It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Proposal: Extended Edits for OPs only, BUT....

page: 1
6

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 15 2016 @ 09:36 PM
link   
Recently I created a thread, and later on (maybe a day later) I came upon some new data that supports the OP. I had to alert mods to get that info in the OP.

Proposal:

So, we have a time limit to edit ANY post. That is a good thing, because we don't want people indefinitely editing their posts to add or change things that people called them out on, or things where the original response was....lacking.

But what if for Ops we changed something: We still have the usual 4 hours to edit (ehem, change) anything in the OP, but we should also be allowed to add info at the end of the OP after that time is up, similar to the "x edited because why in this thread." The most important thing is that after the original 4 hours pass, the body of the original OP can NOT be changed (per current rules), but you can still edit and add info as an addendum at the bottom, but only when it's supporting information and not strictly commentary. That might require additional moderation to determine relevancy, but the point is: if you put forth the effort to create a well thought out OP, and you come upon some additional info after the fact, it should BE in the OP as supporting data or evidence, and the OP should have the option to do it.

Maybe an alert is easier and less muddled, but it might be a good consideration.

Or not, because people might take advantage of it and it would overwhelm the mods.




posted on Jul, 15 2016 @ 09:54 PM
link   
Actually the edit time should be reduced imo.

Too many times the edit feature get abused after other members comment on original posts.




posted on Jul, 15 2016 @ 09:59 PM
link   
No edits at all.




posted on Jul, 15 2016 @ 10:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence


I can see how that change you propose would benefit those that had a systematic reason to change the data, but it would be too late. Postings were done to that exact wording/facts/figures. Your being allowed to change your "story" means that the subsequent posters were no longer relevant or wrong. Win-win for you.



posted on Jul, 15 2016 @ 10:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence


We still have the usual 4 hours to edit (them, change) anything in the OP, but we should also be allowed to add info at the end of the OP after that time is up, similar to the "x edited because why in this thread.

They aren't busy enough? If you want to add info you can do it anytime, in another post.

If you didn't research thoroughly enough in the first place thats on you.



posted on Jul, 15 2016 @ 11:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

I don't see that as something needed. It's easy enough to add information in the form of a response, and people reading the thread can still see it. Edits, in general, aren't a bad thing. I use them, for typos, or some quote issue, if I miss a character or something. That said, I see a lot of them with no reason listed, which always makes me winder. For an OP, should be the same as any other post.



posted on Jul, 16 2016 @ 04:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence
We still have the usual 4 hours to edit (ehem, change) anything in the OP,

I should warn you, for future reference, that we only get two hours (whatever that message says).
When we edit within the time-limit, we get a little message just above the edit box, saying "You have x minutes remaining to edit this post".
If you notice a mistake and edit immediately, as I sometimes have to do, the figure will probably be "119 minutes". They are obviously counting down from 120 minutes. That's two hours in the normal universe.

I think the "4 hours" message came about because somebody was unconsciously counting thirty minutes to the hour.
There are fairly frequent threads in this forum about the discrepancy.



posted on Jul, 16 2016 @ 12:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aliensun
a reply to: Liquesence


I can see how that change you propose would benefit those that had a systematic reason to change the data, but it would be too late. Postings were done to that exact wording/facts/figures. Your being allowed to change your "story" means that the subsequent posters were no longer relevant or wrong. Win-win for you.



You obviously didn't understand the OP.



posted on Jul, 16 2016 @ 12:41 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
a reply to: Liquesence

I don't see that as something needed. It's easy enough to add information in the form of a response, and people reading the thread can still see it. Edits, in general, aren't a bad thing. I use them, for typos, or some quote issue, if I miss a character or something. That said, I see a lot of them with no reason listed, which always makes me winder. For an OP, should be the same as any other post.


Yes, in the form of a "response," which can be a problem...if it's on page 8 or 20. Some relevant info (a link to a study, data, etc) that can be an addendum to the OP would help. Not everyone reads every page in threads that become very long, so it there is pertinent (supportive) information that comes to light on page 15, edit the OP to add only a link to it.
edit on 16-7-2016 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 16 2016 @ 12:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

Too many times the edit feature get abused after other members comment on original posts.





That's very true.

I still think allowing edits only for additional information at the end of the OP would help to make some OPs better because it would allow people who first read the thread/OP to have a more valid information available.



posted on Jul, 16 2016 @ 12:52 PM
link   
I agree for the times of an OP.

the edit time should be shorter and only used for typos and stuff.

but an "add-time" could be extended and a timestamp on each "add" is very clear and useful. Maybe even have the color of the text slightly different to make it extra clear for readers that that part is added.




posted on Jul, 16 2016 @ 12:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dumbass
Maybe even have the color of the text slightly different to make it extra clear for readers that that part is added.

And if the OP is correcting a spelling error (I always type "Beast" as "Besat"), the differences in colour will serve as a spelling aid for other people. "See, this is where he got it wrong. Try to avoid that mistake".



posted on Jul, 16 2016 @ 03:39 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

u agree - zero edits - for all - i have had people backtrack onece the fallacy of thier thread or post premise has meen pointed out - let all things fall as they are

if you want to revise your position - do it in a new post



posted on Jul, 19 2016 @ 01:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence
Yes, in the form of a "response," which can be a problem...if it's on page 8 or 20. Some relevant info (a link to a study, data, etc) that can be an addendum to the OP would help. Not everyone reads every page in threads that become very long, so it there is pertinent (supportive) information that comes to light on page 15, edit the OP to add only a link to it.


On a long thread, that can be an issue, sure, but there would have to be some sort of procedure to preserve the OP. Maybe a reserved slot, just beneath, for later comments, that would show the date those were added. Not sure how easy that would be to do, though.



posted on Jul, 19 2016 @ 08:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: DISRAELI

originally posted by: Liquesence
We still have the usual 4 hours to edit (ehem, change) anything in the OP,

I should warn you, for future reference, that we only get two hours (whatever that message says).
When we edit within the time-limit, we get a little message just above the edit box, saying "You have x minutes remaining to edit this post".
If you notice a mistake and edit immediately, as I sometimes have to do, the figure will probably be "119 minutes". They are obviously counting down from 120 minutes. That's two hours in the normal universe.

I think the "4 hours" message came about because somebody was unconsciously counting thirty minutes to the hour.
There are fairly frequent threads in this forum about the discrepancy.
Either that or it's the Mandela effect and you're switching from the universe where ATS has 4 hours equal 240 minutes to another universe where ATS has 4 hours equal only 120 minutes. I'm trying to find my way back to the alternate universe where ATS has 4 hours equal 240 minutes but I can't seem to get back to that one, I guess I'm stuck in the same one as you.

Seriously though 4 hours would be good. Maybe ATS can change this universe to have 60 minutes per hour instead of 30? Is that possible?

edit on 2016719 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Jul, 23 2016 @ 10:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

originally posted by: Liquesence
Yes, in the form of a "response," which can be a problem...if it's on page 8 or 20. Some relevant info (a link to a study, data, etc) that can be an addendum to the OP would help. Not everyone reads every page in threads that become very long, so it there is pertinent (supportive) information that comes to light on page 15, edit the OP to add only a link to it.


On a long thread, that can be an issue, sure, but there would have to be some sort of procedure to preserve the OP. Maybe a reserved slot, just beneath, for later comments, that would show the date those were added. Not sure how easy that would be to do, though.


That's what I'm talking about. After the initial and current edit period, the main body of the OP can not be changed. Only *relevant* footnotes, more or less, with a time stamp or a date stamp (like the edits have) that can't be removed, and maybe even a word count so there is only a short description and a link or something.
edit on 23-7-2016 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2016 @ 10:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

That might not be a bad plan, as long as it was known for certain which portion was added.



new topics

top topics



 
6

log in

join