I have noticed at least three posts by three different posters lately, that have been edited so as to completely change their meaning, in at least two cases after a subsequent poster has responded to the earlier version, where the poster making the edit made no attempt to explain why the edit was being made.
When the discussion over editing time limits was happening at CSB, a lot was made of the fact that, even with open ended editing, no one was going back after the fact to alter the substance of what they had originally posted. I would have thought that the same ethic would apply here. Do others agree, or not?
Editing for content
Editing for content
"The dildo of consequence rarely comes lubed." -- Eileen Rose
Re: Editing for content
I certainly agree.
Editing for content without at least notifying and explaining, is poor form.
Editing for content without at least notifying and explaining, is poor form.
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”
Re: Editing for content
If I was one of the posters, I believe I explained why I changed my post.
No me importa, I can change it back.
No me importa, I can change it back.
-
@meric@nwom@n
Re: Editing for content
My feeling on this is that if someone has already responded to your post, you should not change it at all even with an explanation. What you can do is make a new post explaining your altered point. To do otherwise is not only bad form, but it is pretty underhanded.Scooter wrote:I have noticed at least three posts by three different posters lately, that have been edited so as to completely change their meaning, in at least two cases after a subsequent poster has responded to the earlier version, where the poster making the edit made no attempt to explain why the edit was being made.
When the discussion over editing time limits was happening at CSB, a lot was made of the fact that, even with open ended editing, no one was going back after the fact to alter the substance of what they had originally posted. I would have thought that the same ethic would apply here. Do others agree, or not?
Re: Editing for content
That was one thing on the CSB that was convenient; if someone cross-posted while you were typing or editing, a message would pop-up saying: 'Warning a new reply has been posted, you may wish to review your post.' ...or something like that.
Here, I'm just off to the next active thread that the screen offers.
Here, I'm just off to the next active thread that the screen offers.