Edit quote at bottom of edited post

I'm not sure if it's just me but sometimes I find the edit quote at the bottom of an eddied post a little annoying. I know people can sometimes change the content of a post but there must be a better way of letting people know they have done this.

Not really sure how it could be done but admit it people it does annoy you


Maybe the changed content could be highlighted, I'm not a programmer so I am not sure who difficult of a change this would be.

Opp's another edit:

[edit on 10-3-2010 by NotAgain]



[edit on 10-3-2010 by NotAgain]

reply to post by NotAgain


No reason for more than 1 ETA quote...
You can backspace delete the previous one upon your next edit...that what you mean?

Its easy enough to cut out the multiple edit notes and leave only the one.

reply to post by Doc Holiday


Yes I know it can be deleted but it still leaves one and it's still annoying, kind of makes people look dumb even though it may be a genuine spelling/gamma mistake. Most people don't even remove the other edit quotes for some reason, the OP was just an example.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


Even with one edit quote, lets say 4 people edit on one page of the topic.... That could be a post on the same page rather than the next. Lets look at something like the Yellowstone 500+ thread, take away all the edits quotes and I bet it's only 450 pages long.

especially when people leave the huge gaps.














[edit on 10-3-2010 by NotAgain]

reply to post by NotAgain


If thread length is the concern I would think that far more wasteful than the "edit" line would be posters poor quoting practices where they simple quote the entire post they wish to respond to rather than editing out the unrelated material.

especially when people leave the huge gaps.

More exemplary of bad posting rather than the edit line itself being the problem.

[edit on 10-3-2010 by thisguyrighthere]

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


But if the edit wasn't there it would close the gap, they could just simply move it to the top of the post instead. I admit though it is bad posting, bit it does not sink in with some people. They post and then just click out the topic and onto the next one.....

^^^Above this where the time and date is should be the edit quote.

e.g posted on 10-3-2010 @ 11:55 PM :Edit

Thats all we need, it's not like we can edit any other day, you only get so much time. And when we re-edit it shouldn't change and add another quote.

[edit on 10-3-2010 by NotAgain]

reply to post by NotAgain


I'm not in love with it either; but it does have another function.

I once saw a poster make a huge mistake by lashing out at someone, while presenting material which was quite erroneous.

When the second poster then linked information proving the first poster was completely wrong, the first poster then went back and changed his post to appear to be correct, consequently making the second poster look foolish.

But then the second poster called attention to what he had done, and we could all clearly see the attempt to rescue himself, and consequently making the second poster look as though he was the one who was mistaken.

The first poster eventually apologized for his actions.

If this makes any sense whatsoever.

I like the edit quote. I think it helps keep people honest. I have seen one or two threads where people went back and deleted portions of their post. Then they wrote that ideas being atributed to them were lies. That happened with the edit tag at the bottom of their post. Imagine how much more often it would happen if it wasn't so clearly visible.

Sometimes the 'edit' code is useful in debates. I can think of a couple of well-known members who edit their posts to weasel out of awkward challenges. I'll go back to the post and find the point has vanished. The appearance of 'edit' in their posts confirms the sneakiness.

reply to post by ladyinwaiting


That's a great point, but also points to the option of quoting someone prior to replying to them (especially if what is being replied to is controversial) just to ensure the original message is on record.

Edits should not necessarily be taken negatively - for if they are, I'm in trouble since there is an edit on nearly every post I've made. More often than not, I will think of more info. to add, or a better way to phrase something - so, there ya go - apparently I never graduated from having to write a rough draft.

_____________________________________
ETA:
What would be great is if a post correction would not show as edited in (say the first 5 minutes after the post goes up) which gives someone enough time to add, rephrase or catch a spelling error that was missed, without having to document an edit. Thereafter, the edit is documented.
I have seen this feature in place on other forums and it is helpful.

*Another option would be to add an edit counter to the top of the post alongside the date/time stamp... that would be great, too!



[edit on 10-3-2010 by LadySkadi]

I am in no way saying the function should be removed, just moved as it looks untidy more than anything. I think it would look good near the time and date stamp too

Just a thought anyway, maybe I am too picky lol

Anyway thanks for the replies, I don't disagree with anything you are saying.

NotAgain

EDIT: JOKE JOKE

reply to post by NotAgain


I'm responding to the OP.

I sometimes agree with you, but i must admit i too am guilty of using the edit tool.

I've noticed there are a great deal of ATSers who do take the time to explain their reasons for the edit and what was edited. I often do this myself, but perhaps this is good blogging behavior.

Often when i use the edit tool it is to correct grammar and spelling or simply to add an additional thought which corresponds with the existing thought or contribution.

I don't think the edit tool is meant to be confusing or be an attempt to annoy people, but rather a tool that is available for a short time in order for people to make some corrections to their contribution.

Personally i'm not offended, but i don't think the edit tool should be used to totally change the posters' orignial content, or original post all together. On this point i guess i can agree. But, most of the time, i don't think this is the case.

Best Regards,
John

Post Script -
Dear OP, don't know why you added me to your respected foes list, but looking at your public profile information i noticed you have only a few friends while you have dozens of respected foes.

Any reason for this, or do you honestly think you have that many enemies on ATS?

What aspect of my posts or contributions caused you to add me as a respected foe? Just curious.

reply to post by Esoteric Teacher



I too have become a "respected foe"............any reason?

as far as the edit line- yes it is annoying, especially because not too many folks bother to describe what the edit was.



EDIT to put a "s" in "repected"


[edit on 20-4-2010 by IandEye]

I don't see any way to edit my post. No text. No "button". No "drop-down menu". What do I click on (or otherwise do) to allow me to edit my post?

I believe the 2010 ATS redesign allows the member to type the reason for their edit into a slot which will appear in the edited post. Instead of having an unknown edit tag or members manually typing in a reason they edited their post, they will have the ability to select why they edited.

Grammatical errors, added new info, etc.

reply to post by NotAgain

take away all the edits quotes and I bet it's only 450 pages long.

There are 20 individual posts on each page of a thread, after the 20th post is reached a new page in the thread begins. Each post allots for a selected amount of characters within that post. As you're creating a post in a thread, at the bottom left of the text box it shows your alloted amount of available characters, i.e. mine characters (8000 maximum). I am pretty sure the amount of maximum characters increases with the different levels a member can achieve as I remember this one time reading 6500 max.

So each page could technically have a post that is filled to capacity with text to the maximum amount allowed and it would still contain 20 posts per page. True the page would be longer to scroll but the amount of edits within a post will not make the pages that have been created decrease in any way.

Just thought I'd point that out to the OP

Originally posted by jhwilson9
I don't see any way to edit my post. No text. No "button". No "drop-down menu". What do I click on (or otherwise do) to allow me to edit my post?

---------

Strangely, I can see an "edit" button at the top of my post for this entry, and also for a second entry that I posted in a topic blog:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

but not in the first post I made (look toward the bottom of the linked page for my two posts on the St. Malachy ..." topic, by "jhwilson9" - me).
The two posts I did today have the following in the upper right corner:
edit "quote" REPLY TO:
but the first post (last night) has only:
"quote" REPLY TO:

I suppose you can't see what I am seeing, because the edit box would only show for one's own posts, not the posts of others.

So I am still unable to edit my first post. Can anyone explain why and/or fix the matter?

Mod Edit: Removed link that would add stars to post.

[edit on 10-5-2010 by GAOTU789]

Originally posted by jhwilson9
I suppose you can't see what I am seeing, because the edit box would only show for one's own posts, not the posts of others.

exactly right.

So I am still unable to edit my first post. Can anyone explain why and/or fix the matter?

There is a time limit in which you can edit a post. I believe it's 2 hours. After that, the edit function disappears.