Expiring editability of posts

[JohnW2]

I've just noticed something. It seems that one's ability to edit a post seems to expire after just a day or three. Although that's the cae in many forums, I'm sure was not the case in the past. I seem to recall someone saying in the past that they couldn't edit one of their posts from 'months ago' but I haven't heard of (or noticed) the ability to edit disappearing anything like as quickly as now seems to be the case.

I'm not sure that this is such a clever idea because, in the case of regs changing etc., it can be useful to be able go back add and an 'Edit' pointing out that what the post says is no longer true. What do people think?

Kind Regards, John

 

[pete01]

People wouldn't take a 10 year old post as gospel, would they?

 

[JohnW2]

People wouldn't take a 10 year old post as gospel, would they?

Who knows - but they presumably would be less likely to if it contained an Edit which pointed out that the information it contained was no longer correct, wouldn't they?

 

[ericmark]

I have posted before about old posts, and problem with no longer being valid.

I have made errors which on bring pointed out I have changed, but could also add a further post to confirm the error.

It is only a problem when the thread is locked, I can see why threads are locked, can stop old threads bring reactivated. But often to delete would seem a better option.

Even that can cause problems when a reply is deleted and the answer remains.

I do post then read my post, and often edit for spelling errors etc. It is easy with a tablet for auto correction to go unnoticed. But a few days latter spelling hardly matters.

Maybe we should be able to delete a post? But after a few days one can change a post without any one noticing, so I can see why sysops want to limit the time.

 

[JohnW2]

I have made errors which on bring pointed out I have changed, but could also add a further post to confirm the error.

To add a further ('correcting') post, which could be many pages after the one 'containing an error' would be far from satisfactory/foolprrof - but a correction/comment actually IN the erroneous post would inevitably be seen by anyone who read it.

....But often to delete would seem a better option.

As you go on to say, that is not ideal, either, because ...

Even that can cause problems when a reply is deleted and the answer remains.

... and one couldn't have a situation in which people could delete posts which had been posted by others (i.e. 'the answer(s)')

Maybe we should be able to delete a post?

I sometimes feel the need for that if I have posted something in error, but you have highlighted at least one of the problems with that.

But after a few days one can change a post without any one noticing, so I can see why sysops want to limit the time.

There's no perfect answer. Some forums don't allow editing at all. Some forums only allow editing for a very short period (e.g. 1 hour). Others only allow editing until a further message is posted to the thread. Some allow unlimited editing 'fo ever'.

Maybe the closest to the ideal (which I've never seen implemented by any forum software) would be to allow editing 'fo ever', but with the software somehow leaving it clear what had been edited (e.g. 'striking through' deleted characters and somehow identifying any added ones).

Kind Regards, John