-
Updated 2023-07-12: Hello, Guest! Welcome back, and be sure to check out this follow-up post about our outage a week or so ago.
Concerning the editing post policy
- Thread starter Mike Richardson
- Start date
Christopher
Well-known member
Two people shorten a road.Too many cooks spoil the broth.many hands make light work.....
Theres another one, like "curiosity killed the cat" but there's something else that adds to that saying that I forget.
luddite
Host of RetroChallenge
I know it's not an exact parallel, but my experience with the RetroChallenge has shown that if you want things to run smoothly someone has to take charge... back in 2006 we had so much debate over the rules that the RetroChallenge never officially happened. In subsequent years it's become quite evident that the most vocal debaters are the ones who participate least (if at all) in the actual RetroChallenge.
I'm not saying input from the proles is always a bad thing, but quite often it's just more expedient for an individual or small group to take the reigns and basically just get things done. Even in the world's greatest democracy you, as a citizen, don't get a say in every law that's passed... the system would grind to a halt.
I'm not saying input from the proles is always a bad thing, but quite often it's just more expedient for an individual or small group to take the reigns and basically just get things done. Even in the world's greatest democracy you, as a citizen, don't get a say in every law that's passed... the system would grind to a halt.
Scott Baret
Well-known member
However, there is still an explanation about everything.
A good case is copyright law, which tends to change overnight and behind everyone's back. Despite the media not reporting on it there are still places one can go to hear an explanation of the new laws, bills, and whatnot. They may not be calling everyone's name like, say, NBC News, but they do exist.
Even if there had been a comment about this in the rule section when it was done I would have been satisfied.
Mike Richardson
Banned
That doesn't mean the owner must have a dictatorship, only that it is one possible management style out of several that they can choose from. At one end you have dictatorship and the other end anarchy (basically USENET) and I think the best policy is somewhere in the middle.
wally
Well-known member
So there I am trying to answer something tomlee59 said on recelled batteries sometimes working and sometimes not. Since I have some complicated stuff to get straight I quote him and go thru many, many, many preview cycles to get it right so I do not to have to ask someone later to please, please fix it for me.
I finally get it almost right, the part about connecting wires in the right order, the specific chips used in the battery monitor and why, the links to the chip datasheets, the ways the gas gauge can fail, the precise requirements for replacement cell matching, all stuff not easily found on the internet if at all.
One more preview needed to see if the url links need special treatment to be completely displayed in the posted message. Then if they are ok I can then submit just once. But I never get beyond the next preview...
KA-BOOM!
Suddenly it thinks I am not logged on.
It says I need to be logged on to quote a message.
Everything I typed in is gone.
Maybe I cannot even spend more than an hour COMPOSING a message.
Why do I even bother trying to help? >
I finally get it almost right, the part about connecting wires in the right order, the specific chips used in the battery monitor and why, the links to the chip datasheets, the ways the gas gauge can fail, the precise requirements for replacement cell matching, all stuff not easily found on the internet if at all.
One more preview needed to see if the url links need special treatment to be completely displayed in the posted message. Then if they are ok I can then submit just once. But I never get beyond the next preview...
KA-BOOM!
Suddenly it thinks I am not logged on.
It says I need to be logged on to quote a message.
Everything I typed in is gone.
Maybe I cannot even spend more than an hour COMPOSING a message.
Why do I even bother trying to help? >
Flash!
Well-known member
I know I know, what a pain in the arts! I've had problems with preview dumping my text too.
The only thing I can suggest is that you submit your "draft" and then jump back in and edit it...before you hour is up.
As a side note, ~tl if you're reading....while understanding that you don't wish people to edit their posts retrospectively, how about changing the time limit to 2 hours?
The only thing I can suggest is that you submit your "draft" and then jump back in and edit it...before you hour is up.
As a side note, ~tl if you're reading....while understanding that you don't wish people to edit their posts retrospectively, how about changing the time limit to 2 hours?
Scott Baret
Well-known member
Or we could just change it back to the way it was before this limit was imposed. I've been thinking about this and have read over all the rules and have found this change to be "unconstitutional" as per our rules because of this:
Nowhere does it say that a submission becomes property of 68KMLA. If our posts are truly ours and do not become anyone else's property, then we should be able to modify our property, just as we can modify our own artwork, computer program, etc. Some websites do state that content posted on them/written on them is now property of the entity who owns it, but this one does not, meaning that it is still our property.
Furthermore, if a new disclaimer property is imposed, I believe we should be able to edit any post we made prior to the date the new rule was enacted (this should be true for any post edit as well). This is basically stating that there should be no ex post facto here. (Ex post facto states that one's past actions are now impacted by a law; for example, if a law stating that one cannot say the word "the" was enacted in 2004, someone can now be tried for saying it in 2003 before the law was passed). I'm not sure if there are any government systems even using ex post facto these days (I know the US outlawed it when the Constitution was written).
Please take all of this into consideration. As the current documentation reads now these posts are property of the posters and therefore we should be allowed to do what we want with them.
Nowhere does it say that a submission becomes property of 68KMLA. If our posts are truly ours and do not become anyone else's property, then we should be able to modify our property, just as we can modify our own artwork, computer program, etc. Some websites do state that content posted on them/written on them is now property of the entity who owns it, but this one does not, meaning that it is still our property.
Furthermore, if a new disclaimer property is imposed, I believe we should be able to edit any post we made prior to the date the new rule was enacted (this should be true for any post edit as well). This is basically stating that there should be no ex post facto here. (Ex post facto states that one's past actions are now impacted by a law; for example, if a law stating that one cannot say the word "the" was enacted in 2004, someone can now be tried for saying it in 2003 before the law was passed). I'm not sure if there are any government systems even using ex post facto these days (I know the US outlawed it when the Constitution was written).
Please take all of this into consideration. As the current documentation reads now these posts are property of the posters and therefore we should be allowed to do what we want with them.
Flash!
Well-known member
I agree with both of you, however according to ~tl there has been "problems" people editing posts retrospectively (this was news to most of us!)
Given that this forum is "owned" by ~coxy, cinemafia and ~tl (and others?) they get to write the rules. I accept that. However I strenuosly object to the way in which some of the new rules were implemented - especially the way in which we were "ridden rough shod"
It's a forum: flame wars, trolls, arguments et al ARE always going to happen - especially by the more juvenile minded. However I think that most of us would be able to recognise the rare instances where someone has modified their post, and dismiss it as being insignificant. Personally I think that those "few people" should be named and shamed, have their threads locked, account suspended or deleted, or some other such thing. I detest the fact that so often in society the actions of "a few" affects all the rest of us "the many"
As I've mentioned before, I really appreciate the work and effort that the forum admins put into this place. It is my favourite corner of the internet
Back to the point in question, post editing, I would prefer to have no limit as i think that the pros out-weigh the cons. But I feel that if we are going to have a limit, then two hours would be a suitable middle-ground for all concerned.
Given that this forum is "owned" by ~coxy, cinemafia and ~tl (and others?) they get to write the rules. I accept that. However I strenuosly object to the way in which some of the new rules were implemented - especially the way in which we were "ridden rough shod"
It's a forum: flame wars, trolls, arguments et al ARE always going to happen - especially by the more juvenile minded. However I think that most of us would be able to recognise the rare instances where someone has modified their post, and dismiss it as being insignificant. Personally I think that those "few people" should be named and shamed, have their threads locked, account suspended or deleted, or some other such thing. I detest the fact that so often in society the actions of "a few" affects all the rest of us "the many"
As I've mentioned before, I really appreciate the work and effort that the forum admins put into this place. It is my favourite corner of the internet
Back to the point in question, post editing, I would prefer to have no limit as i think that the pros out-weigh the cons. But I feel that if we are going to have a limit, then two hours would be a suitable middle-ground for all concerned.
My suggestion is to either use an online word processor that automatically saves (and tracks) changes, such as adobe buzzword or google documents, or to use a local text editor (like textedit, notepad/wordpad or gedit or nano) to draft your posts. This way they won't be lost at all.
The loss when you take forever editing in the web interface is not a result of the one-hour post limit, it's because your session with the site has timed out, and when you logged in, you didn't check the "log me in automatically" box, (at least this is what I'm guessing) so the cookies/session/server-connection timed out. Drafting your posts and then pasting them in when they have reached the desired level of perfection would solve this issue. (an issue that existed before the post editing policy was put in place.)
The loss when you take forever editing in the web interface is not a result of the one-hour post limit, it's because your session with the site has timed out, and when you logged in, you didn't check the "log me in automatically" box, (at least this is what I'm guessing) so the cookies/session/server-connection timed out. Drafting your posts and then pasting them in when they have reached the desired level of perfection would solve this issue. (an issue that existed before the post editing policy was put in place.)
