Time limit on editing?

[Brian]

A second.

 

Configure the forum to auto-delete content after one second -- sort of the digital analog (if you follow) of the "shrinter" or the ever-favorite "disappearing ink."

[Marblehead]

You're not giving us a very long life span.

 

[Brian]

1 hour ago, Marblehead said:

You're not giving us a very long life span.

 

Clearly, you're not lithium-8.

 

OK, a day then.  That's... like... a whole lifetime in mayfly years.

[Marblehead]

Personally, I feel no need the have any limits against editing and deleting posts.  Especially an "edit to add:" or spelling / grammar correction.

 

 

[Stosh]

5 hours ago, Marblehead said:

You're not giving us a very long life span.

 

It's long enough if you live in the present , or are actually a butterfly.  

[Stosh]

One forgets so as to move on , like an unceasing bellows be , no grasping hoarding attempt at immortality in a forgotten thread. 

Anyone who ever changed their avatar should be at least amenable to understanding the need to cut with the past. Avoiding the long lines at the baggage checkout , looking over ones shoulders , and neurotically changing posts that couldv'e just been left to lie as they may , all 'wabi sabi'  and such.  

Let it go, and float free again like a balloon     ....    

[rene]

38 minutes ago, Stosh said:

One forgets so as to move on , like an unceasing bellows be , no grasping hoarding attempt at immortality in a forgotten thread. 

Anyone who ever changed their avatar should be at least amenable to understanding the need to cut with the past. Avoiding the long lines at the baggage checkout , looking over ones shoulders , and neurotically changing posts that couldv'e just been left to lie as they may , all 'wabi sabi'  and such.  

Let it go, and float free again like a balloon     ....    

 

As one who has recently changed her avatar, and nick; and who now almost cant recall breakfast, let alone yesterday; I find Stosh's logic to be stellar.

 

My vote is to allow no editing at all. If nothing else - more care might be taken at the moment of typing, to choose our words more carefully, to take the time to consider wtf we are actually conveying - since we cant take it back.

 

Bells cant be unrung. We owe each other, and ourselves, the same honest and thoughtful effort. Typos and all.

 

warm regards

[Stosh]

49 minutes ago, WuDao said:

 

As one who has recently changed her avatar, and nick; and who now almost cant recall breakfast, let alone yesterday; I find Stosh's logic to be stellar.

 

My vote is to allow no editing at all. If nothing else - more care might be taken at the moment of typing, to choose our words more carefully, to take the time to consider wtf we are actually conveying - since we cant take it back.

 

Bells cant be unrung. We owe each other, and ourselves, the same honest and thoughtful effort. Typos and all.

 

warm regards

I just lost my post, ,, restarting,, I could live with that, but modify almost every post so that the autocrunch feature puts my spacing the way I typed it. So turn that annoying feature off and the spyware that autosaves , and you got yerself a coconspirator.

[Marblehead]

I was going to say something but I have forgotten what it was.  Oh well.

 

[Stosh]

2 hours ago, Marblehead said:

I was going to say something but I have forgotten what it was.  Oh well.

 

Don't worry, I'm sure the next post will be just as good.  

[s1va]

On 6/12/2017 at 0:16 PM, Jonesboy said:

I propose that we put a time limit on editing and the deletion of posts.

 

It is really sad to look up some information and see half a thread filled with deleted posts.

 

What is wrong with 24hrs to edit or delete a post?

 

I would agree.  But, 24 hours is too short for me.  Sometimes, it takes me a week to notice or correct spelling mistakes

 

May be 2 weeks or 4 weeks.  They should get locked at some point in time.  If it does not get locked at some point, there are going to be threads filled with deleted posts.

 

I search up old topics, find some valuable information, start to read.  Only to find, the rest of the thread has mostly deleted posts.  I gave up searching old posts except in some cases.  

[s1va]

On 6/13/2017 at 3:20 PM, Marblehead said:

Personally, I feel no need the have any limits against editing and deleting posts.  Especially an "edit to add:" or spelling / grammar correction.

 

 

 

May be the original post can be locked after a certain timeframe.  The "Edit to add:" can be still left to add new content to existing post, but not remove the old content after some timeframe (if this is technically possible in forum).

[Marblehead]

Yeah, I do agree that it is sometimes bothersome for readers of a thread when they come upon a post that has been deleted but another member has already spoken to the post.  It makes it nearly impossible follow the various trains of thought.

 

Someone mentioned the importance of quoting a post when responding to it.  This is something to be considered, I think.

 

[Stosh]

But the quotes are of someone else's intellectual property as well  ,

its simply a work around to prevent deletions by someone who one has granted the right to delete their own text.

Either give someone that right and the ability to actually do it or do not, 

but its bogus to allow deletions on one hand , but prevent its actual removal with the other. 

[dawei]

1 hour ago, kāvēri said:

 

I would agree.  But, 24 hours is too short for me.  Sometimes, it takes me a week to notice or correct spelling mistakes

 

May be 2 weeks or 4 weeks.  They should get locked at some point in time.  If it does not get locked at some point, there are going to be threads filled with deleted posts.

 

I search up old topics, find some valuable information, start to read.  Only to find, the rest of the thread has mostly deleted posts.  I gave up searching old posts except in some cases.  

 

The problem is, after 24 hours they could then delete it... no way to prevent that.   Only an extreme to never allow editing, which is not the forum history nor owner's desire.

 

1 hour ago, kāvēri said:

 

May be the original post can be locked after a certain timeframe.  The "Edit to add:" can be still left to add new content to existing post, but not remove the old content after some timeframe (if this is technically possible in forum).

 

Technically not possible with IP.B... not sure if other forums have more controls but I don't think management would want it anyways.

 

30 minutes ago, Stosh said:

But the quotes are of someone else's intellectual property as well  ,

its simply a work around to prevent deletions by someone who one has granted the right to delete their own text.

Either give someone that right and the ability to actually do it or do not, 

but its bogus to allow deletions on one hand , but prevent its actual removal with the other. 

 

Yes, but forum software has utilized quotes this way since the time of Laozi

[Stosh]

Understood , but that doesn't change the bogosity quotient.  Such an act is an attempt to circumvent the rights to which folks have been granted ,if one says that on principle one agrees that the originator of the text should be allowed to remove the material .. then its not exactly honest to have copies of it retained, it violates the principle one is claiming to defend or agree with, regardless of whether one claims to have a legal type argument that says they the posting person agreed to allow copies. 

Is Daobums a principled site?   

[Marblehead]

But Stosh, once someone posts something on the internet it belongs to the universe.  The CIA, NSA, and FBI all have a copy of it.  We pretend we have private ownership of what we post but reality doesn't respect that thought.

 

From a private ownership point of view anything we say here should not even be quoted unless we first get permission to quote that whatever.

 

Real life just doesn't work that way.

 

[Stosh]

3 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

But Stosh, once someone posts something on the internet it belongs to the universe.  The CIA, NSA, and FBI all have a copy of it.  We pretend we have private ownership of what we post but reality doesn't respect that thought.

 

From a private ownership point of view anything we say here should not even be quoted unless we first get permission to quote that whatever.

 

Real life just doesn't work that way.

 

The principles and rights of people exist if they are honored, and don't exist if they are not. These things live only in the hearts of men. This is a fact of reality. Those who do not honor such things are not acting principled, as regards these matters. That includes our various spy agencies and law enforcement . The actions of an individual or corporation, we attribute to that individual or organization.  If Daobums wants collectively,  any person to be quoted , to be asked in advance , if they may be quoted , I am fine with that and consider it to be a most gracious and respectful thing to do.

However , , for the sake of speed this act of  respect is set aside , but I would honor it if a person presented any objection to forgoing that grace.

I also would honor anyone whom  I had  quoted in deleting what they want , of their words. Again , the issue is mostly speed and ease regarding doing that. BUT No I am not going to search through thousands of posts to delete individually every thing I quoted of you for instance,,  ,(  you should have told me sooner ,, recent stuff ,, fine ) . 

But it appears that there is computer connection between the origins of quoted segments and their originating posts , the little curvy arrow ,, and so it is not beyond the realm of potential possibilities that originals can be automatically linked to subsequent copies , to allow for later edits and deletions. 

And so it seems like a thing on the table being discussed , whether its wanted , that originators have complete control of what they have written , to the greatest extent that is possible ,  or if those rights are to be heavily abridged , so that lurkers and non-participants of conversations,  have more convenient access,  to conversations made by the people whose right to edit is abridged. 

This quoting process,  as it stands now,  circumvents the right to edit ,,,  period.  

I still think you should delete all inactive ( as in , no more substantive participation in it )  threads after a year... or month.,,but  not a second or minute like in chat. 

[Marblehead]

Hi Stosh.  I have nothing more to say to this.  I was thinking and ran out of time.

 

[Stosh]

Then I will make the second point without a foil. As it stands, one cannot live down what they have said in the past. This medium preserving everything, preserves every argument and error , anyone can dig up the old stuff and read how it was you were thinking literally years ago, they can presume your attitudes are unchanged ,and have expectations based on them. So if a person does indeed grow, shift their thinking and come to a perspective, then these folks do not get seen in the light freshly. 

Instead of approaching the live and responsive person of the present, viewers may dig up the frozen content of the past. We got into arguments , said things we might not say now, ,and that record will not ever be expunged. It represents- never being forgiven. 

So I rhetorically present to any individual who wants to powerlessly preserve every paragraph of their own speech, Are you exactly the same as when you began ? 

Are you perhaps clinging to an ego image which has been branded to your name? 

You may be sad to let go of memories, sad to have evaporate the carefully formulated phrase. But again, We forget in order to move on ,and live the new days. 

 

[silent thunder]

While it peaks my curiosity from time to time to go to an old thread and not see all that was originally contributed due to later edits and deletions, any annoyance from that has faded and I now embrace it. 

 

No one owes me anything here.  I have received far more than I have offered already and will never be able to balance those scales.

 

As one insight can liberate the ignorance of prior decades and lives... then this too may drive one to to remove, or alter words and interchanges.  And while the original exchange will always remain with those who co-created it... what a grand opportunity we have in the written, ammendable word, to go back and alter our piece to suit the new realizations we arrive at on our paths.

[Marblehead]

Nicely said Stosh.

 

I have been accused (rightly) of having changed from the days when I first joined this site.  I don't deny that.  But then I remind the accusers that "I reserve the right to change my mind".

 

Change is ever present.  No need, IMO, to appear to have always been of a certain state.  

 

I might disagree with something someone says today but three days from now I might look at what they said from a different perspective and find that I actually agree with what they said.  Or perhaps they have phrased what they said differently and that caused me to agree with them.

 

 

[rene]

When I asked dawei to change my nick to WuDao, I'd forgotten that was one I'd used for a coulpe years five years ago. All he could do was merge the two accounts, and in the process my post count went from 8700 to 1400. 

 

7300 posts deleted in one push of the button! Love it!! Course, I could always ask the NSA to restore them  but there was nothing in them that needs preserving, heh.

 

ZZ said it best: Springtime in every moment.

[Marblehead]

5 minutes ago, WuDao said:

When I asked dawei to change my nick to WuDao, I'd forgotten that was one I'd used for a coulpe years five years ago. All he could do was merge the two accounts, and in the process my post count went from 8700 to 1400. 

 

7300 posts deleted in one push of the button! Love it!! Course, I could always ask the NSA to restore them  but there was nothing in them that needs preserving, heh.

 

ZZ said it best: Springtime in every moment.

I wonder if he could zero my post count and I could start all over again.

 

 

[rene]

1 minute ago, Marblehead said:

I wonder if he could zero my post count and I could start all over again.

 

 

Could be. Did you ever have a Marblebrain account? That would be an interesting merge.