Calling it a mistake after years of being able to edit in my opinion is disingenuous, it feels like shallow excuse for making the change. If there' a way to allow editing but not deleting a post or thread, that would be fine.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Unable to edit comments
- Thread starter Wild_Bill_57
- Start date
- Status
Like, disingenuous shallow excuse for the change, as in a hidden and nefarious reason, beyond simple oversight of the error in tens-of-thousands of lines of code being managed by volunteers in their free time, but has now been corrected to make sure that everyone, supporting and non supporting, are treated equally?
Do tell!
If you're about to post an ancient aliens meme, I'm gonna try to kiss you.
But on the cheek, you heathen. I'm practically married.
It cuts both way IME.
Just last week I was trolled on another forum, a person posted disparaging comments about me, & I tried to skirt around directly quoting that person but mentioned getting insulted. DOH!, they deleted their original posts & played coy.
I was livid, but the mods (again, NOT this forum) would do nothing, even though it was a clear case of trolling.
I've deleted many posts in the past, usually so that people will stop quoting me to argue.
Just last week I was trolled on another forum, a person posted disparaging comments about me, & I tried to skirt around directly quoting that person but mentioned getting insulted. DOH!, they deleted their original posts & played coy.
I was livid, but the mods (again, NOT this forum) would do nothing, even though it was a clear case of trolling.
I've deleted many posts in the past, usually so that people will stop quoting me to argue.
The solution to the problem is not to take away functionality that users like, but instead to find a way to retain history for moderation purposes. It's pointless to debate the virtue or lack thereof of the editing and deleting capability that many users want to have reinstated.
Sorry man, but I don't see how this "cuts both ways" -- except in one case you're the victim and in the other case you're the perpetrator. Whenever people delete posts because (for whatever reason) they don't like the responses to it, it makes the respondents look like jerks or idiots. If you post something that provokes an argument, that's on you and you should live with the consequences. Hopefully the next time you'll think more before posting.
BTW, I think this provides good evidence for the policy I'm now endorsing (having stolen the idea from @EchoEcho): If you were not allowed to delete or edit a post (beyond some short time window), you would still be able to add a clarification/apology/whatever to a post if you wanted to amend what you originally said after seeing how people responded to it.
I'm not thinking that would be possible.
If editing after an extended period of time was allowed, what's to keep someone from editing all the content from a post?? We deal with this in the classifieds, where a member sells an item and later goes back to "edit" all the info from the post, leaving only a "." In its place.
This, while being only an edit on the surface, is in fact deleting a post....
And ? sounds like a punishable rule violation for the Mods, not a limitation to be placed on the compliant and innocent masses!
Let me say this, then I'm out of this thread forever.
Yes, yes it was.
Here's how it went down for me.
I was a supporting member when I first came here because I thought I wanted to sell some gear. Then I sold some gear and realized shipping was ridiculous and decided I was not going to sell non-local anymore.
So I cancelled my support because that was the perk I wanted.
Once it was cancelled I noticed the edit functions had changed. That bothered me enough that, even though you all are telling us now, after the fact, that it was never an intended perk, nonetheless it was worth paying for. To me, and to others here, quite obviously. So I renewed my support for that, and only for that.
You may never have intended to create a valuable feature for supporting members but, intentional or not, it did have value to us. And now it's gone, and you've lost not only my financial support, but a lot of my activity here as I continue to look for new interactive spaces online.
So just telling us "sorry, we didn't mean to give you something you liked, really sorry we were so nice to you, we really meant to give you less and you should be grateful we took it away" seems a bit silly. Why not take it on board that you accidentally offered something we felt was valuable, and consider that perhaps some of us are doing you a favor by telling you that this had value and could be a promoted perk? Instead you're asking us to blithely accept a change to something that we paid for, whether you meant us to have it or not, because a mistake was made.
I just joined another forum where I'm able to edit all my posts. Freaking FACEBOOK lets users edit their own posts forever, for heaven's sake.
No, I'm not dying on this hill but I am certainly looking for a better hill at this point. That's the last you'll hear from me on this.
Folks, again, Chef got it right. The policy change was implemented for good reasons that have been listed in the many threads about this. There was an error that went unnoticed by the staff for a while, and when they noticed it, it was brought to the attention of the site owner and he corrected it.
The staff discussion about this policy was lengthy and either unanimous or nearly so. And as it happens, the problems that the longer edit window caused have pretty much dried up, and made the work of the unpaid staff a lot easier.
So while I know I speak only for myself in this moment, in the big picture it was a staff decision, it did what it was supposed to do to ease staff workload, and it will remain. I'm sorry that some don't like it, but it's here to stay. Again, I would urge everyone to simply take a few extra moments to proof read your latest posts before moving on.
The staff discussion about this policy was lengthy and either unanimous or nearly so. And as it happens, the problems that the longer edit window caused have pretty much dried up, and made the work of the unpaid staff a lot easier.
So while I know I speak only for myself in this moment, in the big picture it was a staff decision, it did what it was supposed to do to ease staff workload, and it will remain. I'm sorry that some don't like it, but it's here to stay. Again, I would urge everyone to simply take a few extra moments to proof read your latest posts before moving on.
- Status
