Why can't we edit/delete original posts?

[Jack]

justification to “protect the masses”.

This is not about malevolent users or even users in general, this is about the forum. Problems that come from unlimited editing are often unintentional and not malicious. Protecting the integrity of the forum simply means that information remains reliable and accurate. No one assumes users will abuse the function, but the edit limit does prevent this. There is no prejudice or distrust- you are simply projecting your own fears (and very apparent distrust of authority) onto the forum. This is not about you, or the "masses", it is about setting the forum up for the future.

I want to be a contributing and active member to this forum but I am now not motivated to do so.

As I said before, this forum is probably not for you- especially if you value unlimited editing over connecting with the community.

Since it seems there is support on both sides of this issue, I propose we do a poll on the time limit. Yes, there will always be a time limit. Thoughts?

 

[GTO 409]

New member here. I've been frustrated by limited editing time for comments on other websites, e.g., the Washington Post, where you only have 5 minutes to edit! I end up having to reply to my own post to make a correction; which works, but they use *nested* replies, so that the “correction” appears right under the original post. So, that's one avenue, albeit one that would likely require a programming change and be too big a change for many, if not most, users. But an hour or two seems quite sufficient time to catch and correct many, if not most, errors.

Still, given how welcoming and informative people are here, I’m doubtful that there would be much of a problem under an open editing system. You could run an experiment. Say, for a month, give users unlimited editing time — and see whether any problems arise. In any event, since that option seems off the table, running a poll would be good. I'd still suggest including “unlimited time” as one of the choices just to gauge how much of an interest there is in that.

In any event, as a new member, whether the editing time is one hour, two hours, a week, or unlimited does not change my appreciation for what is being offered here!

 

[Jack]

So, perhaps, an experiment is in order. Give user unlimited editing time for a month —and see whether any problems arise.

No. We have more than enough information to make this decision. A decision made in a moment, monitored for a month, does not have the authority to change our community's discourse for an unending, ongoing future. We are not fishing for problems, they will come regardless, either this day or the coming days. We are not going to entertain various use-case scenarios; no decisions will ever be made based on "what-ifs". While I understand this may be personally annoying, it ultimately shall not affect how or what we share with others. If this community is to be trusted and respected, it must remain consistent and transparent. To have integrity is to remain whole, and unlimited editing runs counter to this principal. While individuals may flounder, this forum will not.

I gladly welcome you, and though I do not agree, I truly appreciate your thoughts and opinions.

 

[jdonalds]

I just made edits to a 9 day old post on jetboaters.net.

 

[GTO 409]

Jack, what a way to slam a new member!

A resounding, patronizing "No." is hardly welcoming. Nor is a string of nots: "We are not fishing"; "We are not going to entertain"; "no decisions shall ever be made"; "it ultimately shall not affect", etc.

Did you read my comment carefully at all? You obviously missed the very next sentence in what I wrote:

"In any event, since that option seems off the table, running a poll would be good."​

Your reaction actually confirms a concern raised earlier about totalitarian control of forums. You wrote:

"If this community is to be trusted and respected, it must remain consistent and transparent. To have integrity is to remain whole, and unlimited editing runs counter to this principal."​

First, it's "principle". Second, providing longer editing time or even unlimited time (which I already stated I realized was off the table) is a sign of trust and respect. Assuming that people will willfully rewrite history is distrustful -- and disrespectful. Third, instead of a proper welcome, and acknowledging my summary (see below), you unloaded on me with your patronizing string of "nos" and "nots". I concluded with this, which you didn't even respond to:

In any event, as a new member, whether the editing time is one hour, two hours, a week, or unlimited does not change my appreciation for what is being offered here!​

I hope that you'll see fit to leave this post up and not exercise a heavy hand because I have a different point of view and now feel disrespected as a new member!

By the way, I'm a moderator of another forum on the Internet and have never responded to anyone even remotely like this or so egregiously misread a new member's post. I've always made sure to respond with a positive, welcoming comment, not a barrage of put-downs followed by a token throwaway line: "I gladly welcome you".

My sense is that you felt under attack by this thread and that your judgment or the forum's approach was being questioned -- and that my post felt to you like piling on. But when we ask for thoughts and reactions, as moderators, we have to welcome input and not immediately criticize what is being suggested or proposed -- and, especially, not respond quickly and harshly to those with a different viewpoint. (See your earlier response to another poster in which you basically said, "It's this way or the highway" and suggested the person might want to leave the forum if unlimited editing time mattered so much to them! Again, not very welcoming.)

 

[Jack]

Jack, what a way to slam a new member!

A resounding, patronizing "No." is hardly welcoming. Nor is a string of nots: "We are not fishing"; "We are not going to entertain"; "no decisions shall ever be made"; "it ultimately shall not affect", etc.

Did you read my comment carefully at all? You obviously missed the very next sentence in what I wrote:

"In any event, since that option seems off the table, running a poll would be good."​

Your reaction actually confirms a concern raised earlier about totalitarian control of forums. You wrote:

"If this community is to be trusted and respected, it must remain consistent and transparent. To have integrity is to remain whole, and unlimited editing runs counter to this principal."​

First, it's "principle". Second, providing longer editing time or even unlimited time (which I already stated I realized was off the table) is a sign of trust and respect. Assuming that people will willfully rewrite history is distrustful -- and disrespectful. Third, instead of a proper welcome, and acknowledging my summary (see below), you unloaded on me with your patronizing string of "nos" and "nots". I concluded with this, which you didn't even respond to:

In any event, as a new member, whether the editing time is one hour, two hours, a week, or unlimited does not change my appreciation for what is being offered here!​

I hope that you'll see fit to leave this post up and not exercise a heavy hand because I have a different point of view and now feel disrespected as a new member!

By the way, I'm a moderator of another forum on the Internet and have never responded to anyone even remotely like this or so egregiously misread a new member's post. I've always made sure to respond with a positive, welcoming comment, not a barrage of put-downs followed by a token throwaway line: "I gladly welcome you".

My sense is that you felt under attack by this thread and that your judgment or the forum's approach was being questioned -- and that my post felt to you like piling on. But when we ask for thoughts and reactions, as moderators, we have to welcome input and not immediately criticize what is being suggested or proposed -- and, especially, not respond quickly and harshly to those with a different viewpoint. (See your earlier response to another poster in which you basically said, "It's this way or the highway" and suggested the person might want to leave the forum if unlimited editing time mattered so much to them! Again, not very welcoming.)

Your feeling welcome does not change the fact that I welcome you. Just about all of the information that you claim I did not read has been addressed already. What wasn’t addressed was the useless call for an experiment. Don’t be so foolish to believe that I am any different from other users here. I am free to criticize and counter any idea or thought, just as you are. I mean no disrespect, I simply choose to remain firm in my judgement of the community. I am not obligated by any means to coddle every new user. You are correct I feel attacked, this discussion has gone on too long in my opinion, but don’t mistake a firm hand for a heavy hand. Did you really expect to add fuel to a fire only for the fire to cease burning until the fuel is adequately introduced? As a moderator, when I ask for thoughts and opinions, I expect them to come with reverence to all preceding thoughts, however I recognize that most users, yourself included, don’t take all the previous information into account, thus it is necessary for me to shut down any thought that may spur more useless banter.

I don’t know how else to put this- if your fear of a “heavy hand” and your feelings of “distrust” are the motivation for unlimited editing, then you are more worried about yourself than the community. I have already explained that this is not about you or me or any other user. I do not assume any action from users. I have already explained that there will be no heavy hand. I happily accept that users may leave for another forum in search for something that better appeals to their desires.

Again, if you are here for yourself rather than the community, this is not the place for you.

 

[Jack]

Final Poll added! Thanks for voting everyone!