Technical question with this website

[slang]

IMO, here's a good example of "bad editing", by the OP.

https://forum.cosmoquest.org/showthr...Mass&p=2492427

From a moderator standpoint I have no problem with that edit. It is possible that the poster hadn't seen any replies yet (not an excuse, really, but in this case I would not weigh that heavily), the edit saves others the trouble of answering, and it is very clearly marked as being an edit. I'm more concerned with what appears to me as a useless glib answer. If you don't want to answer, then don't.

[pzkpfw]

Yep, if I thought he'd broken a rule I'd have reported it, not posted about it.


But, no, it's not clearly marked as an edit.

There was stuff added, marked as edit, but if you compare the quote in grants post with what's left of post #1, the content was changed too.

[slang]

Yep, if I thought he'd broken a rule I'd have reported it, not posted about it.


But, no, it's not clearly marked as an edit.

There was stuff added, marked as edit, but if you compare the quote in grants post with what's left of post #1, the content was changed too.

True enough. However, the edit history shows that the first edit, where the line that you mention is rephrased to something (IMHO) better, was done at the exact same time that grant posted his response. Generally we're OK with an non-trivial edit (ie to tone down an agressive or offensive remark, remove a stupid joke, rephrase for clarity , etc etc) in the first few minutes, and before there is a reply. Generally!.

It might have been a good example of bad editing if that first edit was quite a while after there was a response. But it wasn't. Two subsequent edits were both clearly marked additions, and also in an IMHO reasonable time-frame.

[slang]

All Gorn needed to do was to put that added material into a new post after the responding post.

He didn't need to, he could have. But he chose not to, and IMHO that was a reasonable course of action given the timeline. Adding posts 5 in a row with a little bit of info in each post just makes the thread more annoying to read, and could potentionally even make us suspect that one is inflating one's post-count for some reason.

[Gorn]

Sorry. I did not change content. I added content. Also, about 30 seconds after I got the reply.

Any re-phrasing that took place..was virtually immediate even though I might have hit the reply
and this was in fact an edit.

I hope people remember my original post concerning this. My concerns happened to be with twitter..
not this web site.

G

[Gorn]

Plus there is this 'editing' post timeline that has been mentioned.

G

[Jens]

I hope people remember my original post concerning this. My concerns happened to be with twitter..
not this web site.

You titled the thread "Technical question with this website" but actually wanted to ask about Twitter???

Your original post really seems to be a question about this website, mentioning Twitter as an afterthought...

[Gorn]

No. Because the ability to edit posts or not is an issue with this website but which I am generally ok with. But with Twitter..once you post
anything..it's lost to the twitter verse. No second chance

I am trying to get at the technical philosophy around this..and whether it should really be a concern.

G

[Hornblower]

No. Because the ability to edit posts or not is an issue with this website but which I am generally ok with. But with Twitter..once you post
anything..it's lost to the twitter verse. No second chance

I am trying to get at the technical philosophy around this..and whether it should really be a concern.

G

My bold. Perhaps this is an ethical rather than a technical issue. Technically it's whatever the owner of the site wishes to enable.

[ToSeek]

No. Because the ability to edit posts or not is an issue with this website but which I am generally ok with. But with Twitter..once you post
anything..it's lost to the twitter verse. No second chance

I am trying to get at the technical philosophy around this..and whether it should really be a concern.

G

It's not a technical issue at all - vBulletin allows us to set the timeout on editing to whatever we want, or to have no timeout at all. We've chosen the given timeout in order to prevent inappropriate revisionism. If someone truly needs to make a change to a now-locked post, they're free to contact the moderation team to make a case for editing it. We can always edit posts.

[Jens]

I am trying to get at the technical philosophy around this..and whether it should really be a concern.
G

Do you mean, should it be a concern for you, or should it be a concern for Twitter?

It is a concern for Twitter, and you can see by googling that it is something they think about. But they face the same issues that other sites do.

And incidentally, there are lots of situations like that. Once you publish something in a newspaper or say something on TV, you can make a correction but can’t remove it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[21st Century Schizoid Man]

Expired certificate now?

[The Backroad Astronomer]

Yep, it has happened before.
ETA I think Dr Gay needs some more help.

[slang]

I don't think renewing an SSL certificate can be done by "help", I'm afraid. But it's been reported.