue. Or a moderator would go in and remove something inconsistent with our community guidelines, only to find the poster goes back and changes it back later on. And so on. The Community Team can't do their job here if the floor keeps moving under their feet.

loisba, I've deleted posts on forums because of certain circumstances, not to go out of my way to create chaos or trouble, but because I felt unsafe. Admin. know about that and they knew why.

There are circumstances which some people might never know anything about where a poster might need to delete their posts. That is different from a few members changing their posts so that the message ends up being a totally different one on controversial threads as DocJohn has described above. Not everyone edits or deletes their posts in a manner which creates chaos or to cause trouble, but I've certainly seen people on forums do that. Sometimes members have extremely serious, personal and valid reasons for editing or deleting a post which many other members might have absolutely no idea what those reasons are all about. I've also noticed that certain banned members on some forums have all their messages removed. That can change the flow of conversation too! (Understatement) lol

Heck, I've had an awful day. Perhaps I'm not understanding correctly what the original message is, but I read it as being about abuse of the system, not use of the system.

[Chemar]

hi Lara :)

yes, the reason for this change is to stop abuse of the editing feature, fpr the reasons Doc outlined above

At any time, if you or any member want posts edited or deleted, all you have to do is contact one of the mods or admin and we will do what we can to help
We all have valid reasons sometimes for deletions or edits, and so we do want members to know we will help when this is needed.

[Burntmarshmallow]

I erased every one of my posts at obt before it crashed, and glad I did.
I guess I am one of those guilty posters :eek: .
Peace
BWM ...Tina

[Chemar]

Let's remember to stay on track here...this is about editing here not what was done on obt or why:D


Once again, if members want edits or deletions after the 12 hour self edit has passed, just contact us and we wil be glad to help with all valid requests:)

[Bobbi]

So true, and I plead guilty to doing so in the past: Deleting...

My reasoning was, if I posted something about a physician or something that could lead folks to recognizing themselves in what I noted (even without citing their names), I considered the effects on others. I didn't want what I was stating - within the context of "support forums" - to have a possible adverse effect on the treatment I'd receive from physicians and others. I waited (some time - generally weeks to months and when my posts were far off the main pages) and deleted.

At times, I also did so for retaining privacy, since seach engines tend to cache so much personal data that I may not want trailing me for the rest of my existence.

I thought, if the purpose is peer support, I don't want to hurt myself or my care in the process of also seeking support and insights from others ;).

I know I've not deleted for the purpose of altering the context or flow of a discussion, though.

It was the possible impact of how my words might be used to hurt (not help) me.

I do tend to think about what I've written before hitting the "post" button, but... there are still those times that I prefer not to have a life-long reminder of things that may be particularly painful.

[Chemar]

Bobbi

if you come across anything that needs deletion, please just submit a request to a mod of that forum or to me or KimmyDawn and we will assist

the purpose of the new rule isnt to restrict members who need valid deletion or editing of their posts after the 12 hour window

it is so that posts that HAVE been edited by mods or under mod request cannot then again be re-edited by OP to return what was edited out or to add new stuff and also to prevent people from editing their posts in order to change a discussion where they have elicited responses to their post etc etc
ie to prevent abuse of editing/deleting rather than correct use of the feature

[Lara]

the purpose of the new rule isnt to restrict members who need valid deletion or editing of their posts after the 12 hour window

With all due respect and I mean that... it can affect how members post, especially things of a personal nature.

I'm just wondering if this time limit on the edit feature, which also means the delete feature, is going to be permanent?

thanks. :)

[Lara]

My edit feature still works. Does this mean it's a good time to delete messages??? LOL ;)

I just did a check. Edit works on my posts from after the 6th March just fine which is the day DocJohn posted the message. Well it was maybe the 5th for you all, but I'm a day ahead here where I live and it shows the 6th. Posts prior to that have no Edit button.

[Chemar]

G'day Lara :)

Doc would have to answer re the permanence of the 12 hour edit window

I hope the mods here have proven that we are always accessible and willing to help, so you can rest assured that all you would have to do is contact me or any other mod, or KimmyDawn, and we will delete and/or edit for you if you no longer wish to have something left on the boards:p

[kimmydawn]

Yep, I will help anyone in any way that I can.

I've already had a couple of PM's for an edit and it's worked out just fine. I always respond and ask that it was done how the member wished, etc. Don't ever hesitate...even if it's a typo that's just irritating. ;)

We volunteer because we care. We care to keep these forums as safe as possible for those who need them, but we care about the individual experience as well. I think I can speak for all of us on that.

We're here and available to you...even in the small ways.

KD

[Jo*mar]

Just a bump up - so all have a chance to see it.

[Lara]

me again. I keep thinking about this. I'm not arguing, I'm just trying to understand the logic of doing it this way as well as the effects it might have on people posting.

Wouldn't it be more logical to give a warning to the couple of people who _are_ abusing the edit feature and leave everything as it is?

Surely that would be less time consuming in the long run? I'm fully aware that we can post to a Moderator to have our posts changed, because people keep saying that, but that isn't the point to me. The point is that all the other 99% of users who are doing the right thing have no control over their words because of a tiny minority.

moot point I suppose.

I guess nobody read my message about how my edit feature was still working yesterday...

[Chemar]

hi Lara

sorry, I mustve been posting at approx the same time as you the other day and so did not see your 2nd message

not sure why the edit button is still working after 12 hrs...Doc will be the one to check that

just remember, PM me if you need any changes made:) ....it would be great if it werent necessary to have this restriction, but I can honestly assure you it was needed for a number of reasons. As you have seen here at NT...we do go out of our way to keep the members happy:D and would not have risked irking any over this had it not been very necessary

[test_account]

Well, let's try this out then, shall we......

[Bobbi]

Thanks Chemar & KimmyDawn :).

:grouphug:

Lara, I also see that the "edit" option is still available my other post in this thread:

[mrsD]

A certain other forum, is following suit.

However, the reason given there is very strange. Can anyone here verify that
unlimited edits eat server space? Is this true?

I can understand removing "abuse" potential. I would think that the Quote function takes more server space than edit.

I'll even share this one with you all:
I joined another venue recently, and they use vBulletin too. Only another skin.
The posting window is VERY small, so I hit enter and start a new line out of habit, I guess when I hit the edge. So I got an email from the admin after about 10 posts saying don't post in short sentences...it eats space. ???? So I looked at all the other posters, and they QUOTE every single post over and over and my 1 inch long post is the SHORTEST of all of theirs which are many inches long! Quoting the same posters over and over...makes the threads there very long and hard to read. But my 4 sentence post gets tagged? How weird is that? Needless to say I am not posting there anymore.

[Chemar]

hmmmmmmmmmm
I too am puzzled by the reasoning of server space and the edit window mrsD

maybe someone who understands vBulletin can shed insight on that

however, here is was purely a case of it becoming very hard for mods to keep track of old posts being edited in ways against guidelines or to change the history of threads in their favor after the fact etc

just adding again that members who need edits or deletes should just contact the mods of their forums or myself or KimmyDawn and we will help wherever we can, whether it is a spelling correction, link update or removal of personal info etc . No reasonable offer refused :)

[DocJohn]

Honestly, anyone who is micromanaging their community to this extreme and worrying about 10 bytes versus 100 bytes per message suggests that either they are on a very limited hosting plan (and therefore can't support much growth in the community without falling over badly), or have very limited hardware. I find such arguments frustrating and very "1990's" in this day and age where I can buy 250 GB drives for under $100.

So the answer is, no, edits do not take up any significant additional server space and that's a completely bogus reason.

We will always keep up with our user's demands here at Neurotalk. Post as much as you'd like, it's MY job to ensure you have a reliable, secure and expandable platform to do so. If I don't do my job, then I'm failing as a community host.

Remember, computers are about helping people and giving them more power, not asking people to change their behaviors to meet the computers' needs.

John

[mrsD]

I suspected that excuse (eating server resources) the minute I read it... as a red herring.

I could smell it all the way thru my terminal! :thud:

I appreciate the confirmation and so do others as well! ;)

[loisba]

I for one really appreciate the limiting of edits. It prevents abuse of the system, editing posts so much that you are left wondering what the whole thing was about, or wondering what potentially useful information was deleted. I have known situations where it was like a kid that got mad and said, "I'm taking my toys and going home!" I know that if I ever did need to go back in and edit something, that one of our nice mods would be glad to do it, assuming I have a good and valid reason for doing so.

[Chemar]

yes....Lois....some did do that, but in fairness some people also delete their posts for very valid reasons ranging from protectiveness of their privacy to realising after the fact that they wished they hadnt made the post or many other good reasons

once again...we are here to help with edits and deletes when needed:)

[DocJohn]

Ok, I found out what the problem was... I had an extra zero on the edit time, making it more like 7 days than the intended 12 hours. All fixed now, thank you.

John

[OneMoreTime]

Honestly, anyone who is micromanaging their community to this extreme and worrying about 10 bytes versus 100 bytes per message suggests that either they are on a very limited hosting plan (and therefore can't support much growth in the community without falling over badly), or have very limited hardware. I find such arguments frustrating and very "1990's" in this day and age where I can buy 250 GB drives for under $100.

NOW I understand why the archives have not gone back up and probably never will. Server space. When someone doesn't use a hosting service, but instead maintains his own stacks in a basement.... VERY limited to what you have in the way of the space (photos showed very crowded area). And tons of gigs of space now perhaps otherwise devoted to other ventures??

And the search function possibly sucks a lot more bandwidth, maybe leading to crashes. The archives were an entire web resource and brought in many people. But maybe he could bring in Google to index and maintain the search capabilities for the site?

just popping in... will drop in again in a few months again... nice to see so many familiar "faces" ...

[Chemar]

Hi OMT

I assume you are referring to the original BRAINTalk archives? Because here at NEUROTalk the archives are safe and easily accessible by everyone, members and guests alike! :)

[mrsD]

since OBT changed its banner to say est. 1993.

I was surprised at that. So I looked and looked for links from old forums.
Then I thought well, maybe they were not public but only retrievable from
MGH by MGH patients in the beginning. Still nothing.

So I went to Wayback Archives. By fiddling around there--- which I find difficult and slow BTW--- I discovered something very interesting.

I found the very first posts when the 1997 forum opened. It was on 10-10-97.
This is the forum I called the "first" forum, since many of us old timers started out then. I joined there in late 97 early 98 myself. It was a pretty rough place, with insults flying, mean petty posting, and endless flames.

So I checked the first posts on several forums there on Wayback. I found JL posting a short welcome. Then on Spinal Disorders I found a very telling post.
I won't copy it here, you can PM me for it if you want. It was a couple of days later, and it opined: "Why can't we have the data from the first THREE forums that we worked so hard on then?" It went on to say, details about the previous 3 formats then. So the opening of the 1997 forum was in reality the FOURTH forum by MGH and JL. And the data was NOT restored for use.
That was in 1997. It appears that a pattern was in place even then, 10 yrs ago, to just drop previous work and efforts with no explanation. I think it is very possible that we will never see the archives. I suspect they were never
backed up, or that the personal intent of JL is to never make them available,
and just move on.(as he has done in the past more than once).

And I think I mispoke my earlier question here. The "excuse" for changing the edit function there was SPEED not space. Being the computer dope that I am, I didn't understand that fine point. It appears there is enough SPACE to have all our chatroom graphics on that server. Yep, they are there. Only we cannot use them, only the forum admin is using them now. Just right click on the graphics he uses and you will see the address. If you try a general index address however it says forbidden.

Also anyone can search Google and find vBulletin.org forum posts on how to
optimize speed on vBulletin. There are many complex ways to accomplish it, but none of the long lists of computerese fixes includes changing the time on the edit button. The number of registered posters at OBT is not great at any one time. I have seen 60-80 on average. How many do you think are editing at any one time? Maybe none, or maybe 2 or 3 at most? Some drain.:rolleyes:

I am reminded of this quote by Galileo:
"All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them."

I really appreciate this forum for its forthright approach to this issue.
At least the truth is more forthcoming here. I may not agree with the new policy, but I can respect its need. And the availability offered to help, is
appreciated as well.

[michael178]

whoops. now my grammar and poor spelling is exposed, thanks for the explanation. I wondered how I was able to get away with post submission editing.

[waves]

deleted posts before? guilty. child running away? sure. emotional reaction? sure. strong even unreasonable emotional reaction? you bet your boots. mental illness? yeahhh........

i think this edit limit is crummy.

my "post deletion" runs usually occur when i'm feeling like doo doo and want to hide under the bedcovers and if i could get into the very fibre of the dern covers i probably would, you know? the last thing i'd need would be to have to contact someone to delete my own words, which may bother me despite not being "bothersome" or, vice versa. In any event, in this sort of vulnerable state, in my hidey-hole state, i would not contact anybody, but rather, leave my post(s) there and feel prey to its/their persistence.

ok, that's my own failing... feeling, my own problem. Administration is not responsible for my feelings, obviously. But with this limit i feel much less "safe" about posting. AT ALL. I am currently pretty scarce, due to other things. But should i come to post more, it would affect me... a lot... i'd be afraid to share, period.

i came to know of this change, and see that others are upset by it for various reasons. so i figure mine is as good as any. two cents.

~ waves ~

[Lara]

waves to waves ~~~ :Wave-Hello:

G'day waves,
I just wanted to tell you that it is absolutely not a failing to feel emotional or unsafe or vunerable nor is it a sign of being a failure or of being weak. It's a part of being real and being human and being sensitive. I certainly understand your feelings and please know that you're not alone.

[loisba]

Thanks for that very honest reply, waves. I definitely can empathize, having had my own moments of feeling like doo. My previous comment about people acting like children who get their feelings hurt and take their 'toys' and go home was perhaps not expressed well enough. I was remembering another community where someone felt mad, hurt, whatever, and went back in and deleted, as far as I could tell, every single post they had ever made, some of which was very valuable information.
Of course, that is a very extreme reaction, and most posters don't go to such extremes! I certainly can understand your personal concerns.
Hugs,

[bizi]

Has anyone asked the time limited be extended to 24 hours?
Please Please Please..or did I miss that already?
bizi

[kimmydawn]

Yep, it's being discussed. :)

thank you!

KD

[kimmydawn]

Thanks, bizi.

We're going to keep the editing posts time at 12 hours for now. We'll revisit again after a while to see how it's working, not working, what the need it still, etc.

Again, I want everyone to feel comfortable to request edits needed. Just say what the change needs to be. We're all here to help.

KD

[bizi]

please please please think about 24 hours as there are folks who only post at night and this would not allow them to change their posts being 12 hours.
thank you kimmy dawn for trying to push the issue along if anyone can change this you can
thank you for this.
bizi

[waves]

i second and third and fourths Bizi's plea for 24 hours.

i sometimes need to take meds which knock me out... FOR WELL OVER 12 hours.

and i am not the only one...

and, at the risk of repetition:
i do not feel comfortable with this edit-via-mod thing.
i shall not be asking for edits.
i shall refrain from posting any med info.

i used to post a lot re meds, answers etc. where accuracy is essential. we all make mistakes, and i suffer from toggle syndrome at times: eg, you say "lower" rather than "higher." with meds, bad bad info can result. and would have to be edited, and possibly bumped. about the only thing i could think of i could possibly ask a mod. but it just feels wrong, all wrong. note i said feels.

no, i don't post much of anything here lately but... others do... others are sensitive and vulnerable too.

Wouldn't 24 hours already be pretty restrictive?

~ waves ~ sadly :( :confused: :(

[Chemar]

bizi and waves......

have you sent a PM to DocJohn to explain your feelings and the reasons why a 24 hour edit window is so important to you?

[dahlek]

after a reasonable amount of time...I guess would depend on how much you trust the mods? In that quarter, HERE I have no problem with that AT ALL. Other places, well, the mods can and have been 'inconsistent' at best. Still other places exert a sort of benign neglect unless a complaint is lodged against the initial poster [usually probably because another poster believes the initial poster is WRONG...or disagrees with facts that contradict their own beliefs]

I understand the meds fog thing, it takes a toll on a very many of us. At least this way, options at a later date/time are not totally out of the question. I believe it's all designed as a courtesy to the MODS, after all, they are the ones who make sure we all 'behave'. Good manners all around, essentially. I believe the whole of board participants adhere to these principles and that's what makes it all healthy.

Thanks for all the work folks! - j

[waves]

I understand the meds fogyeah but *meds fog* is quite different from being unconsious.when i take heavy stuff at times i can be out cold for a full 16 hours. unmedicated i've been out cold longer after days running on air.
__________________________

after a reasonable amount of time...I guess would depend on how much you trust the mods?for me trusting mods has absolutely nought to do with this, the issue is me.
deleted posts before? guilty. child running away? sure. emotional reaction? sure. strong even unreasonable emotional reaction? you bet your boots. mental illness? yeahhh........trust mods? sometimes; here, usually. deleted posts after a long time? yeah. paranoia? sometimes, even bad.mental illness? yeahhh... isn't that what this support forum is about.

There is nothing wrong with the mods effecting a change for me; there is everything wrong with my having to contact someone.my "post deletion" runs usually occur [COLOR="Red"]when i'm feeling like doo doo and want to hide under the bedcovers [...] the last thing i'd need would be to have to contact someone to delete my own words. [...] in this sort of vulnerable state [...] i would not contact anybody, but rather, leave my post(s) there and feel prey to its/their persistence.Administration is not responsible for my feelings, obviously. But i see no harm in expressing how this change would affect me... and to what extent. And it would to where I'd be afraid to share.

best regards

~ waves ~

[dahlek]

BUT an experience I'd had on another board, was, ultimately a good one in the end. I'd posted a somewhat harsh reaction to some comments. After I'd pushed the 'submit' button...I'd tried to delete that post and couldn't edit nor amend. I'd appealed to the mods and received a very kind response that: While the comments were acerabit [my form of humor mostly] the issues/concerns voiced by me [even in that state of mind] were really VALID. Sometimes...even when we're drugged out of our normal selves...well, maybe good viewpoints just 'come out'? As long as it doesn't hurt others, or deter others from comments...well, to me-it's good!
To discuss, and openly is healthy! To let ego come into play, well, some/many of us can 'blame' our meds? I am sure I'm not the only guilty one here, nor will I be the last. I tend to think that it may not be 'ego'....more likely ANGER. Anger at what we have, what can and can't be done, at the time it takes to diagnose and that while lots is being done 'research' wise, well, little of it is gonna affect me NOW nor in the next 10-15 years....NOT ENUF in my book, but, I am one mere member of this community.

I'm comfortable w/the mods in the areas I usually post in. Concerns in my quarter of this community have always been dealt with tactfully and in reasonable timeframes... I admit that at times, I have been at fault-and I have been approached and addressed issues to a usual mutual satisfaction.

I guess in the end it all means that we, AS A GROUP, are trying to work out the middle ground as best we can. I sure hope we can.

Good thoughts for all! - j

[Jo*mar]

Remember too, that if a correction or added information is needed to update an older post - you can just quote that post and note the new info or corrected info in the new reply.
Then the new info would be bumped up also.

[waves]

Remember too, that if a correction or added information is needed to update an older post - you can just quote that post and note the new info or corrected info in the new reply.
Then the new info would be bumped up also.This is especially important with scientific info. i often quote the corrected excerpt, or make some note as to what the correction was (in the new post) and link back explicitly to the old post.

[bizi]

I guess I did not think I needed to write Doc john personally about this as I thought he was reading this thread and I know that kimmy dawn has responded and other mods as well.
How much harm could there be from 12 to 24 hours or is it the principal of the matter?
jsut curious.
bizi

[Chemar]

Hi bizi :)

I was just recommending a PM as well as it is something that is clearly important to you

sometimes a personal PM can convey a point in a way that maybe a long thread cant kwim:o

:hug:

[waves]

Dear Dahlek,

you make some interesting considerations.

it seems you have had a pretty positive experience with meds and mods (lol) ... i shall make treasure of this.

mine, and i believe Bizi's, immediate concern is one of basic arithmetic. a medication has an effect for a certain duration of time. depending what and how much we take we can be knocked out past the edit window.

this problem would be resolved to a large extent if the edit limit were brought up to 24 hours.

There have been times where i have been dead as a log (not med fog, log, kerplunk. kaput. thonk. total narcosis) for 14 hours, and, now that you mention it, foggy afterwards for about six hours with apparent and most unfortunate immunity to caffeine, to boot! if only my boss had been a forum admin... sigh. prime time tv? who? but i digress: this situation 12 hours edit vs. 14 med that gives me what, no viable hours to change or delete posts, and very few viable hours in a single day to do all my viablility-requiring things.

You also mention the med fog. That unfortunately is also a problem as Bizi alludes to in her post at our forum (http://neurotalk.psychcentral.com/showpost.php?p=81837&postcount=5). I shall say here from my personal experience, i also have post-drugginess effects from Ambien, especially if awoken too soon.

take care Dahlek. Thanks for your thoughts.

~ waves ~

[waves]

Doc John: if you are reading, please consider - reconsider re-re-consider our requests for the increase of the edit window to a twenty four hour limit on the trial run.

Chemar: i only just gleaned a sort of suggestion to be synthetic... a short note... then again some of our posts are that. but i think i understand better what you are trying to say than when i first saw your post.

I guess I did not think I needed to write Doc john personally about this as I thought he was reading this thread and I know that kimmy dawn has responded and other mods as well.
How much harm could there be from 12 to 24 hours or is it the principal of the matter?
jsut curious.
bizicouldn't have put this better, and the same is true for me. i have been in touch by pm and by posting on this issue, to members all including powers that be.

maybe i'll just forward him some links, heh. (silly me).

~ waves ~ seriously ~ the 24 hours would help.

[kimmydawn]

There are a few bonuses for having a time limit.

1) It prevents a member from getting angry and deleting all their posting...changing history and leaving huge holes in the forums.

2) It prevents posts from getting so long from added information that they become difficult to read, so adding another post to the thread helps many in their reading and understanding.

3) It prevents history from being changed in conflict.

4) It allows moderators to do their job more effeciently with a "real time" perception.

I could go on about the "reasons" for an editing limit.

12 hours has been chosen as a reasonable editing time limit. As I've stated before...some communities only allow for 1 hour.

I'll say again, when you PM a mod, you don't have to give "whys"...just ask. Alot of times a request might not even be necessary because you can add additional information or correction in another post/response.

When posts are edited alot to add information, it's missed alot of the time because it doesn't show up as a new post to flag for the member reading, so when you go back and add to an older post alot of the time the additional (and maybe really important) information is missed. For that reason alone, with or without the edit limit, I think it's a good idea to create a new post within a thread for additional information to *really* get it out there.

If you have difficulties due to meds or illness, don't hesitate to shoot a friend, mod or admin a PM and have them read your post for you within the 12 hour limit. They can give you their feedback in the time allowed. Again, if you choose not to do that, you can clarify in a subsequent post.

To sum up, there are alot of reasons for the limit, and 12 hours will remain that limit for now.

I can't express enough that it just takes a quick PM saying, "Hey, will you remove, change, edit this post for me in this manner?" No one is here to question why you want it done. Dahlek mentioned that she wanted that done and the mod thought it should stay. It's not up to us to determine that (as long as it's in the guidelines and doesn't drastically change the history of a thread). In other words, it's not up to us to judge the reasoning unless it's an extreme, or out of the ordinary, request.

If you feel you can't or won't ask for an edit, you can always add a correction, or expand, in a following post.

Again, the 12 hours will stand for now but we will revisit it at a later date. If you don't feel comfortable asking a mod/admin who have stated time and again that we're here for you in any manner we can be, or please feel free to make your own corrections in a subsequent post.

Thanks!

KD

[redjpwranglergirl]

I haven't replied on this thread yet because even though when a time limit was first discussed, I voted for a very short time limit for posts to be changed. But, I was in the minority so it wasn't a big deal- I could go along with what the majority wanted. My reasons were coming from what I saw go on for several years at "another forum that will remain nameless"- precisely #3 on kimmydawn's list. Maybe it didn't go on on all forums so it wasn't a problem on them. But, it caused a HUGE problem on the "nameless" forum.:mad: And granted, it wasn't something that everybody on there was guilty of-in fact, a huge majority of the members never did it- just 2 or 3 people- and I'm happy to say that "that" doesn't appear to happen here as often as it did over "there"- especially in the last few months. People who presumed themselves in charge of the forum would purposely start fights or say really hateful things to others on there and then if their post wasn't going over too well, they'd edit out what they'd said or done and then go, "who me"?! Please...give me a break....But I do understand the reasons of those who've posted here in favor of a longer limit. But the "rewritting of history" to appear "innocent" later was my main reason for being against unlimited time to edit posts.

[glenntaj]

--of the possibility that in controversial situations, people who have flamed others may well go back, if there is no editing time limit, and "change history" to make it look as if they have been completely innocent.

One thing that I have taken the precaution of doing--in any situation in which I want to have proof of what was being said/not said in a particular thread, I copy the thread into a Word document, as is. Should it become necessary (e.g., should the thread be significantly altered), I can always PM the thread to a moderator as an attachment, so that the moderator can see that the attached document has not been edited or altered since it was copied verbatim from the board (Word doc contain records of such edits).

I don't like having to this--I realize it has a taint of paranoia--and indeed have only done several times my whole Internet history. But those several times it was invaluable in being able to prove what had gone down interactively, and I think it may have discouraged some flamers from flaming again (at least at those sites).

[waves]

There are a few bonuses for having a time limit.why do i feel like i'm in a car dealership. great transmission, just listen to that engine, great transmission, leather seats, great transmission, great mileage, single-user owned, you're gonna love it. and all the while i am asking about airbags.

i'n so tired of hearing the rote phrases... - "contact mod" "contact MOD-ER-A-TOR" "polly wanna moderator" "contact admin" "mod and admin so kind" etc etc... i think i will need a forum holiday even an internet holiday perhaps. i have parrot speak in my head. Someone says "i can't ask", and the response is always "ask" with some endearing verbal condiments.

That said, i accept administrative policy and no more "but"ing in. I have posted not to offend but only expose my issues. Unfortunately i don't feel heard but that is now moot. simply, i take note.
12 hours has been chosen as a reasonable editing time limit. As I've stated before...some communities only allow for 1 hour.I am amazed at this comparison to other forums. 1, 12, 24, 36, square root of minus 2, unlimited whatever. hopefully deliberation of the new edit limit here was based only on what to do here, and not BrainTalk or elsewhere.you can always add a correction, or expand, in a following post.if my reasons (quoted in this thread) against this policy had been truly understood, it might occur to one that posting about a "scary" post is often worse - it bumps the thread. :eek:

Med/info posts are different. heck i've had other members post contact ME if i made a slip and i've gone and corrected it, and quoted the correction in a new post specifically to bump the thread. i have NOO problem with a MOD doing this for me....Why? Again, it is not emotionally charged.

when you PM a mod, you don't have to give "whys"my asking anyone be it a mod admin or my best bud, if i'm in a non-contact emotional state is like.....

Hello??? Would you ask someone in a wheelchair to walk??? Bipolar Disorder, while not a physical limitation has deep emotional limitations.

its time for another walk around the block for me. I never thought i'd participate so much in forum feedback, and it has stressed me off my patootie.

Kimmy if i sound upset, i am. it is to be expected, but i know...

[B]you can't please all of the people all of the time.
Again, the 12 hours will stand for now but we will revisit it at a later date. Good. I liked that part.

Can we have a poll when we revisit?

best regards,

~ waves ~ from (to be determined)

[jccgf]

.

Can we have a poll when we revisit?

A past poll has already determined that the majority desires unlimited editing, but administrative concerns have trumped that. I'm sure a future poll would probably show the same thing. At this point, I think we're going to have to try to learn to live with an edit limit despite many of us not liking it.

http://neurotalk.psychcentral.com/showthread.php?t=1481&highlight=edit+limit

I don't like the limit either. I hadn't posted on this thread so far because I've made feelings known in the past.

I'm learning to live with uncorrected typos, uncorrected grammar mistakes, and trying to remember not to post about my children's personal symptoms/experiences...something I later like to remove for their privacy.

Like you, waves, but perhaps for a different reason, I don't feel comfortable asking the moderators to edit my posts. I just don't like to bother people for something that is generally insignificant, even if I'm being told repeatedly it is no bother at all. Seriously, I think they would tire of me asking for help to dot my i's and cross my t's, change their to there, know to now, and correct my spelling mistakes because I neglected to spell check, reword my sentence so the tenses match or my verbs are in agreement, or because better wording might be clearer, or to add an inadvertently omitted word, etc. Although seeing my mistakes cast in stone makes me a little crazy, that is my issue. Nobody else gives a hoot. My paper isn't being graded here. I'm learning to live with my mechanical errors, so I guess it is helping to reduce my obsessiveness in that area. Maybe good therapy.

My pasts concerns about trying to keep informative threads organized are no longer a big concern for me because I keep all that on another format now (googlepages). I understand that frustration for others because I've spent so much time in the past keeping data organized and in an easily usable form.

As for corrections of substance, it seems to me that corrections are best made at the source (as well as bumped as an alert), rather than making a correction six pages into a thread, where over time they may never be seen because someone may lose interest in reading a long thread before they get there. Many people aren't reading these forums in real time, so they may not notice the 'bumped' correction that is buried in the midst of a long thread. They may be reading threads that were written months and eventually years ago.

There are all sorts of pro's and con's for a time limit. I think it is unfortunate that the freedom of the whole has to suffer because of problems caused by a few, but that happens in real life, too. I guess we just have to try to adjust, and for me, it hasn't been a big problem thus far. I would still prefer unlimited editing, though, for the record.

Cara

BTW.. I have probably edited this at least 12 times to make corrections, and I'm sure I have still missed a few that I won't see for days. :Doh:

[loisba]

I just happened to notice a post that had been edited by Chemar though not posted by her. http://neurotalk.psychcentral.com/showthread.php?t=16554
I'm assuming that this was at the request of the poster after the editing time limit had passed. However, the wording of the editing leaves one wondering if it had been done by Chemar acting on her own just because she didn't like the spelling mistake, or for whatever reason. I wonder if it might not be better to have the wording something like: Last edited by Chemar for (name of poster); or- Last edited for (name of poster); or last edited by Mod at request of (name of poster).
Otherwise a newbie is liable to think that the mods just go in and edit anything they happen to take exception to. (Chemar, we who know you and love you realize you would never do such a thing! :D )
Hugs,

[Chemar]

no Lois...mods will not ever simply go into members posts and edit spelling or grammar or anything other than a violation of the guidelines without requests or agreement from the member who made the post......we for sure are NOT the Spell Police :D

[loisba]

I know you wouldn't, but what about a change in the wording so as not to leave a wrong impression? I'm concerned that someone who does not know our community well may get the wrong idea!
Hugs,

[Chemar]

if it means that much to you Lois....it is done...the spelling error corrected was for the URL so that it went to the correct site.:o

[loisba]

Thanks, Chemar, that took care of it nicely, and is not open to any mis-interpretation.
Hugs,