Revisting the time stamps on EDITs and a way to see what was removed.

i know this has been brought up a couple times,but i just ran into a situation where i quoted a member, and after their reply i went back to my post and looked and part of the quote was gone. then went to their post and it was also gone, then a few minutes later part was back, but was still changed in my post. also it appeared that the way the post was structured had been changed, paragraphs or statements moved around.

i think there should be a time stamp feature added to the edit notes after a post is edited, and a way to see what and how it was changed.
if a person quotes some one and the the person goes back and changes their post this makes the quoter look as if they are making it up.

another thing that would be useful is if this edit notes could not be deleted at all, you can delete all but one.

i've seen some edit notes with a time stamp and some with out, i just think this would stop a lot of people changing things they wrote and were called on. that way they have no out without writing a separate retraction, or explanation.

reply to post by hounddoghowlie

then a few minutes later part was back but it appeared that the way the post was structured had been changed, paragraphs or statements moved around.

I do that all the time because I can't really see it in the smaller edit box.
I'll sometimes spend 15 minutes editing my post before I am happy with it and there would be conceivably ten different versions if people were quoting it during the process.

My advice is to let things lie as they are for a while before quoting.
If you know someone specifically who will do what you say, change a post after it is already quoted by someone else, then what I do is wait until I know the time is expired for making edits, before I will quote it.

My personal practice is to check for replies before I make each edit, and stop making any further edits if someone has already quoted my post, unless it is a simple spelling typo.

sadly i resemble that remark
ethical editing requires one to own up to a content change after the fact
readers will spot the difference anyway

if nothing else, its certainly considered bad form

if one is adding in, or just fixing stuff they don't see on the first several reads, like i do all the time being somewhat dyslexic,
there probably won't be a problem.

jmdewey60
reply to post by hounddoghowlie

 

then a few minutes later part was back but it appeared that the way the post was structured had been changed, paragraphs or statements moved around.

I do that all the time because I can't really see it in the smaller edit box.
I'll sometimes spend 15 minutes editing my post before I am happy with it and there would be conceivably ten different versions if people were quoting it during the process.

My advice is to let things lie as they are for a while before quoting.

well if you post something and leave it, and then edit it to keep from looking like what you were called on isn't true when another poster calls you and claim you that person is wrong a poster should be able to prove what they said.

and yes waiting until a post is past the time alotted to edit is ideal, in a hot and heavy in the moment thread allowing some some to change their words is a (for lack of a better word) disadvantage.

reply to post by hounddoghowlie


Or do what I have done on one occasion (because I didn't trust the poster in question) and take a screenshot, then paste it in as an image instead of a quote block

reply to post by Danbones

if one is adding in, or just fixing stuff they don't see on the first several reads, like i do all the time being somewhat dyslexic,

With me, it is like Walder Frey in Game of Thrones, "Sorry, old eyes."
Sometimes you have to look at it as much as a half hour later so you don't just "see" what you were thinking when you were writing.

reply to post by Rob48


yea i was wish i had done that when i saw what i think was the change.

reply to post by hounddoghowlie

and yes waiting until a post is past the time alotted to edit is ideal, in a hot and heavy in the moment thread . . .

I usually find those moments to be a good time to take a nap.
I realize a lot of people don't have that luxury.

Danbones
sadly i resemble that remark
ethical editing requires one to own up to a content change after the fact
readers will spot the difference anyway

if nothing else, its certainly considered bad form

if one is adding in, or just fixing stuff they don't see on the first several reads, like i do all the time being somewhat dyslexic,
there probably won't be a problem.

if you ever looked at some of my posts, sometimes it sounds like english is a second language for me. i have what i've been told is a mild form of dyslexia, that shows up when i try to read or write in a hurry.

ethical editing requires one to own up to a content change after the fact

and this is so true

reply to post by hounddoghowlie


So basically you want to corner someone.? Go for the throat?

I know what you mean. Also though, a person like me who often does have to edit posts, someone could easily quote me as saying something I didn't, and make it look like I edited it out. Another thing I just noticed, posting timestamp, and edit timestamp, can sometimes be wierd. Like it seems like they might be using different time zones?

I am on a cell phone and I have fat finger syndrome.

I end up editing alot because I proof read reall quick and miss alot of mistakes.

Also being that I am not an English major, I might feel the need to edit a post once in a while to better convey my message. Not necessarily change the meaning of the content, but change the manner in which it is written.

I usually put why I edit the comment, but recently my phone likes to throw whole quotes in the edit box also, user error combined with syndome as indicated..lol

If I quote someone and they end up editing or removing the info, I throw in a ETA: just to let everyone know that they edited their post. I don't change mine.

This has happened with a well known poster a few times.