Moderators--how about a grace period for editing posts?

[allanq]

Many times, right after posting something, I notice a typo or sometimes just a better way of saying something. So I go in and make the changes, which means that a little notice that I've edited my post is now eternally appended to the post. (Previewing the post lets me catch some errors, but not all.)

How about giving posters about an hour or so to edit their posts before sticking on that little edit message (that a lot of people feel compelled to explain).

Allan

[Matty the Damned]

Actually Allan if you catch your mistake in the first 60 seconds or so, the little edit message doesn't appear at the bottoms of your posts.

MtD

[allanq]

MtD,

Yeah, a few times I've managed to get in a change before that "edited" message appears. Most of the time, I'm just not quick enough.

Part of the problem is that in a prior life I was a school teacher, and I have an uncontrollable urge to correct and edit my own writing. I have learned to suppress the urge when it comes to other people's writing. (Although it's difficult when I see "it's" as the possessive form of "it.")

Allan

[emeraldize]

I agree with Allan. It would be better to have a window of time longer than 60 sec.

[thunter34]

It completely messes with my OCD if I don't get my corrections finished in 60 seconds & am left with that little edit message.  Racing to perfect my post only to have it marred by that, that flaw.   

[milker]

I thought it would be modifiable for an unlimited time until someone reads it, in which case then it becomes an "edited" post if you modify it, which would make sense. I've too jumped to on the post trying to avoid the "last edit' when I realized I was missing words or found a typo.

Milker.

edited to add: modified less than 60 seconds later, longislander read my post.
edited to add: so i was wrong
edited to add: reaching 60 seconds
edited to add: MATTY WAS RIGHT AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Miss Philicia]

I can't believe you girls have your panties twisted about the "edit" message.  Who the fuck cares?

[Matty the Damned]

The edit stamp serves an important role (in Matty the Damneds opinion) in preserving the integrity of a thread. It allows other readers to see if posts have been modified. The reasons this is desirable should be manifest. It's why when I edit a post I generally include a reason for doing it.

The forums software provides a number of features including a spell-checker.

MtD

[Miss Philicia]

I agree with the matted one, which of course is a rarity.

[JeffInNYC]

I can't believe you girls have your panties twisted about the "edit" message.  Who the fuck cares?

I dont wear any panties. 

[Matty the Damned]

I agree with the matted one, which of course is a rarity.

And of course, Matty the Damned is indifferent to your support.

MtD

[Miss Philicia]

Horribly fascinating.

[allopathicholistic]

I dont wear any panties. 

you don't wear any panties for more than a minute

[JeffInNYC]

you don't wear any panties for more than a minute

I wear them merely to keep my ankles warm my dear.

[allopathicholistic]

I wear them merely to keep my ankles warm my dear.

bwahahah

[Tim Horn]

Allan:

As you may or may not know, we've had to deal with the "editing" issue quite a bit over the past few years.  Recently, we stopped allowing people to edit their messages at all, once 48 hours have passed since the message's original posting.  This is because we've had a few members caught up in the... errr... "passion" of dramas in the Forums and, in haste, decided to manually remove everything they had posted recently and previously in the Forums, rendering a number of threads nonsensical.  The 48-hour "stop-gap" measure, if you will, prevents this from happening. 

As for the edit timestap, you actually have 90 seconds -- not 60 seconds -- to make changes under the wire (I know, I know... same difference).  As Matty says, the timestap really does maintain the integrity of the thread.  Of course, there's absolutely nothing to be ashamed of, if you find yourself wanting to go back to edit out a typo.  If you find yourself wanting to edit your message after several others have already posted responses (provided that its within 48 hours of your original posting), don't fret -- consider adding an "edited to..." remark at the bottom of your original post, so people know that you only made a minor correction, not a major change to your original message.

Tim Horn

Edited () to add an example, courtesy of Matty, of an editing postscript: http://forums.poz.com/index.php?topic=13305.msg166592#msg166592