HOME > Chowhound > Site Talk >

Discussion

Editing posts - is there any thought to not allowing it?

It seems not infrequently that a post gets edited to the point that a reply to it makes no sense. I think an easy solution would be to do away with the edit 'button' and one would just reply to oneself when wanting to edit. Or at the least, do like FB and have it indicate when a post has been edited. Any consideration of something like this?

  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
Delete
Posting Guidelines | FAQs | Feedback
Cancel
  1. The edit window is short -- 2 hours -- to keep people from putting serious holes in a conversation after the fact. We see significant, conversation-altering edits only very rarely, and mainly in a small minority of fast moving (and often argumentative) threads, so it's not something we've really considered changing. It gives people who are working on mobile devices a chance to correct Autocorrect, people who are writing longer meal reports a short time to perfect them and other people a chance to reconsider whether they should have written a post at all.

    3 Replies
    1. re: Jacquilynne

      Thanks, Jacq. Especially that last one, eh? :)

      1. re: Jacquilynne

        I suppose also when it happens to me I can always reply to myself with something like "oops, the post I replied to has been edited and my reply may not make as much sense."

        1. re: c oliver

          I've used the edit function to correct my misspellings, correct a sentence, correct my comment and delete a link already posted by another CH.

          I also use eta to add a comment or further explain my comment if I'm within the 2 hour window.

          I've also deleted myself and posted to myself to add a comment or change my mind after the 2 hour window.

          I find the edit feature useful. I know I'm not alone when I say, people do change their minds, do edit their words and do regret a post...within a comment box as well as in person.

          Please don't remove the feature. Edit allows the double check of posts.

      2. I agree that editing out relevant parts of ones posts after being responded to is obnoxious. To be honest I don't see this kind of thing happening often here, though it does on occasion.

        I edit quite a bit for clarity, typos, etc. Occasionally to provide links, support, details, etc. On a few occasions I've rethought and removed posts that came on too strong (though I try to only do this before any responses/mod actions/bannings come my way). I think the benefits outweigh the negatives, though I personally would have no problem with an automatic notification that a post has been edited at the bottom of it.

        4 Replies
        1. re: cowboyardee

          Yeah, I agree. I've thought about it and the good does outweigh the bad. Obnoxious is the best word for the blatant ones :)

          1. re: cowboyardee

            When Mods come into a thread and delete certain parts of a discussion it sometimes leaves comments out of sorts too. Since Mods can and do edit threads, I don't feel completely responsible for how a discussion can wind up even if I've had to edit, add or try to clarify my pov.

            1. re: HillJ

              On occasions, I've flagged a chain of off-topic posts within a given thread, and gotten a CH note that it's not necessary to flag all of them since the mods will move/remove all the posts in the orbit of the problem post. Except that, time and again, they don't. They remove the "perp" and leave the now-irrelevant/confusing "accomplices.

              1. re: greygarious

                Sometimes we deliberately leave replies if they seem to stand on their own but that should generally not leave them feeling irrelevant or confusing.

                We try not to do that, but sometimes we pick the wrong option in our tools, or some one has replied not quite in the chain, and we end up accidentally leaving orphans. If you notice that, do go ahead and flag again.

                Our tools let us delete a post, or delete the post and all its replies. But when we do the latter, it doesn't clear flags on the replies, and they still have to be individually cleared. It's fine to flag a couple of things or point out our mistakes, we just don't want you to feel like you need to flag every post in a 20 post digression, and we don't want to have to clear flags on every post in a 20 post digression.

          2. oh, I hope not.

            I participate on another forum that didn't allow any editing at all. Threads would wander on forever as people correcting spelling and grammar errors, and/or add or correct missing or erroneous information.

            That forum now has only a 5-minute window, which is highly annoying, but at least it gives you a fighting chance.