Editing of/Modifications to Posts on the Forum
 

I would like to address something that I've recently experienced on the Forums: posts being edited/modified after the fact.

Whereas this hosting program allows us to modify after the fact (thank God, for so many reasons) and even gives us an opportunity to explain why we edited/modified, I feel posters at times feel free to significantly alter and amend posts that are sent out there into the forums in a situation where they are actively being commented upon.

This skews the exchange and is therefore unfair and disingenuous. Who's to say what existed first?

I've been accused of doing it when I really made minimal, insignificant changes, and I've been on the receiving end of significant changes that were not acknowledged.

What, if anything, can we do about this?

Personally, I always use the "edited to" function, and if I'm doing anything beyond fixing simple spelling / grammar, I usually leave the original and put a "Edited To Add (ETA)" line at the bottom.

As for being accused of doing more: if it's a dialogue worthy of this site, there's gotta be good faith in at least that much. If there's not, then that's a good sign for me at least to disengage. (Then again, it doesn't seem to take much these days for me disengage).

I do this quite often
 

I guess I do it because no post is ever perfect, and I'm a bit compulsive that way. Often, I make a note, in bright color, then make the color softer later, once I know that the note has been read by most.

Or, I will add a note, after the word EDIT: I do try to be clear about what I am doing. Occasionally, I will correct spelling, or punctuation, or add information that I would have put in the first time, if I had thought about it. I make no apologies for that.

Sometimes, I want to get a post up quickly, to maintain continuity within the thread.

I almost always edit to make the posting clearer. I make no apologies for that.

Do you have any specific examples?

Bruce Chris

Are you talking about in threads that turn into a heated debate/argument, where one person changes his post a little to protect himself/herself from unwanted flack over something they posted in error?

Lol I think I know what you mean in general about this going on, but I don't see instances where people are accusing the other on THIS site. So please, give more examples. Otherwise, I personally don't see a problem with editing.

Unless you mean editing a previous post and that being meant to stand as a new one... that could be confusing, having to reread old posts even more to check for changes. But again, I don't see that. Enlighten us :)

Yeah, I did a LOT of this with Lee Scotia, duryng his last couple of days.
 

It was obvious that he was feeling attacked, and I pulled or re-wrote a lot of my earlier writings, but by then it was too late. Sometimes it is hard to build an honest argument, and yet express Christian kindness, especially when addressing someone I don't know.

BC

No.
 

I'm not interested in outing specific threads or individuals, but I did want to air the practice and attempt to get some sort of broad consensus about what is expected and fair.

For instance, at many other sites, once you hit "send", there is no editing possible. Very embarrassing for poor spellers like myself. It's one of the things I'm glad doesn't happen here. I like to edit too.

I'd like to suggest that we make an effort to fully use the "Reason for edit" space...or simply post anew. There's a fine line between having a conversation and gilding one's comments for the ages.

Here's a technical question, though: does anyone know if a quoted text changes when its author edits after the fact?

an experiment
 

we could experiment and find out AND MAYBE EXPLODE IN THE PROCESS !!! YIKES !

Here is a quote of the original line (or... IS it? bwahahahaha!)

The answer is .....
 

NO. the quotes stay the same.

And no Earth-shattering kaboom!:tup::D