Visa Journey Post Edit Time?

[William33 110]

Although this is Captain Ewoks decision, how much time is appropriate for an edit to your post?

I believe 5 minutes is adequate and here's why:

1.) Everyone should have access to a spell checker. If not, the Google toolbar offers one and it is free.

2.) With respect to long, detailed posts, most people draft them in Word and then post. This offers plenty of time for afterthoughts, clarification and so forth.

3.) Given the periodic "disagreements" among the regular members, five minutes is appropriate so that original points are a matter of record.

4.) If an amendment is required, you simply add another post.

In closing, most websites offer 5 minutes or less of edit time.

Thoughts?

Edited October 17, 2009 by William33

[Spoom 8]

FYI, this was posted in connection with the discussion about edit time in Site Discussion. Check there for previous discussion.

Most forums I've been on allow unlimited edit time, actually. News sites are another story, but they're a different beast altogether.

And I agree with Wingnut Slayer; I doubt most people actually go to the trouble of opening an external application to type out their posts for a forum.

Personally, the best solution I can see would be to have posts have a restricted-to-the-poster Wiki-like nature, where the previous revisions are kept in a clickable history link. That offers the best of both worlds, but I don't know if such a mod is easily available for this forum software.

Again, I think an hour would be a good compromise.

Edited October 17, 2009 by Spoom

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Why have a time limit for edits at all? I know of one site that has no time limit, and that seems to work just fine.

[Ms. Squirrel 11]

VJ used to have no time limit on edit a few years back, but it was not exactly beneficial, so the time limit was introduced.

I say - stick with he 5 minute time limit.

[Ban Hammer 13,619]

Why have a time limit for edits at all? I know of one site that has no time limit, and that seems to work just fine.

there was some that abused that feature - one of those no i didn't say that routines......

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Why have a time limit for edits at all? I know of one site that has no time limit, and that seems to work just fine.

there was some that abused that feature - one of those no i didn't say that routines......

Perhaps the mods could stick to the five minute limit, and also add the editted by tag to their edits as well. fair is fair.

[almaty 19]

10

[Spoom 8]

Note that currently 7 people want 10+ minutes, and only 6 people want 5 or less.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

I think 10 minutes is perfect. 5 minutes doesn't allow a person to add much information and just causes a lot of double posts. Too much time and you could start having a conversation with only two posts (hope that made sense).

[Welshcookie 17]

The time limit is fine imo.

[Rocky_nBullwinkle 6]

I am perfect. I don't make mistakes.

[Scott and Mhay 57]

Hmm i am a member of a diesel forum (im an admin there) and we dont have a time limit on post edits. I have seen it a problem from time to time because if the person that they are arguing with doesnt quote their post, tbey can go back and change it. Now a couple of months back we started a new deal with the reported posts. they get reported to a separate forum for the admins and mods with an exact copy of what they said....SO there is no need for the "i didnt say that" routine. I think 5 mins is plenty of time to edit posts though.

[Empress of Groovy 373]

10 minutes. But I'm a dork and edit for minor typos.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

10 minutes. But I'm a dork and edit for minor typos.

Yes you are.

Why isn't there an option for drunken post detection???

I think 10 is fine

[The_Dude 1,142]

An Hour? #######. Come on people, pay attention to what you post. I like the 5 minutes. That way, people can't weasel out of their douchy comments with an edit. Keep it at 5 minutes, or even shorten it.