| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Shades |
why does the forum show a thread edit as a new post?
just leads to confuddled members..... it does my head in, specially when the thread is massive, the edit is not easy to spot & you gotta check the dates to find it 
/end moan |
| Samination |
Silver should rather add a function that turns off editing of posts (other than by moderators) based on a timer. Most places I've seen use that have like only a day or so, but a week should be good, because most of the people that edit their posts are (alot) older |
| DJ Hellfury |
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
Silver should rather add a function that turns off editing of posts (other than by moderators) based on a timer. Most places I've seen use that have like only a day or so, but a week should be good, because most of the people that edit their posts are (alot) older
bad idea, then i cant edit my first post for hardcore history e.g. and there are other situations where you have to edit posts after a longer time. shall i ask moderators every single time for an simple edit? No, I'm happy about editing posts whenever I want.
Spotting those is the problem. Only suggestion I have is: Every post should get a number and whenever a post is edited, forum software makes a note and whenever an user clicks on thread he will be directly linked to that post. I have seen this method in a few boards and I guess it's the most comfortable but silver should rather work on that "video embedded overload in preview"-problem by converting all embedded vids to links or by adding quick reply. |
| Hard2Get |
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
Silver should rather add a function that turns off editing of posts (other than by moderators) based on a timer. Most places I've seen use that have like only a day or so, but a week should be good, because most of the people that edit their posts are (alot) older
I think that's a good idea as anyone who wants to edit a post will usually want to do it pretty fast, and a week is long enough for anyone. That will then prevent people from coming back years later and editing every one of their posts as they sometimes do... Although if editing the posts no longer showed the topic as having a new reply it would make no difference either way. Although overall neither would make a huge difference. |
| Shades |
quote:
Originally posted by Hard2Get:
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
Silver should rather add a function that turns off editing of posts (other than by moderators) based on a timer. Most places I've seen use that have like only a day or so, but a week should be good, because most of the people that edit their posts are (alot) older
I think that's a good idea as anyone who wants to edit a post will usually want to do it pretty fast, and a week is long enough for anyone. That will then prevent people from coming back years later and editing every one of their posts as they sometimes do... Although if editing the posts no longer showed the topic as having a new reply it would make no difference either way. Although overall neither would make a huge difference.
http://www.happyhardcore.com/forums/topic.asp?topic_id=26095
http://www.happyhardcore.com/forums/topic.asp?topic_id=13441
cant see the point in doing this at all.........
|
| latininxtc |
Kind of agree what a waste when people do that, revive old topics to delete what they originally had written. Raindancerob comes in every now and then and deletes a bunch of his posts, filling the page with dozens of revived topics. |
| Samination |
quote:
Originally posted by DJ Hellfury:
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
Silver should rather add a function that turns off editing of posts (other than by moderators) based on a timer. Most places I've seen use that have like only a day or so, but a week should be good, because most of the people that edit their posts are (alot) older
bad idea, then i cant edit my first post for hardcore history e.g. and there are other situations where you have to edit posts after a longer time. shall i ask moderators every single time for an simple edit? No, I'm happy about editing posts whenever I want.
Spotting those is the problem. Only suggestion I have is: Every post should get a number and whenever a post is edited, forum software makes a note and whenever an user clicks on thread he will be directly linked to that post. I have seen this method in a few boards and I guess it's the most comfortable but silver should rather work on that "video embedded overload in preview"-problem by converting all embedded vids to links or by adding quick reply.
depending on how he implents it, he could always allow the OP to edit the first post, while the replies will be locked. |
| DJ Hellfury |
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
quote:
Originally posted by DJ Hellfury:
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
Silver should rather add a function that turns off editing of posts (other than by moderators) based on a timer. Most places I've seen use that have like only a day or so, but a week should be good, because most of the people that edit their posts are (alot) older
bad idea, then i cant edit my first post for hardcore history e.g. and there are other situations where you have to edit posts after a longer time. shall i ask moderators every single time for an simple edit? No, I'm happy about editing posts whenever I want.
Spotting those is the problem. Only suggestion I have is: Every post should get a number and whenever a post is edited, forum software makes a note and whenever an user clicks on thread he will be directly linked to that post. I have seen this method in a few boards and I guess it's the most comfortable but silver should rather work on that "video embedded overload in preview"-problem by converting all embedded vids to links or by adding quick reply.
depending on how he implents it, he could always allow the OP to edit the first post, while the replies will be locked.
i can live with that, sound good. |
| silver |
When you edit a post it doesn't create a new post. |
| latininxtc |
quote:
Originally posted by silver:
When you edit a post it doesn't create a new post.
That isn't exactly what he means. What he means is that editing a post will treat it as a new or active topic If I edited one of my posts from a topic that "died" 5 years ago it would be bumped up to the front page with the other most recent topics, therefore "reviving" it without having to put in a brand new reply to the topic.
Most of the situations when that does happen people are removing information from topics that really no one is paying attention to. Kind of a waste to have all of these topics bumped, since many times in the past some people (I htink this happened to Jay) respond to the topic without realizing that it's extremely old. It's not a really big deal, just a bit of a nuisance. |
| silver |
So you dont want it bumped? You want it bumped?
What is the suggestion? |
| DJ Hellfury |
Whenever one user decides to edit a post which is older than 1 week e.g. then it gets bumped to front page.
In the last days one user did that some days ago (example here)
I guess everyone wants a solution like this:
1) It shouldnt be allowed to edit posts older than 1 week, except thread creator / OP.
2) If users edit their (first) posts appendant threads shouldnt bumped to first page. |
| silver |
Editing bumps a topic, i'm not complicating the site. |
