When was there a time limit put on the 'edit' feature?

[Sean]

Don't start this up again lo eh? Is that too much to ask?

[alice]

I only have a couple of minutes, and then probably won't be back on the board again for another day or two, so apologies if this comes across as a 'post and run'..
I thought you were suspended, or banned or whatever the word was, for a month - I could be wrong, because I probably didn't really take as much notice of it as I should, but it should say it in whatever the relevant thread was at the time (I'd help locate it if I had more time)

The above is an excellent example of why it's good to have a time limit on editing. While it was topical, people could see what was written. But everyone, including you, now has the reassurance of knowing that no-one could go back later and amend anything - whatever was written remains true.

If you get criticised by any "grammar nazis" in the short term, I imagine that would be within the edit window of a week or so, so the facility is there for you to edit - it'll just leave a 'footprint' so others will know that you amended it, which is fair enough. You could explain where/why you edited and everything would be okay.

I don't understand why it stresses you to the extent that you feel it's something to do with 'control freaks', unless you had been planning to very substantially change past posts, and if that's the only issue then you could resolve it by copying the post, and then reposting it in the edited form - then people could see what you had previously posted, and what your new post was. It takes up a bit extra space, but achieves the same effect. It won't kill any 'artistic licence', but also will show that your changes are just innocent, so won't leave you open to any accusations. A compromise for all .

Regarding editing things for possible publishing - I imagine you'd have to be copying them from this site anyway and putting the stories all together / formatting them in a word doc or something similar, prior to publishing. So even if this was the only place you had your stories, you would be able to edit them when you put them in your word or other doc, prior to publishing.

[Daisy]

Well, I was kinda banned for longer than a week...

I just like to go back and tweak my posts for future possible publishing. Meanwhile, I get critisized by Grammar Nazis in the short term, and curtailed by Control Freaks in the long term. Where'Z the artistic license to be found?


Does Daisy do anything off Hen's leash?

Wanna try explaining this remark loCA?

The move to curtail the editing time was made by other admins not myself at the request of another poster.

It wasn't done simply to piss you off, this may come as somewhat of a surprise to you, Plan B Forum does not revolve around you and your dramas. As the last month has proven.

[Scooter]

Wanna try explaining this remark loCA?

Don't waste keystrokes trying to get her to justify what she writes, because she can't. Just consider it strike one, and at this rate she will have gotten herself banned permanently within the week.

[Lord Jim]

The move to curtail the editing time was made by other admins not myself at the request of another poster.

Well, in order to put the kabosh on any further speculation about this, and since an account of the primary events has been made public, I will go ahead and explain this;

I am the one who requested an editing time limit. I requested it in conjunction with helping Joe with the complaint he was filing against Quaddriver. I requested it out of a concern that Quad might go back and attempt to alter or delete the posts where he had claimed that his job gave him access to private information, and where he used this claim to provide credibility for his pedophilia smears against Joe. (Most of these posts were made more than a month earlier; but with unlimited editing, it wouldn't matter how early it had been made.)

My recollection is, (and this goes back some months) that the time limit was set to the longest time period the system would permit, if you were going to have a limit. As I remember, this worked out to about a week, (it was calculated in hours.)

To be honest, with an editing time limit that long, I didn't think it would create issues for anyone else except Quaddriver, if he wanted to go back and destroy the evidence of what he had been doing here. I never thought anyone else would ever even notice.

As it turns out, I was 99% correct. Apparently the difference between a week long editing time limit and unlimited editing as a practical matter, only affected and was only noticeable to one person. (Until that person publicly pointed it out, and then a couple of other people checked it; but even then you'll notice that it didn't create any huge controversy.)

I have a little sympathy about this, (though I have to say not a whole lot) because I frequently write fairly lengthy original content posts, and when I do I'll often have a bucket load of typos, grammatical errors, words typed twice (one of my personal favorites) sentence fragments I neglected to delete when I decided to change how I would say something, etc. Mostly on that day, but sometimes over the course of several days, I'll fix these if I have occasion to re-read the post...

However....

You may have noticed I'm not exactly suffering from a severe deficit in the arrogance department, but not even I would be so full of conceit as to believe that there are large numbers of posters here so enamored of my words that they're going back and reading the pearls of wisdom I wrote more than a week earlier...If I haven't fixed something by then I really don't expect anyone is likely to see it....(except I guess every now and then if someone who's been away from the board for a prolonged period and then decides to catch up on a lot of posts written while they were gone; but on the rare occasions that may happen having a person see a few typos that I didn't get around to correcting in seven days, doesn't exactly make the top of my "Big Deal" list...))

I suppose LoCa, you could claim you have a special case because you were suspended for a month, but a couple of things about that:

First of all, you started this thread on the 1st of March, long before you were suspended (and a considerable amount of time after the change was made, btw; so it must not have been all that noticeable even to you, since it took you so long to notice it.) so at the time you originally complained about it, your suspension wasn't a factor.

Second, your suspension did not come as a sudden surprise; the thread with the vote on your suspension was started on the 18th. It was pretty obvious pretty quickly how that was headed, but it wasn't until three days later that your suspension was implemented... That means that if you were so concerned about "grammar nazis" you:

a. Knew there was an editing time limit. (You must have; you started this thread about it, afterall)
b. Knew you were likely to be suspended and had 3 days to make any changes you wanted to, with any post of yours that was less than a week old.)

So, I don't think that argument has a whole lot of merit.

[Jarlaxle]

As it turns out, I was 99% correct. Apparently the difference between a week long editing time limit and unlimited editing as a practical matter, only affected and was only noticeable to one person. (Until that person publicly pointed it out, and then a couple of other people checked it; but even then you'll notice that it didn't create any huge controversy.)

I noticed...I just didn't care enough to start a thread about it.

[Rick]

I never noticed and still don't care...

[Joe Guy]

I'm so uninterested in the subject that I wouldn't even post in a thread about it.

At least not knowingly.

[Rick]

I'm so uninterested in the subject that I wouldn't even post in a thread about it.

At least not knowingly.

Joe is channeling his cat...

[loCAtek]

As stated previously and repeatedly: I go back and tweak my breads- my blog threads, sometimes months later, when I notice:

Grammar
Spelling
Comedic timing
Urban language updates
Name changes to protect the innocent
Etc.

In this case, I couldn't correct my error in Falcon Cam 2012, where I said 'X' chromosome, instead of 'Y'. Call that cunning manipulation on my part, to make my post genetically accurate to those paying biological attention ...but it had to be done more than thirty days after I posted, due to the banning.

If this was professional publishing, I'd have a proof-reader and a personal assistant to fetch coffee and sort the fan mail; not to mention an advance bonus to motivate my output. Thus assuring, perfect, polished, publishing, every time.

As it is, I post off-the-cuff and check back later, when it's convenient, to see what needs tweaking or deleting ..'cause I'm not getting paid for my performance nor can I afford anybody to check my work.
This is personal entertainment folks, don't expect greatness. That's why a keyboard has a backspace key.




...but wasn't that the beef at CSB, and what started Plan B?
That an Administrative call was made to limit editing without board consensus?

So, why the bait and switch? Now, it's OK to limit others without their consent?


I'm juss sayin'- could you at least be honest and upfront about it, and post these rules, limits and regulations, somewhere where folks could see them?

[The Hen]

You obviously did not read Gob's or LJ's responses in this thread.

That's OK.

But if you are interested in why, do so.

[loCAtek]

Obviously, you've evading answering my questions with subterfuge. A direct answer would be nice, but I don't expect forthrightness from you.

[BoSoxGal]

Start a personal blog as a secondary home for your stuff, lo - you can do so for free & and edit there to your heart's delight.

There is a reason for the edit limit here; you've stated your opinion of it, now please don't keep looking to start shit.

[Scooter]

...but wasn't that the beef at CSB, and what started Plan B?
That an Administrative call was made to limit editing without board consensus?

No. What happened there was the refusal to restore ANY ability to edit in spite of overwhelming board consensus (as expressed in a poll) to the contrary.

You are free to determine whether a consensus exists here to restore unlimited editing. I am sure the administration would respect the results of such a poll.

Actually, do not trouble yourself, I will do it myself. But if a majority decides they like things as they are, and you continue to harp on about control freaks, then that will be a clear sign that this has nothing to do with board consensus and everything to do with continuing a personal vendetta. And only two days into a six month probation, that would not exactly be the best foot to be putting forward, if you get my drift.

[loCAtek]

ThX Scooter, I wasn't aware of any probation. I didn't read any of Plan B while on my vacation, I got life;




...it goZ, anywayZ.

[Joe Guy]

There is a way to get around the edit time limit. Copy the original post, edit it and post it again. You can even start your own thread and title it "loCA's Edits".

I'm sure everyone will be anxiously looking forward to reading them.

[Lord Jim]

You obviously did not read Gob's or LJ's responses in this thread.

That's got to be the case, since it's logically impossible for anyone to have read the explanations and not understand why this wasn't publicly announced....

And this:

...but wasn't that the beef at CSB, and what started Plan B?
That an Administrative call was made to limit editing without board consensus?

is, as Scooter has pointed out, a complete misstatement of the facts.....

In that case, you had a situation where the editing feature was reduced as a result of a board upgrade, from unlimited to one hour. Then the admin, (who didn't own the board btw, and therefore had an affirmative obligation to make all decisions based on consensus) arbitrarily refused to put it back to the original setting. There was HUGE outcry about this, and a vote was held where the choices of a 24 hour limit and unlimited got the same number of votes' and the non-owner admin's one hour decision got 3 or 4 votes. (Out of 25 or 26 votes cast)

The obvious decision for the non-owner admin to have made in that case would have been to set an editing time limit somewhere be 24 hours and "unlimited"...say 72 hours...(Which would have reflected the vote, ended the controversy, and been considerably shorter than the editing limit we have here. )

Instead she kept it at one hour, for no other reason than just because she felt like it and she could....

I could go into numerous other differences, (like the context in which this happened....when the non-owner admin did this, it was the culmination of a whole series of high-handed arrogant and arbitrary actions that had been building for some time.) but I'm sure most people here remember all of this.

[Rick]

As an aside since I have commented here on this weather it was in jest or not.

The editing feature issue on previous boards seemed arbitrary and capricious.

I have never considered Daisy arbitrary or capricious...

[Lord Jim]

One correction to my previous post:

I believe the board upgrade at the CSB actually reduced the editing time limit to 30 minutes....

[Scooter]

ThX Scooter, I wasn't aware of any probation. I didn't read any of Plan B while on my vacation, I got life;

The six month probation was built into the proposal for your suspension when it was put out to the membership for a poll, which obviously took place before your suspension, so kindly do not attempt to claim that it was something imposed after the fact.