Editing old posts prohibited

[Transportman]

Ah, I misread a bit and missed the completely prohibiting part in your post. My apologies.

[Voyager One]

My apologies.

No need.

[Supercheese]

Another common practice is not only to keep the first post of a thread updated with relevant information, but also for the original poster to post a couple "Reserved for future use..." posts immediately following the first post, and update these later as the attachment limit is reached on the first post. If special exception could be made for these posts as well as the first, that would likely save the moderators from having additional requests-for-editing from GRF authors...

[orudge]

It would be technically possible to leave the first couple of posts editable, but I'm not sure yet exactly how I'll implement that.

With regards to double-posting, if there's a valid reason for it (e.g., a new release or some new information and nobody else has posted since you made your previous post), then that's fine. I'll perhaps amend the rules to make note of that.

[Purno]

My penny...

7 day limit

This is fine, attachments excluded as suggested. Some may consider them their property but that's another story.

I have to point out something else to consider. Sometimes, I (and we can assume more people here) have to post some things in sequence (i.e. graphics files). I want to avoid being considered a spammer and I add new things into the previous post as much as it goes in.
Now, completely prohibiting editing would mean no adding files/comments -> subsequent posting -> "spamming" -> getting warned by mods and banned? I wouldn't really like that to happen.

If I have to add a file to an existing post which has been posted a while back (actually, max 1 day to me), I *always* double post to be sure my new addition gets marked as "new post" for other people, so they won't miss my new addition. Sometimes I may consider deleting my post and posting it anew though.

If you add files to a post which dates a few days back, it's likely your added file gets missed.

IMO, the "double post" rule should be taken loosely.

[Whopper]

It would be technically possible to leave the first couple of posts editable, but I'm not sure yet exactly how I'll implement that.

With regards to double-posting, if there's a valid reason for it (e.g., a new release or some new information and nobody else has posted since you made your previous post), then that's fine. I'll perhaps amend the rules to make note of that.

That would be great

Maybe this is an intersting post: http://www.phpbbhacks.com/forums/unlimi ... 76883.html
Not exactly the same situation but it might give you an idea where to search

[orudge]

That is basically what I was intending to do, yes. I'll try to get it implemented this evening, if Olivia goes to sleep at a reasonable time!

[Hyronymus]

That is basically what I was intending to do, yes. I'll try to get it implemented this evening, if Olivia goes to sleep at a reasonable time!

Let's sing lullabies!

[orudge]

She is asleep. And, because of that, I can now confirm that:

All users can edit the first post of any topic they create indefinitely. Any other post can be edited for up to 7 days from the date of posting.

Currently no other posts can be edited. It may be possible to allow, say, a few posts into a topic in specific forums, but that's slightly more complicated to code. If people do find they are regularly wanting to update such topics, please let me know. Otherwise, I hope this solution will suffice for the time being.

Thanks for your patience and understanding.

[Level Crossing]

Thanks!

Speaking of which, maybe you should edit the first post to make sure everyone sees your change. ( )

[Voyager One]

All users can edit the first post of any topic they create indefinitely. Any other post can be edited for up to 7 days from the date of posting.

Thumbs up!

[Lord Aro]

Thanks SROTU

while slightly offtopic, any word about restoring the 'destroyed' threads?

[FooBar]

Well done!

Being able to edit the second or third post isn't necessary I think. One can just upload new releases in a new post and then link those from the first post. Deleting of old releases (which I do not recommend, but that's a different story) can then be done via the UCP. Slightly more work than before, but IMO just as flexible.

[orudge]

while slightly offtopic, any word about restoring the 'destroyed' threads?

At the moment I don't think I am going to bother, as it involves a lot of hassle and may just incite further disagreement. I do still have a copy though, in case for whatever reason I should change my mind I guess.

[JamieLei]

Thanks Owen!

[smallfly]

Thank you!

(By the way: You should implement a "thank you" button - then a list of users who said thanks appears below the entry)

[Hitperson]

here are my thoughts on this.

rather than expunging a users right to edit their own posts after 7 days just remove their ability to delete posts entirely (not even with a count down) i used to run an online community myself and there were a couple of key points we had regarding the deletion of posts, first and foremost we never allowed users to delete their own posts, whilst they could edit them it was still possible to view the edited history of said post and secondly posts were never hard deleted instead they were automatically moved to an archive.

now i'm not sure what the ruleset here is based on (if anything) but we used to use one set in line to the RFC 1855 Netiquete guidelines and i recently produced an updated and amended version for a friends forum which ran into something like 7 pages.

now whilst i'm aware of the whole "your site your rules" argument (and it is one i have used myself in the past) there is nothing more that people will bang on about than the "right to free speech" (again an illusion on an internet forum as freedom of speech does not exist within closed, privately funded, forums.)

anyway though that is my thoughts on the matter, to summarise i disagree strongly with this policy as there are far better methods than this.

[Purno]

You can only delete your own post here as long as it's still the last one, and that's something I really like (and which should stay IMO).

Additionally, prohibiting people from deleting their post doesn't prevent them from editing out all the text, which is effectively the same thing.

[orudge]

anyway though that is my thoughts on the matter, to summarise i disagree strongly with this policy as there are far better methods than this.

Maintaining a history of posts through edits is all very nice, but would involve a serious amount of work in phpBB, which I just don't have the time to do.

[Hitperson]

anyway though that is my thoughts on the matter, to summarise i disagree strongly with this policy as there are far better methods than this.

Maintaining a history of posts through edits is all very nice, but would involve a serious amount of work in phpBB, which I just don't have the time to do.

ok so that appears to be a vB only feature then (SMF and phpBB both appear to not have it)