Extend editing time limit

[joeu2004]

The 10-minute time limit on post-submittal editing frequently causes me grief. In some cases, it leads to incessant postings as I try to correct critical mistakes.

Please consider one or more of the following changes.

1. Eliminate the time limit altogether.
2. Increase the time limit to 30 or 60 minutes; maybe even 24 hours (not "same day").
3. Restart the time limit clock after each edit.

Forgive me if this has been discussed "to death" before. I do see some discussions a few years ago. But I do not see all of the suggestions about.

I am well aware of the pros and cons of allowing unlimited editing. I see abuses in other forums; one user often completely replaces content, changing the entire gist of their response.

But responsible respondents like myself need the ability to correct blatant mistakes and misdirections, even minor typos that might be confusing. The alternative is incessant postings, which does not help anyone ("cannot see the forest for the trees").

I know it is difficult to appease responsible respondents while also controlling abusers. But I would err on the side of responsible respondents. I participate in other forums that have no limits, and abuses seem far less often than responsible modifications. In fact, I tend to see the opposite more often: unnecessary "replies" that serve only to correct an earlier mistake, which could have been handled with a minor edit in that forum.

Food for thought. Bon appetit. Tick, tick, tick....

 

[Joe4]

A long time ago, it was determined that the 10 minute window was the "happy medium" between allowing users to correct typos, while also making sure that the thread doesn't get messed by late edits (there were some issues on the board before we had this limit a very long time ago).

Even when they are not done maliciously, allowing late edits can really mess up the flow of a thread. If a conversation ensues based on a post and it goes down a certain road, and then someone goes back and edits the earlier post that many of the replies are based off of, it can render a thread very confusing, if non-sensical (this can even happen within the 10 minute window, but at least then it is confined to a very small window, which helps limit the number of replies affected).

I myself am a horrible typist, and often make a lot of typos. I find the 99% of the time, the 10 minute window is sufficient to go back and correct them.
I am not trying to be mean here, but if you find that you are making a ton of mistakes, my advice to you would be the following:

1. Slow down, and re-read your posts before posting them (or even after posting, within the 10 minute window).
2. Test all formulas and code before posting, to ensure that they work.

If you follow these guidelines, then the number of edits necessary should be rather small. In cases where you are past the 10 minute window, a new post may be necessary for clarification. That is OK, we all have to do that from time-to-time.

 

[joeu2004]

I myself am a horrible typist, and often make a lot of typos. I find the 99% of the time, the 10 minute window is sufficient to go back and correct them.
[....]
1. Slow down, and re-read your posts before posting them (or even after posting, within the 10 minute window).
2. Test all formulas and code before posting, to ensure that they work

I, too, rarely need more than 10 min to correct simple typos. And I do all the things that you suggest.

But I am not infallible. For example, I posted a complicated solution to a user's problem, only to realize much later than I made some terrible mistakes in my zeal to "make things as simple as possible, and no simpler".

Of course, I will simply post a new response. But I am concerned about users who stop after reading the completely-wrong first response, which looks very authoritative and correct to the untrained eye.

(We see that behavior so-o often. How many have you posted a response to the effect of ``did you see response #xx? it seems to answer your questions``?)

I wish I could edit the first response, not to gut it or rewrite it completely, especially if there have been follow-up comments from others, but to add a bright red bold caveat at the beginning, directing users to ignore it and to look for the later one.

How about this compromise.... Provide a "button" that allows the author to flag a response as "invalid" or "retracted". It would be great if the "flag" were nothing subtle, but a canned caveat inserted in plain English at the top of the response, saying in effect that ``ignore this response; the author has retracted this response due to incorrect and misleading information``.

(Extra credit: the "button" applet could allow the user to select from a limited set of canned caveats, or even to write a very limited one him/herself.)

 

[smozgur]

Just as @Joe4 explained in detail: there is no plan to increase the post-editing time.

There is no plan for customization regarding flag a post as invalid or retracted either. You can simply post a new reply to the same thread explaining the matter. The future readers can and would easily follow the discussion until the last post, and take the most useful part for their needs. The previously posted solution might be still useful for a future reader in its context.