A Second Chance?

When we post something,we are given a four hour window in which
to edit the post.I was wondering if it would be possible to give a member
a chance to edit a post before issuing penalties if the post is still within the
time limit?

Originally posted by mamabeth
When we post something,we are given a four hour window in which
to edit the post.I was wondering if it would be possible to give a member
a chance to edit a post before issuing penalties if the post is still within the
time limit?

I don't see this as a workable solution. If everyone was given this
privilege then it would make mods jobs even more intensive than it is just now.

If you haven't edited after four hours then it is likely you were never going to.
Besides that . if it was a serious breach of the T&C's, a mod would be down on it long before fours hours
had elapsed.

reply to post by rigel4


I know how to be careful and watch what I post.I am
concerned about newer members who might not have
the experience to know what to post and what not to.

The time limit is less than four hours, I believe it is only two now, even though the "Edit" button sticks around after your opportunity to edit has expired.

One change that I would appreciate is not putting the "this post was edited" thing at the bottom if you edit it within the first minute or two. 90% of the time that I edit a post is because I see a problem (misspelling, tag repair, grammar or punctuation errors, etc) immediately after posting. I may be wrong, but I think I remember it behaving that way in the past.

One problem with a longer "edit" time could be with responses.

If somebody responds to you and you don't like it, a "next day" edit could make the responder look foolish.

That could be considered a "tactic" for a "bait & switch" post.

I think the "edit" time should be 30 minutes.

I have actually seen some examples of "edits" after a negative response.

Originally posted by xuenchen
I have actually seen some examples of "edits" after a negative response.

That's why I almost always quote the post I'm responding to -- they can't edit my posts

reply to post by adjensen


Regarding the "this post was edited text. As moderators we rely upon that particular item quite often - as some of our more rowdy ( and usually temporary ) members have a tendency to post something way, way, way, way over the line - let it sit for a few minutes, and then edit it down to something less offensive. By the time we get the complaints from other members we're too late to see. But if there is an edit tag... we can begin to piece together what's happened and get an admin involved.

~Heff

Admittedly the 4 hours window is a bit spurious at times.

However I'm always willing to make an edit to a post, so long as it isn't to cover yourself for being a jerk.

That, and not attempting anything sneaky or being dishonest for arguments sake, etc..

So just drop me a PM if there's something you need to edit and me along with other staff ( depending on the nature of the edit) will determine if the edit is appropriate, or if the post should stand as is.

~Tenth

Perhaps penalties could be lessened if the poster reports themselves for not following the T&C. I personally give 0 poops about getting docked points, the only real reason I feel bad about the whole thing is making the mods job a pain.

I get dinged fairly often for off topic, occasionally for being a dick, and once for political trolling (which I contest). I just don't see it as a huge deal and edits lasting that long would throw off the flow of a thread.

Despite all the commercial friendly upgrades, ats still has not managed to stop tricking persons into believing the window for edit is 4 hours. It is not. It is 2 hours. Don't be fooled. It has been 2 hours as long as I have been around.

What I would like to see is about a two minute window of time to delete a post. Too often a bounced return key or a snag while a post is being uploaded results in a double-post. I have had similar happen also when accidentally hitting the "quote" button instead of "edit".

There are other circumstances when such a feature could be used to save a member a bit of embarrassment as well. A one or two minute no harm/no foul window would be most welcome.

reply to post by Erongaricuaro


You think that's bad. Last night I actioned a post - got computer freeze - and when it unfroze I found that I'd actioned the same post 6 times.

Talk about a moment of panic.

~Heff

reply to post by Erongaricuaro


Id be OK with that. It would have to be real short though. I can also see some members getting away with shenanigans and name calling though. Ive caught a number of folks pre edit with the ol quote feature.

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by xuenchen
I have actually seen some examples of "edits" after a negative response.

That's why I almost always quote the post I'm responding to -- they can't edit my posts

yes that works....usually.

I have had people accuse me of actually "editing" the quotes ....

for example:

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by xuenchen
I have actually seen some examples of "edits" after a negative response.

That's why I almost always quote the post I'm responding to -- they can't edit my posts

or can they

.

Originally posted by mamabeth
When we post something,we are given a four hour window in which
to edit the post.I was wondering if it would be possible to give a member
a chance to edit a post before issuing penalties if the post is still within the
time limit?

I have been a member here for how long, about 5 years? I may have gotten a single warning in that time, and if i recall correctly, the moderator who issued it, when I asked why, stated they regretted doing it. Of course, it wasn't a big deal to me, i just wanted to avoid it in the future.

what i am getting at is, the rules here on this forum are so easy that it is hard to see how it could be a frequent occurance that a policy violation happens without it being on purpose. In essence, if you follow the golden rule, provide content for the site (rather than one liners that destroy content), and provide for adequate sourcing to prevent copyright issues, you should have clear sailing.