Poll: What do you feel about having more edit rights?

Ok, I voted for some combination of the above. 

I like the way it is now and I think only slight modifications or loosening of editing rules are needed.

• What I like:

        -  The 15 minute rule to edit for members:  I think there is a good reason for this and should stay and
           if needed some loosening - maybe just 30 mins. max.  Besides if just simple corrections are needed, 
           members can just make another post and make the necessary corrections.  This rule prevents  
           people  from back-tracking to their previous posts and changing it if they want to back-pedal what  
           they previously said or just embarrass another member whom he or she may have had a heated 
           argument or debate with.   There are a lot more advantages I can think of but will take up much
           space. Trolls also takes advantage of a free willing editing powers
 
        -  I think admins and mods not able to edit other member's posts besides theirs is more of a good thing
           rather than a  bad thing.  Why? Because it prevents staff of being too power drunk and prevents 
           them from altering anyone's posts from their original intention.  We already have a community  
           moderation and if staff doesn't like a post they can vote among themselves to just hide the  
           offending post.  Of course, if their members does not agree with them, they can vote to bring it
           back by giving more thumbs up.  Lefora has a community moderation set-up already, free will 
           editing by anyone will run counter to that community moderation set-up.  It also forces admins and
           mods permission to their members to delete offending posts and ask their member to just re-post 
           w/o the offending lines. 

• Some things I want in the future:

          - Admins able to edit titles of some topics within x days if they want it more descriptive or correct    
            it.  I think it takes at least 1-2 weeks before google's spiders can see it anyway.

          - I think admins and mods should only able to soft-delete posts (collapses or goes to a temporary
            recycle bin) and only the founder can hard-delete.

All in all, I think admins and mods should not be all too powerful by giving them all the tools.  Some admins and mods do become big-headed and power hungry overtime that they essentially become Hitlers.

Ok, I voted for some combination of the above. 

I like the way it is now and I think only slight modifications or loosening of editing rules are needed.

• What I like:

        -  The 15 minute rule to edit for members:  I think there is a good reason for this and should stay and
           if needed some loosening - maybe just 30 mins. max.  Besides if just simple corrections are needed, 
           members can just make another post and make the necessary corrections.  This rule prevents  
           people  from back-tracking to their previous posts and changing it if they want to back-pedal what  
           they previously said or just embarrass another member whom he or she may have had a heated 
           argument or debate with.   There are a lot more advantages I can think of but will take up much
           space. Trolls also takes advantage of a free willing editing powers
 
        -  I think admins and mods not able to edit other member's posts besides theirs is more of a good thing
           rather than a  bad thing.  Why? Because it prevents staff of being too power drunk and prevents 
           them from altering anyone's posts from their original intention.  We already have a community  
           moderation and if staff doesn't like a post they can vote among themselves to just hide the  
           offending post.  Of course, if their members does not agree with them, they can vote to bring it
           back by giving more thumbs up.  Lefora has a community moderation set-up already, free will 
           editing by anyone will run counter to that community moderation set-up.  It also forces admins and
           mods permission to their members to delete offending posts and ask their member to just re-post 
           w/o the offending lines. 

• Some things I want in the future:

          - Admins able to edit titles of some topics within x days if they want it more descriptive or correct    
            it.  I think it takes at least 1-2 weeks before google's spiders can see it anyway.

          - I think admins and mods should only able to soft-delete posts (collapses or goes to a temporary
            recycle bin) and only the founder can hard-delete.

All in all, I think admins and mods should not be all too powerful by giving them all the tools.  Some admins and mods do become big-headed and power hungry overtime that they essentially become Hitlers.

Thanks T-Cell for the comments.
You are aware that Moderators do not have rights to edit their own posts?
I agree that editing other folks posts is fraught with problems. I also would like a method of hiding a post or Topic until being able to discuss it with the poster and my forums Staff. Right now that is not available. We can not even Modify a Topics title.
I do not use the Community Thumbs up/down moderation. I find it too simplistic. I prefer to have Moderators handle the Task of reviewing content. Moderators can become Power hungry or Big headed but that is why there are other Staff members. Moderators and Admins can be removed if their behavior gets out of line. A Forum must set up how they wish to be seen by its members at large. Members will always have the ultimate vote.
I run a separate moderator Forum to discus Forum direction and members issues. I also insist on being just one Voice even though I am the Forum Founder. I allow the Staff to over rule me. This is necessary because I can be one of the worst offender of the rules at times. That is because I have a anarchist streak a mile wide. But I accept that there needs to be checks and balances.
With a Forum consisting of Volunteers, my forum lives and dies on people that enjoy spending time there.

Oops got caught by the edit time. I had separated the above into paragraphs which were lost upon re submit. Sorry.

I like it just the way it is. If a post is offensive it can be deleted, or deleted and reposted without the offensive content by an admin. Opening posts can be edited by an admin, and I think thats all that is necessary.

I don't need any more editing tools than I have already to be an effective moderator. If somethings not broken, don't fix it.

Just my opinion.

Opening posts can not be edited by a Admin. Unless they started the Topic. Though I appreciate your views, wrenna.

Thank you.

I voted for Only Admins to have Edit Rights.

In all other Forum software that I have used, Administrators have the right to edit/delete/move/merge Posts and or Topics.

If someone posts something accidentally the Admin can be requested to Edit it for the poster after the 15 minute edit time has expired.

If someone posts something offensive it can either be edited - like a bleep out on a TV blooper show - or it can be deleted.

If exercise of control over these features cannot be decided by the admins of forums, then should they be running a forum anyway?

Perhaps the FOUNDER can select this option when creating the forum. Can't be difficult for this to be switched on and off per forum surely?

I agree with wrenna for MODERATOR Rights. No editing for Moderators.

In Business, The Boss decides what is right and wrong, the Managers organise it, the staff do it.

Boss = Admin - Manager = Moderator - Staff = Members

My opinion of course.

Thanks hal9000. I tend to favor a Founder having the choice to grant edit and I understand the Chain of Command (former Navy). I think many folks are not aware of what they have for Admin rights as presently set up. Thus, why I started this Poll to get people to think about it.

I kind of like the idea of the founder/admins being able to set edit capability on moderators, but I do beleive moderators should have that ability.  Seems to me that it would be a waste to delete an informative post, if the member just slipped in one offensive word.

I like it just the way it is. If a post is offensive it can be deleted, or deleted and reposted without the offensive content by an admin. Opening posts can be edited by an admin, and I think thats all that is necessary.
I don't need any more editing tools than I have already to be an effective moderator. If somethings not broken, don't fix it.
Just my opinion. [image]

-wrenna

Totally agree with you.

Sorry, about this.  Been having duplicate posts when posting here for some reason.

Other than the mistake regarding editing of initial post, wrenna's point is totally valid.
But with the knowledge that, original post edit is not available, does wrenna still think nothing should be changed? She would have to answer for herself I guess.
I just find it strange T-Cell after your post above that you could totally agree that no change is warranted:

I like the way it is now and I think only slight modifications or loosening of editing rules are needed.

If some modification is acceptable, that is a change to the status quo. You can not stand still and advance at the same time (unless you are on a escalator, but that is a stair way that never ends, so we can exclude it).
I see you got caught by the vagaries in the electronic ether and had a double post. This is another thing that edit needs in my opinion a way to delete the post by a member within the 15min edit period. I know myself that at a Forum that allows this, that I am a member of, I have used the feature. Sometimes, after reading one of my posts, I have second thoughts about the advisability of actually posting it.

Here's another option. The FOUNDER has ALL Rights and can do aboslutely anything on the site.
Think of that person as the Managing Director or Owner in the business model.

Admins and Mods remain as they are. If a post needs editing then they ask the founder to do it. Only one responsible person therefore, the person who founded the forum in the first place.

I'm with Mattb4 & bdquick on this. Moderators *should* be able to step in & do a bit of editing.

Regarding my error above.... I still agree with myself. Editing would be ideal in such a scenario, but I don't think its a big deal. If a title or post of an OP were sufficiently offensive to warrant me editing it then anyone who replied shouldn't be too surprised if it gets deleted and reposted or moved to a more appropriate board.
We choose moderators very very carefully, so I prefer they have all the tools they need for moderation. I just don't think editing is one of those. The option to edit someone else's post has a lot of potential for abuse. I like the thumbs up and down feature, after all, thats what its for. I am just attracted to the democratic nature of it.

I am not a big fan of editing other peoples posts for the same reasons as wrenna. But it would be nice to give the moderators the ability to edit their own posts that Admins have. It provides a incentive for someone becoming a Moderator. You trust them to delete anyone elses post, why not trust them to edit their own posting?

My forum being a Help Forum, Post Titles are very important for Google searches. A Social Forum may not have this problem but I think they would still want to attract new members by people searching on key words. Deleting a entire Topic every time that something is misspelled is like swatting flies with a bazooka. Plus when a posted link fails or needs to be updated it is better to do it in the original post IMO.

Other than the mistake regarding editing of initial post, wrenna's point is totally valid.
But with the knowledge that, original post edit is not available, does wrenna still think nothing should be changed? She would have to answer for herself I guess.
I just find it strange T-Cell after your post above that you could totally agree that no change is warranted:
If some modification is acceptable, that is a change to the status quo. You can not stand still and advance at the same time (unless you are on a escalator, but that is a stair way that never ends, so we can exclude it).
I see you got caught by the vagaries in the electronic ether and had a double post. This is another thing that edit needs in my opinion a way to delete the post by a member within the 15min edit period. I know myself that at a Forum that allows this, that I am a member of, I have used the feature. Sometimes, after reading one of my posts, I have second thoughts about the advisability of actually posting it.

-mattb4

What I meant was that it just needs a few improvements and some wiggle room.  Nothing drastic.
Here's another idea, the extra powers some wants maybe made available with those with premium accounts.

Here's another option. The FOUNDER has ALL Rights and can do aboslutely anything on the site.
Think of that person as the Managing Director or Owner in the business model.
Admins and Mods remain as they are. If a post needs editing then they ask the founder to do it. Only one responsible person therefore, the person who founded the forum in the first place.

-hal9000

ts.I think that's a good idea.

Thanks for the feedback everybody.

As always, there are a few other items that we're currently working on and we'll post more about these on support over the next few days.

As for the edit time, there are options we'd like to add, such as appending to posts, and we'll discuss this more in the future.