Hi, I think the new edit time-limit of 15 minutes is too short. I would prefer it if IL were to go back to the old time period (24 hours was it?). I did not see many problems with that. I tend to use the time to edit for clarity, content and grammar (gasp!). My own hurried, illiterate formulations irritate me no end. The original grace period mitigated the damage somewhat. Yes, some members may have made a post and deleted it after a few replies, but that does not bother me. I prefer OPs & responders who are comfortable with their posts over those who are regretful about hasty or intemperate remarks they might have made. Apart from an occasional deleted post, I see no other reason to impose a tight 15 min edit deadline. Cilvilized discussion is aided by the grace period, not hindered by it.
To add - Results in non-contiguous posts when you grab that parasol, walk in the rain and come back to add something (locked!). I've stopped reading my posts after hitting the 'submit' button as it makes me recoil at my spelling/grammar errors, and the few times I re-open and edit, re-post (it mocks - EXPIRED!!). And I've to choose between Ted Mosby or Text editing (ticking 15, 14, 13 ...) , can't even watch telly properly these days.
I'm only contributing here to prevent any further progress in Soka's newly-formed multiple personality disorder. Predictably, I'm with both you guys regarding the compulsive editing and self-flagellation upon noticing misplaced commas, dangling particles, and so on. But I wonder if this new 15-minute edit window is good for me. Perhaps it is constructive that IL is no longer enabling my neuroticism with its not-so-generous new policy. Besides, it has been a bit discordant in the past when people edit their posts after someone has already replied to and quoted specific parts of it. Sometimes people say unkind things, and edit afterwards, not because they are remorseful, but because they hope to avoid getting into trouble, while the damage has already been done to the "victim", and the thread has already taken a terrible turn as a result of the now-missing venom and vitriol. This bugs me, with my childish, overdeveloped sense of justice. I wouldn't mind if the 24-hour window came back, but I'm kind of liking this new restriction. Perhaps it is just the incentive we all need to make sure that before we hit "Post Quick Reply" (which always seems somewhat ironic to me after I've spent what seems like hours, polishing, finessing, and re-writing my post), we have written exactly what we want, in the way that we wanted, with the best intentions.
The moderators generally do a good job of addressing this, no? I also think that poorly constructed posts, leading to misunderstandings are far more common than the truly unkind ones. The former might benefit from more enthusiastic editing post-reflection. I always regret my hasty turns of phrase, which often seem to acquire a life of their own, conveying thoughts I never intended. 'Aporia' anyone?
Ansuya, I understand your very valid points. Sometimes when the posts are edited, it results in incoherent threads. Technically, not sure of the implementation details, ideally as an end-user what I'd love to have is - 1) The Original Post/Thread Runner cannot be edited outside the 15 min. window irrespective of who posts. It is the flagship post that runs the thread and edit/deletion results in anatopistic advice based on original content. Moreover the thread owner, hopefully, deliberates prior posting compared to the participants on content, formatting, tone to live with it when he/she blotches. 2) The participant responses need to have time window based on privileges of the members. Similar to PM access, all the new members (yes the hot-blooded, how-dare-you kinds, who mostly* form the populace you are hinting) may have restricted access to edits (not permitted outside the 15 min window). May be the membership rubric can be configured to determine edit time. (* Suggesting ways to cover but not foolproof solution)
I have always wanted to do this: say something that goes with the rhyme and get a few likes; then edit it later conveniently and fill it with expletives and watch the horror that follows LOL. Just that i like this user id so much that i refrain myself, lol. Maybe the higher-ups sensed this. Also, people here make back-to-back posts(which is not permitted in some forums) and that is not discouraged too; so there is nothing much to rant about the edit time. I think he is bumping up the thread in an innovative way.
Unlikely, Mr. Watson! Why would anyone use that ploy to bump a thread under 4 mins? There is more to it, the devil is in the details, watch carefully, you will find one more motive lurking there ;-)
