Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[1]

I am opposed to a limit on editing posts. Sometimes the initial post has to be edited, such as for some of the game threads.

[J N Winkler]

I don't think a limited editing window is something we need to implement.  I would hate for us to do it simply because it gets talked about and managers get the idea it "should" be done without it necessarily being broadly supported.

I can think of a few instances where I have gone back and edited a post after a long time interval, usually to add significant new information or remove incorrect information that I feel is particularly misleading.  I nearly always do this with an "Edit:" flag to avoid giving the impression I am engaging in a cover-up.

It is also fairly common for people to start a thread in full expectation of editing the OP multiple times, e.g. to create an easy-to-find compilation of information submitted by other members downthread.  I can easily see myself doing this to create a master list of hill descent map signs, for example.

[kphoger]

Sometimes I make dumb spelling errors and I don't want to embarrasses myself.

I see what you did there.

Wait, did I misspell a world?

[kphoger]

Sometimes the initial post has to be edited, such as for some of the game threads.

I can think of a few instances where I have gone back and edited a post after a long time interval, usually to add significant new information or remove incorrect information that I feel is particularly misleading.

It is also fairly common for people to start a thread in full expectation of editing the OP multiple times, e.g. to create an easy-to-find compilation of information submitted by other members downthread.

Geez, I didn't even think of that.  Totally.

[kkt]

Sometimes I make dumb spelling errors and I don't want to embarrasses myself.

I see what you did there.

Wait, did I misspell a world?

I think he was kidding.  I hope he was kidding.

[Scott5114]

Wait, did I misspell a world?

[adventurernumber1]

I think that the ability to edit posts, even much later on, should remain with no restrictions, because it would just cause too many problems. Most of the time, when the OP of a thread is being edited, it is not being semi-deleted - it is usually being updated to correct false information or add new information, or something else. This sporadic incident of the user making all of his thread-starting-posts "unavailable" is obviously not common. This should not take away anybody's important right to edit their post with no restrictions. I don't see something like that happening again, at least not very soon, but that's just me. Original posts of game theads, as people have said, would be especially hit hard by a theoretical new restriction on post editing. However, when it comes to being unable to modify posts in locked threads at any point in time, stuff like that is obviously reasonable - I am just referring to a general time restriction on editing posts anywhere. Also, people who are like me tend to be very obsessive in editing their post many times, sometimes even way later on, in order to make my words more accurately match my thoughts, and to correct false information and such.

Wait, did I misspell a world?

      

[oscar]

I don't think a limited editing window is something we need to implement.  I would hate for us to do it simply because it gets talked about and managers get the idea it "should" be done without it necessarily being broadly supported.

Agreed. One reason for editing really old posts is to add to your lists of ferries clinched,  national parks visited, airports visited, etc. every time you add something in those categories. That keeps the original list up-to-date, without making a big deal (by creating a new post) of each update.

[jeffandnicole]

I've sometimes haven't noticed an error until I've been quoted (usually bad grammar or a typo, although sometimes my hands decided to type something completely different from what my brain was thinking).   I'll go back to re-edit the original post, but try to take care in mentioning it at some point since the quoted text will then differ from my original statement.

As far as running for office goes, I'm royally fucked if I were to ever attempt that.  And I simply don't have the money to pay off those that know those skeletons that I hide in my closet as well.

[adventurernumber1]

Also, if you post photos on here, and in the case of a potential crappy photo-hosting sight that makes photos no longer available much later on (Flickr is my personal recommendation for what to use), one may need to edit their post to make the photo appear once again. There could also be other reasons to edit a post regarding updating or adding photos, or something else.

[slorydn1]

I seemed to have stirred up some controversy, which was not my intent. I am not necessarily advocating that we be limited, I was only expressing my surprise that we are that free to do so because of my experience at many different forums.

I do realize that this forum is somewhat different because the posts are needed to be modified (game rules, added pictures, list keeping and the like).

I guess what I was saying is that if admin decides to go down that road I wouldn't oppose it, but I am not stumping to get restricted.

[Roadgeekteen]

Wait, did I misspell a world?

Good god I suck.

[kphoger]

Good God, I suck.

FTFY. 

[Roadgeekteen]

Might as well lock this thread now, it is not close to on topic.

[kkt]

Good God, I suck.

FTFY. 

!

[kphoger]

Well, you must admit, there wasn't much of a topic to begin with.  How on earth did this make it to two pages?

[Roadgeekteen]

Well, you must admit, there wasn't much of a topic to begin with.  How on earth did this make it to two pages?

Question was answered, then we descended into silliness.

[kphoger]

Question was answered, then we descended into silliness.

[adventurernumber1]

Well, you must admit, there wasn't much of a topic to begin with.  How on earth did this make it to two pages?

True. For people like me who have for the most part been knowledgeable of the history of forum drama (mainly contained in locked threads), I already knew who sdmichael was. While maybe not the best idea to start a public thread about a person involved in controversy in the past, I guess I have to give the OP credit if he has never looked in much of the locked threads in the forum's past. 

[michaelfballard]

I left the forum as I grew tired of the near constant drama. I grew tired of the BS, having dealt with it since the 1990's. Some seemed to wish that I was even dead, as evidenced in this thread. I have since returned only to promote and respond to things regarding Historic US 99, something near and dear to me. I have had a website on the Internet since 1995, far longer than most sites on the Internet and one of the few that has remained consistent. I've dealt with attacks from Facebook where people not only actively stole from my site, but then were upset when I called them out on it, despite the fact I don't even have a Facebook account. I've had people call me names, but not actually taken the time to know me or know whatever was the reason they decided to so such. Some on this forum have even gone so far as to completely disregard my years of research and work, only to wonder why I might take issue with that when it came to a topic near and dear to me, particularly the Ridge Route. Yes, this is an "old" topic, but one I thought I'd address. I am a person and have done a great deal of things for the roads. I'm not just some person posting on a forum or just putting up a website with photos. I'm out there doing highway cleanups, working with agencies to get roads preserved and maintained, creating real organizations to further those goals, and much more. Even locally, I have been able to affect positive change in my community and have posted on my website how others can do the same.

[Roadgeekteen]

I left the forum as I grew tired of the near constant drama. I grew tired of the BS, having dealt with it since the 1990's. Some seemed to wish that I was even dead, as evidenced in this thread. I have since returned only to promote and respond to things regarding Historic US 99, something near and dear to me. I have had a website on the Internet since 1995, far longer than most sites on the Internet and one of the few that has remained consistent. I've dealt with attacks from Facebook where people not only actively stole from my site, but then were upset when I called them out on it, despite the fact I don't even have a Facebook account. I've had people call me names, but not actually taken the time to know me or know whatever was the reason they decided to so such. Some on this forum have even gone so far as to completely disregard my years of research and work, only to wonder why I might take issue with that when it came to a topic near and dear to me, particularly the Ridge Route. Yes, this is an "old" topic, but one I thought I'd address. I am a person and have done a great deal of things for the roads. I'm not just some person posting on a forum or just putting up a website with photos. I'm out there doing highway cleanups, working with agencies to get roads preserved and maintained, creating real organizations to further those goals, and much more. Even locally, I have been able to affect positive change in my community and have posted on my website how others can do the same.

Sorry that this has happened to you.

[hbelkins]

The irony of a Marf thread rising from the dead!

For the record, I still think lane-splitting is reckless and dangerous 

If I'm not mistaken, and I very well may be, some of the Facebook drama referred to above happened in the "Freewayjim" group, which is probably the biggest roads group on Facebook. It's operated by Jim Georges, who participated on MTR but still hasn't made his way to this forum. He's pretty insistent on posting good quality photos, giving credit for photos not taken by the poster, and so on. There were some issues in that group, and I believe a couple of others, about photos being shared without credit being given, and they may have been from this individual poster.

Ridge Route, eh? Are we going to see some battles with Max Rockatansky that rival Beltway vs. Sprjus4? 

[Roadgeekteen]

The irony of a Marf thread rising from the dead!

For the record, I still think lane-splitting is reckless and dangerous 

If I'm not mistaken, and I very well may be, some of the Facebook drama referred to above happened in the "Freewayjim" group, which is probably the biggest roads group on Facebook. It's operated by Jim Georges, who participated on MTR but still hasn't made his way to this forum. He's pretty insistent on posting good quality photos, giving credit for photos not taken by the poster, and so on. There were some issues in that group, and I believe a couple of others, about photos being shared without credit being given, and they may have been from this individual poster.

Ridge Route, eh? Are we going to see some battles with Max Rockatansky that rival Beltway vs. Sprjus4? 

I think it's time to move on from the lane-splitting.