Edited posts not showing as such.

[Spinney]

'Twasn't me that deleted it...

... but I agreed with the decision.

You've had harmless fun on this thread without modifying quotes, and rules is rules - and in the case of that rule it clearly says it must be obvious the quote has been changed (and it doesn't just mean that the quoted poster wouldn't call themselves that name..).

And I'm afraid we often have to delete things that we think are funny, because they go against Shaun's rules.

 

[classic33]

Edit within five minutes of making the post, and it won't show as being edited.
Anything over five minutes will show as being edited. One year time limit on editing a post.

Now down to four minutes for that first part

 

[Shaun]

Now down to four minutes for that first part

3 minutes (reduced from 5).

 

[Shaun]

Is there a good reason for it to be more than zero?

Yes, because I said so.

ETA: And, like most, I also like a few minutes grace to go back and edit things without my dooferishness being highlighted.

Edit history is stored for all posts, regardless of the initial time window, so if you have a query about a change just ask.

 

[classic33]

3 minutes (reduced from 5).

Only showed at four minutes.
I'll try this one just to check. Not doubting what's been said about three minutes.

 

[Shaun]

It isn't about history though. It is about situations where people reply to another person's post and the original poster then edits it, without that being apparent. It ends up looking as though the reply has done the editing. What need is there for this, beyond playing Shaun says? People should acknowledge their doofereshness more, not try to hide it.

The vast majority of posts are never edited. Of those that are most are done within a few minutes and are small, subtle changes to correct spellings or add a word or two, or picture, and don't substantially change the content or context of the post. I am happy to offer people a few minutes grace to do this without their posts being marked as edited.

It's the same on BikeRadar (+1 hour) and YACF (where I added a full stop to a post from 2009 and it still didn't publicly mark it as edited) and on most of the other forums I use too.

No one can "hide" from the edit history though and the moderator team will always be able to check if a change was substantial, and if it had a negative impact on your reply. If that does happen we can help you correct it or remove your reply, but unless you're in the habit of regularly going back to check every post you quote to see if it has been edited, you are not going to benefit from tagging it straight away or at 3+ minutes because you won't see it.

As for others seeing that a post has been edited (or not seeing the full post in your quote), it will be no different to the many occasions where only part of a post is quoted for reply. Providing your response is relevant to what you have quoted then it is unlikely anyone will take issue with it. If someone does, just let us know and we'll help you to resolve it.

Cheers,
Shaun

 

[mjr]

If the edit time goes to zero, it would be nice for non JavaScript browsers like light mobiles to have a preview option.

 

[Dogtrousers]

I actually do edit a lot, if not most of my posts. Just superficial stuff, but I'm lazy about proof reading while composing, and glaring errors often jump out at me after posting.

I'd be really sorry to lose, or have curtailed, the ability to go back and fix things. I'd live with it, of course, but the shadow of a frown may pass over my ordinarily sunny visage. So please don't reduce the edit time to zero.

I have no opinion either way whether posts are marked as edited. I've never actually noticed that it was marked. I've just gone back and edited a really old post (I put something terribly rude and contentious into it*) and lo! It was marked as being edited. I am utterly unpeturbed.

There are also info posts like my London Audaxes that I go back to repeatedly to edit and add rides as people suggest them. That's been there for a few months now and I can still edit it. If it gets locked some time in the future I will not lose any sleep.

* I didn't really.

 

[classic33]

I actually do edit a lot, if not most of my posts. Just superficial stuff, but I'm lazy about proof reading while composing, and glaring errors often jump out at me after posting.

I'd be really sorry to lose, or have curtailed, the ability to go back and fix things. I'd live with it, of course, but the shadow of a frown may pass over my ordinarily sunny visage. So please don't reduce the edit time to zero.

I have no opinion either way whether posts are marked as edited. I've never actually noticed that it was marked. I've just gone back and edited a really old post (I put something terribly rude and contentious into it*) and lo! It was marked as being edited. I am utterly unpeturbed.

There are also info posts like my London Audaxes that I go back to repeatedly to edit and add rides as people suggest them. That's been there for a few months now and I can still edit it. If it gets locked some time in the future I will not lose any sleep.

* I didn't really.

One year limit on editing a post.

 

[winjim]

Maybe just wait three minutes before replying?

 

[shouldbeinbed]

One year limit on editing a post.

As long as it's not 1 per year

I'm with @Dogtrousers, particularly as I access predominantly from my phone with its frequently idiosyncratic autocorrect that I can often miss or find I hit b or n instead of spacebar & make some pretty funky portmanteau words up by accident.

I appreciate the opportunity to save face with swift edit when I've missed a slip of the finger.

The forum rules are clear that editing a quote should not be done in malice, so to speak, nor to deliberately mislead & I guess that's what the report button is for if you take umbridge at how someone has represented you in amended quotes.

 

[Dogtrousers]

I'd also note that I'd have absolutely no objection to "this post edited x minutes ago" or whatever it says if I have edited it immediately. I don't know why anyone would care when I've edited my posts, mind ... but I've no objection to it being shown.

 

[classic33]

As long as it's not 1 per year

I'm with @Dogtrousers, particularly as I access predominantly from my phone with its frequently idiosyncratic autocorrect that I can often miss or find I hit b or n instead of spacebar & make some pretty funky portmanteau words up by accident.

I appreciate the opportunity to save face with swift edit when I've missed a slip of the finger.

The forum rules are clear that editing a quote should not be done in malice, so to speak, nor to deliberately mislead & I guess that's what the report button is for if you take umbridge at how someone has represented you in amended quotes.

You take a year to edit a post!!

 

[shouldbeinbed]

You take a year to edit a post!!

I'm a slow writer