suggestion

Slabdrill · 2016-08-23 21:07:35

if you delete a post and post again before someone else posts, either the last (deleted) post should also show up or you should get an edit stamp right from posting

hummerz5 · 2016-08-23 21:12:07

But the "delete" means someone wanted to get rid of the post entirely. Does knowing someone made a mistake contribute to discussion?

Please give an example where you think this would prove most useful.

Slabdrill · 2016-08-23 21:18:53

hummerz5 wrote:

But the "delete" means someone wanted to get rid of the post entirely. Does knowing someone made a mistake contribute to discussion?
Please give an example where you think this would prove most useful.

"and post again before the next person posts"

this ONLY applies for if you make a post, delete it, then post again just because you don't like the "last edited by" tag.

32OrtonEdge32dh · 2016-08-23 21:29:02

12345678908642 wrote:

this ONLY applies for if you make a post, delete it, then post again just because you don't like the "last edited by" tag.

A better solution would be to not show the "Last edited by" for edits made within five minutes and before a(nother) reply is made.

Muftwin, Napakeun

hummerz5 · 2016-08-23 21:32:14

^ Right. So you're saying this suggestion is basically a way to prevent people from using the "edited by" circumvention. I really don't see the problem with their dastardly ways, but 32OrtonEdge32dh has what is probably the best solution here.

Slabdrill · 2016-08-23 21:38:10

hummerz5 wrote:

^ Right. So you're saying this suggestion is basically a way to prevent people from using the "edited by" circumvention. I really don't see the problem with their dastardly ways, but 32OrtonEdge32dh has what is probably the best solution here.

While it is, it's not implemented yet so i posted an alternative (kaslai said it in IRC i think like forever ago).

Also, an example of this being bad would be the contest results: toop posted it, then immediately deleted it. everyone thought we were gonna have to wait another day to see the results and that it was posted by accident or whatever (and everyone was asking zoey to leak results early)

hummerz5 · 2016-08-23 21:45:22

An example of which idea "being bad"?

The invisible edit idea has no noticeable downside (to me) in your example.

Your proposed idea doesn't even consider any action until another post is made, so again I am confused. (Especially since that topic was deleted entirely, no?)

IF you're referring to the "deleted content comes back from the grave" scenario, I completely object to that aspect. In no sense is it reasonable for the delete button to retroactively return content that was previously thought to be eradicated. Even less so would be if this deleted content could not be edited. That would, in effect, make the delete function actually make content permanent.

Slabdrill · 2016-08-23 22:04:25

hummerz5 wrote:

An example of which idea "being bad"?

The current system - since you seem so opposed to fixing it

hummerz5 wrote:

The invisible edit idea has no noticeable downside (to me) in your example.

"While it is, it's not implemented yet so"

hummerz5 wrote:

Your proposed idea doesn't even consider any action until another post is made, so again I am confused. (Especially since that topic was deleted entirely, no?)

If designed so the same thing would happen to topics posted in the same subforum

hummerz5 wrote:

IF you're referring to the "deleted content comes back from the grave" scenario, I completely object to that aspect. In no sense is it reasonable for the delete button to retroactively return content that was previously thought to be eradicated. Even less so would be if this deleted content could not be edited. That would, in effect, make the delete function actually make content permanent.

Someone suggested that one as a joke in IRC

Hexagon · 2016-08-23 22:34:42

What if instead we held posts in a queue for like 30 seconds, in which case you could make an unlimited amount of edits within 30 seconds, and there would be no edit stamp?

hummerz5 · 2016-08-23 22:53:09

^ I feel like that would open the door for ninja'd posts, but I guess that's only thirty seconds in the grand scheme of randomness, so we can rule that out.

An interesting idea. I sorta like the five minute grace period better, though. Seems easier to implement to me

Hexagon · 2016-08-23 23:00:31

hummerz5 wrote:

^ I feel like that would open the door for ninja'd posts, but I guess that's only thirty seconds in the grand scheme of randomness, so we can rule that out.
An interesting idea. I sorta like the five minute grace period better, though. Seems easier to implement to me

Well, it would be in a queue so it wouldn't show to anyone (except yourself) until after 30 seconds. After that, the edit marks would appear if you were to edit it after 30 seconds and it would post as if you just posted it.

I think the main issue is that the edit marks are too visible. Maybe we need to have like a pencil icon beside the authors username and when you click on it it'll say when the post was edited (or something else less intrusive, like a darker color instead of the harsh white.)

N1KF · 2016-08-23 23:01:45

Hexagon wrote:

I think the main issue is that the edit marks are too visible. Maybe we need to have like a pencil icon beside the authors username and when you click on it it'll say when the post was edited (or something else less intrusive, like a darker color instead of the harsh white.)

What if edits were shown next to the post date? I mean there's plenty of room there.

Hexagon · 2016-08-23 23:03:53

N1KF wrote:

Hexagon wrote:
I think the main issue is that the edit marks are too visible. Maybe we need to have like a pencil icon beside the authors username and when you click on it it'll say when the post was edited (or something else less intrusive, like a darker color instead of the harsh white.)
What if edits were shown next to the post date? I mean there's plenty of room there.

Something like this?

(I just added in an example date.)

hummerz5 · 2016-08-23 23:38:30

^ That seems a bit too busy up there. Plus, n1kf traveled back in time yes you used example data

we've just about turned this topic into an exact copy of this topic so read up on that everyone?

your pencil idea? check one of kaslai's posts for an image thingy

Hexagon · 2016-08-23 23:42:34

hummerz5 wrote:

^ That seems a bit too busy up there. Plus, n1kf traveled back in time yes you used example data
we've just about turned this topic into an exact copy of this topic so read up on that everyone?
your pencil idea? check one of kaslai's posts for an image thingy

What about putting it on the right hand side beside the post number?

Duplicates:
http://forums.everybodyedits.com/viewtopic.php?id=35401
http://forums.everybodyedits.com/viewtopic.php?id=33728 (semi relevent)
http://forums.everybodyedits.com/viewtopic.php?id=31987
http://forums.everybodyedits.com/viewtopic.php?id=16485 (semi relevent)

Official Everybody Edits Forums

#1 2016-08-23 21:07:35

suggestion

#2 2016-08-23 21:12:07

Re: suggestion

#3 2016-08-23 21:18:53

Re: suggestion

#4 2016-08-23 21:29:02

Re: suggestion

#5 2016-08-23 21:32:14

Re: suggestion

#6 2016-08-23 21:38:10, last edited by Slabdrill (2016-08-23 21:40:30)

Re: suggestion

#7 2016-08-23 21:45:22

Re: suggestion

#8 2016-08-23 22:04:25

Re: suggestion

#9 2016-08-23 22:34:42

Re: suggestion

#10 2016-08-23 22:53:09

Re: suggestion

#11 2016-08-23 23:00:31, last edited by Hexagon (2016-08-23 23:02:08)

Re: suggestion

#12 2016-08-23 23:01:45

Re: suggestion

#13 2016-08-23 23:03:53

Re: suggestion

#14 2016-08-23 23:38:30

Re: suggestion

#15 2016-08-23 23:42:34

Re: suggestion

Board footer