Modify / Delete Option A No-Go On Older Messages...

[AC5UP]

Just noticed that I can modify or delete new messages posted this morning but comments from last night do not have the option.

Not opposed to the concept, but curious as to the timeout value.

[K3GM]

Yes, I've noticed this too.  The modify/delete option expires after a particular amount of time.  It is like this over on the QRZ forums.  As an eHam subscriber, put me down in the "don't like" column for this option.

[N2MG]

This was done deliberately to curtail the making of substantive changes /deletions to past posts. These types of edits of older posts tend to "break" the thread.

My personal opinion is to disallow ALL editing, or maybe disallow those beyond a minute or two past the original submission of the post.  It's more than rude for one to go back in time and change posts others have read or worse, ones to which they have replied.  I compromised at the current setting - 60 minutes - which is subject to change. 

60 minutes is more than enough time to re-proofread one's post for misspellings and the like.  (Preview is better of course)

Originally we did not allow editing at all.

Mike N2MG

[K3GM]

I see your point, Mike.  I use it always for editing my crappy fat finger typing.

[N2MG]

I'd be the last one to thwart users' efforts to clean up spelling and whatnot, but there have been several cases where the entire thread became superfluous because the original post or significant responses were modified or deleted. 

[N3OX]

My personal opinion is to disallow ALL editing, or maybe disallow those beyond a minute or two past the original submission of the post.  It's more than rude for one to go back in time and change posts others have read or worse, ones to which they have replied.  I compromised at the current setting - 60 minutes - which is subject to change. 

A minute or two is far far too short and would probably hurt thread readability on average, civil, courteous threads where people respect the etiquette of not editing once the conversation has moved on. An hour is probably longer than necessary, though I will go back and edit a post with no responses after it if I think of something new ... I think that's better than having a post and then a correction to that post in response to the post.... looks silly and is less readable.  Same with not being able to remove dupes and retract things you figured out were dumb before anyone had the chance to start writing a response.

Would be nice if there were an option to shorten the window dramatically or only have it come in once a new post has been posted (or even once someone has clicked "reply" ), that might be ideal?  Removing prior posts or even substantially changing the content or meaning after people have specifically responded to them is dirty BS and certainly shouldn't be allowed... I guess there's only the option for a single expiration time tho?

I support an expiration time for all modifications if there is no better option to prevent the behavior you're talking about...

[K1CJS]

I too can see the point about posts being entirely wiped out by the deletion of the first, thread opening post.  I did notice, however, that I used to have longer than just an hour to 'correct' my mistakes on just about any topic, but that has been cut down now to just the hour or so.  What is happening, IMHO, is that the rest of the people who use the editing feature properly are paying for the few who abuse that feature.

So it seems that the site staff are backpedaling on the decision to allow editing--after the users have had the taste of what could be done with the software now in use.  Granted, it is their decision to make, but it's just irritating to the users who used the editing feature as it was intended to be used.

[WB6BYU]

...but it's just irritating to the users who used the editing feature as it was intended to be used.

Yes, and so is the behavior of those users who don't use it in the intended manner.  Unfortunately,
I don't think the Admins want to get in the business of setting different limits for each user
based on their posting habits.

I don't blame the hosts for trying out a new feature, discovering problems with how some people use
it, and then looking for reasonable compromises rather than shutting it off entirely.  In fact, that
is how I'd expect a site to be run.

So you live with the fact that there might be an occasional extra post to correct or add something
after the time limit has expired.  Oh, well.  It's not like we are paying a fixed rate per post, so we
have to cram everything into one to save money.

For me the important thing is that the website supports interaction and information sharing among
members.  An occasional extra post isn't going to affect that.

(But I'm used to a 2 minute window on another site specifically because one user abused their
5 minute window, creating an inflamatory post, then editing it to be much more reasonable after
getting some steamed-up responses.)

[K1CJS]

...but it's just irritating to the users who used the editing feature as it was intended to be used.

....Unfortunately, I don't think the Admins want to get in the business of setting different limits for each user
based on their posting habits....

Oh, I quite agree.  They wouldn't have time to do much else if they did that.

Don't get me wrong--I wasn't complaining about it, just making an observation.  I also agree with what you later said--instead of editing your last post, just make another!

[AC4RD]

...or maybe disallow those beyond a minute or two past the original submission of the post.  It's more than rude for one to go back in time and change posts others have read ...

I certainly was GLAD for the "remove" option yesterday.  I wrote a couple of paragraphs in reply to an antenna discussion, posted it, and then realized I had said more or less the same thing in the same thread a week or so earlier.  :-/   Being able to delete the redundant newer post kept the rest of y'all from finding out what a chucklehead I am. 

[N4NYY]

This was done deliberately to curtail the making of substantive changes /deletions to past posts. These types of edits of older posts tend to "break" the thread.

My personal opinion is to disallow ALL editing, or maybe disallow those beyond a minute or two past the original submission of the post.  It's more than rude for one to go back in time and change posts others have read or worse, ones to which they have replied.  I compromised at the current setting - 60 minutes - which is subject to change. 

60 minutes is more than enough time to re-proofread one's post for misspellings and the like.  (Preview is better of course)

Originally we did not allow editing at all.

Mike N2MG

I used it to correct my typing deficiencies. This is a bad idea.

[K1CJS]

I used it to correct my typing deficiencies. This is a bad idea.

There is another way to do that--the 'preview' button.  Instead of hitting 'post' right away, hit 'preview'.  You can see what your post will look like and the window to correct any 'deficiencies'     is right below that.  Works pretty well.  73!

[N2MG]

Yes, the Preview is the right way to proofread a post.  It gives you a slightly different look at the body of your post and is quite useful at letting you see mistakes.  If you care enough to want to fix spelling errors and the like, use the "Preview".  It's not that hard...honest.

The best solution might be to have a revision control/history so folks could see what people changed.  Short of that...if you want to make late changes, make another post.

Mike N2MG