Hey! I Can't Edit My Posts Any More!!!

[syrenn]

When was this changed? And why? Because it never used to be this way.

I cant remember, but it has been quite a while. I think it occurred during Pixie's admin.


the why is what i stated before. People were going back, editing posts days, weeks, months later.... and totally changing their posts. Then coming in, linking back and saying... see...i NEVER said that... or i DID say that.

 

[Sweet_Caroline]

Refreshing the page may work. Sometimes the thanks button isn't there but comes back once the page is refreshed.

 

[JoeBlam]

Here's a thought....how about "editing" your post before you post it? Life isn't always gonna give you a mulligan son....measure twice, cut once.

 

[Intense]

Well, whatever - I respectfully call bull shit here. Being able to edit posts, no matter HOW old, is very important, at least to me, and I'm sure to lots of others here if they stop to think about it. For example, something can be made apparent to you that you didn't know about when you put the post up originally, that will cause you to want to edit the post. Sometimes, that can happen days or even weeks after the post was posted. We should be able to edit our posts REGARDLESS of their age.

And consider this - the Delete feature is contained within the Edit feature. So now, we can only delete our posts if we think to do it in the first 24 hours or so?

It never used to be this way and if a click or two needs to be done by an admin somewhere, then let's get clicking. There are forums that have this "feature." I don't belong to them . . .

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-Wy_BRFElc]1973 Star-Kist Tuna with Charlie commercial - YouTube[/ame]

Sorry George. It is what it is, for good reason. You have a reasonable amount of time to clean up any posting problems.

 

[Intense]

When was this changed? And why? Because it never used to be this way.

I cant remember, but it has been quite a while. I think it occurred during Pixie's admin.


the why is what i stated before. People were going back, editing posts days, weeks, months later.... and totally changing their posts. Then coming in, linking back and saying... see...i NEVER said that... or i DID say that.

Yep, and that works until you find an unedited quote link back. Also, edits are time stamped.

 

[Sweet_Caroline]

I think editing a post hours or days after is wrong and the reason is a person should stick up for their convictions of a view and if they change their mind then be brave and say so in another post. Editing posts a long time later would confuse others. Many times we may post things we may regret, or change our mind but most should come clean and state so.
Just my honest opinion.

 

[George Costanza]

OK - I get it. Perhaps y'all are right on this - I hadn't thought about it in light of the arguments being made here since I have never even thought about using the edit feature to alter the context of a post of mine and then arguing I never said it. So I will remove my bull shit call and learn to live with it.

But can someone at least answer me this - limiting the editing of posts to a 24-hour period is a relatively new thing here, right? I'm sure that, not so long ago really, we were able to edit all of our posts, no matter how old they were, right?

 

[peach174]

OK - I get it. Perhaps y'all are right on this - I hadn't thought about it in light of the arguments being made here since I have never even thought about using the edit feature to alter the context of a post of mine and then arguing I never said it. So I will remove my bull shit call and learn to live with it.

But can someone at least answer me this - limiting the editing of posts to a 24-hour period is a relatively new thing here, right? I'm sure that, not so long ago really, we were able to edit all of our posts, no matter how old they were, right?

No George.
It has been around for awhile now.
How are you doing since your operation?

 

[Flopper]

I don't see why we should not be able to use the edit function regardless of the age of the post. However, once people start replying to the post, then deleting or changing the post could cause problems.

 

[Amelia]

OK - I get it. Perhaps y'all are right on this - I hadn't thought about it in light of the arguments being made here since I have never even thought about using the edit feature to alter the context of a post of mine and then arguing I never said it. So I will remove my bull shit call and learn to live with it.

But can someone at least answer me this - limiting the editing of posts to a 24-hour period is a relatively new thing here, right? I'm sure that, not so long ago really, we were able to edit all of our posts, no matter how old they were, right?

I think the editing window might have been longer than 24 hours when I first started.

 

[George Costanza]

OK - I get it. Perhaps y'all are right on this - I hadn't thought about it in light of the arguments being made here since I have never even thought about using the edit feature to alter the context of a post of mine and then arguing I never said it. So I will remove my bull shit call and learn to live with it.

But can someone at least answer me this - limiting the editing of posts to a 24-hour period is a relatively new thing here, right? I'm sure that, not so long ago really, we were able to edit all of our posts, no matter how old they were, right?

No George.
It has been around for awhile now.
How are you doing since your operation?

What is "a while"? I know it's been around for a while, but I also know there was a time when it was not in force. My question is, when was that? Six months ago? A year ago? Six weeks ago?

I'm doing pretty good. Had the knee surgery on May 31. A week later, I fell on both knees and injured the left knee which now hurts worse than the right (surgery) one. The surgery knee seems to have survived the fall just fine - I had a good surgeon. Anyway, I'm walking normally. No limp and hardly any pain. The pain comes when I try to bend either knee too far. Sooooo . . . I start physical therapy on Monday. Thanks for your concern.

 

[George Costanza]

OK - I get it. Perhaps y'all are right on this - I hadn't thought about it in light of the arguments being made here since I have never even thought about using the edit feature to alter the context of a post of mine and then arguing I never said it. So I will remove my bull shit call and learn to live with it.

But can someone at least answer me this - limiting the editing of posts to a 24-hour period is a relatively new thing here, right? I'm sure that, not so long ago really, we were able to edit all of our posts, no matter how old they were, right?

I think the editing window might have been longer than 24 hours when I first started.

I can guarantee you it was when you started. I'm guessing the change has been made within the past 6 months or so - maybe even less than that. Hopefully, we'll find out.

 

[syrenn]

OK - I get it. Perhaps y'all are right on this - I hadn't thought about it in light of the arguments being made here since I have never even thought about using the edit feature to alter the context of a post of mine and then arguing I never said it. So I will remove my bull shit call and learn to live with it.

But can someone at least answer me this - limiting the editing of posts to a 24-hour period is a relatively new thing here, right? I'm sure that, not so long ago really, we were able to edit all of our posts, no matter how old they were, right?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/announcements-and-feedback/233729-edit-window-reduced-to-24-hours.html

 

[George Costanza]

I don't see why we should not be able to use the edit function regardless of the age of the post. However, once people start replying to the post, then deleting or changing the post could cause problems.

I kind of agree with you, but I guess wiser heads have decided otherwise because, apparently, the editing function was being abused by people changing what they wrote and then claiming they never said the first version.

You're right about editing after replies are made because replies generally contain a quote of the original post, and editing the original post will not change the quoted portion found in a reply to the original. (Got all that?) I can remember editing an old post that had been replied to and then asking the author of the reply if they would be so kind as to delete the quote of my original post in their reply post - which proves that it didn't used to be this way.

WHEN did it change? Can SOMEONE please answer that for me? That's all I want to know. You KNOW how George obsesses on things . .

 

[syrenn]

I don't see why we should not be able to use the edit function regardless of the age of the post. However, once people start replying to the post, then deleting or changing the post could cause problems.

if anyone wants to add an edit.... quote their post...and add the edit. Its pretty simple.

 

[syrenn]

I don't see why we should not be able to use the edit function regardless of the age of the post. However, once people start replying to the post, then deleting or changing the post could cause problems.

I kind of agree with you, but I guess wiser heads have decided otherwise because, apparently, the editing function was being abused by people changing what they wrote and then claiming they never said the first version.

You're right about editing after replies are made because replies generally contain a quote of the original post, and editing the original post will not change the quoted portion found in a reply to the original. (Got all that?) I can remember editing an old post that had been replied to and then asking the author of the reply if they would be so kind as to delete the quote of my original post in their reply post - which proves that it didn't used to be this way.

WHEN did it change? Can SOMEONE please answer that for me? That's all I want to know. You KNOW how George obsesses on things . .

see.... now that is were it would get sticky....if no one quoted them....

there was no record of the original... they could change anything they wanted to, too something totally different.


and goorge.... look up. I posted where it was changed. You can stop obsessing now.

 

[Ernie S.]

I prefer people not being able to go back and edit their old posts. There's enough revisionist history already.

I guess it could be abused - but the reasons to do it FAR outweigh the reasons not to do it.

More importantly, how did this change happen, who did it and how can it be reversed?

You would be within your rights to reply to your old post and point out that your stand has changed.
If you could go back to old posts and make substantial changes, you could play nefarious games.
Take data mining, for example. Suppose I had, a year or so back, posted my home address and someone came across it and posted my personal information a year later. So now, I've grown a bit wiser and don't want my info out there. I could go back and delete the address and then report the person that posted it.

 

[Pop23]

Anyone else having this problem? Check and see, if you don't know. I go to a post of mine and there is no Edit button on the bottom right. If I put a post up and go back to it within the hour, the Edit button is there. But if I try to edit a post that is a day or two old (or older), I can't do it. I know that at least one other poster is having a similar problem.

I am having the problem with my computer at work, which is running IE-8. I have Firefox at home and will check it out tonight to see if IE is the culprit.

What's up? Anyone else experiencing this?

My posts are brilliant to begin with. I don't need no stinking edit button!

 

[Surfer]

I am kind of lost and confused also.

 

[George Costanza]

George is no longer lost or confused. Game over - all questions answered. Nothing more to see here, folks . . . move along . . .

(Thanks and public acknowledgement to Syrenn for providing the answer regarding when the change was made. )