Timed Edit Mod Feedback
Timed Edit Mod Feedback
Any problems with timed edits? Report them here.
EDIT: this should show an edited timestamp
~Spanky
EDIT: this should show an edited timestamp
~Spanky
Last edited by spanky on Fri Apr 15, 2005 6:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 3965
- Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2004 10:20 am
- Contact:
- Don Muerto
- Posts: 718
- Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2003 4:28 pm
-
- Posts: 3527
- Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 11:07 pm
- Burning Since: 2020
- Location: black rock city
- Don Muerto
- Posts: 718
- Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2003 4:28 pm
-
- Posts: 2983
- Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 7:34 pm
- Location: Kyiv, Ukraine as of 10/27/06
Perhaps there's never been a timer feature and Edit was turned on to appease the masses with the technical glitch excuse being used to cover the timing concern. I may be wrong but it's an interesting theory.
K-IV
~~~~
Thank you for over 7 years of eplaya memories. I have asked Emily Sparkle to delete my account and I am gone. Goodbye and Goodluck to all of you! I will miss you!
~~~~
Thank you for over 7 years of eplaya memories. I have asked Emily Sparkle to delete my account and I am gone. Goodbye and Goodluck to all of you! I will miss you!
Oh, right! Now I remember. It won't timestamp posts that aren't replied to yet. There's a quick MOD that timestamps all edits. I'll see if I can get that in there today.
EDIT
~Spanky
EDIT
~Spanky
Last edited by spanky on Mon Apr 18, 2005 12:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 2983
- Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 7:34 pm
- Location: Kyiv, Ukraine as of 10/27/06
-
- Posts: 34
- Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2005 4:28 pm
Segregation of Areas w Edit
Intended for the Edit Discussion thread.
It is granted, unilateral decisions have to made by a BMORG technocrat whenever he or she is 'knee-deep' in developing a particular 'progress'. There's simply not enough availability or expediency to gather a consensus at every fork of a decision making processes when trying to fulfill a particular module of effort.
However, there does exist in the weeks or days or even minutes following such a unilateral decision, the opportunity to examine if whether or not that decision is congruent with the group consensus. Congruent? No bother. But on the instances where the technocracy makes a unilateral decision that is not congruent with the consensus, then it may be an indication of a poor decision, even if the consensus can never be accurately 'polled': In the name of progress, such a decision can be reversed and a change of path can be afforded.
Here is the particular matter of concern-
In ePlaya Feedback -> Bug Reports -> Timed Edit Mod Feedback:
The consensus that has been brought up (in Edit Discussion) in the last few weeks is that we want an Edit button, reassured by agreement that an Edit button would be re-instated, albeit an Edit button with a time-limit, and made doubly self-evident by the fact that we are now testing an Edit button module. To make the Policy Discussion forum ineligible for the Edit button, but all the while making the Edit button available to the Drunk thread, doesn't make a whole lot of sense! And it certainly is not congruent with consensus. The unilateral proclamation that the Policy Discussion forum simply will not host an Edit button is, at face value, an act of laziness against fulfilling the mandate of the consensus.
The 'Timed Edit Mod Feedback' thread seems more of a place to write test-posts. The 'Edit Discussion' thread is the established thread for discussion of the Edit button. We should discuss this (t)here- What is the rationale behind no-Edit button within Policy Discussion? Why should our ability to restore dropped words and fix typos be denied, especially in an area where writing requires a lot more nuance in carrying across complex ideas when examining board policy? Let's discuss this.
p.s. Upon my posting, it was discovered- the Edit Discussion thread has been locked! Admin, please unlock the Edit Discussion thread and move this message there to where the discussion can continue in its appropriate thread, where we can maintain continuity. (Don't be so quick to lock threads!)
Sincerely yours,
Captain Fuckwit
It is granted, unilateral decisions have to made by a BMORG technocrat whenever he or she is 'knee-deep' in developing a particular 'progress'. There's simply not enough availability or expediency to gather a consensus at every fork of a decision making processes when trying to fulfill a particular module of effort.
However, there does exist in the weeks or days or even minutes following such a unilateral decision, the opportunity to examine if whether or not that decision is congruent with the group consensus. Congruent? No bother. But on the instances where the technocracy makes a unilateral decision that is not congruent with the consensus, then it may be an indication of a poor decision, even if the consensus can never be accurately 'polled': In the name of progress, such a decision can be reversed and a change of path can be afforded.
Here is the particular matter of concern-
In ePlaya Feedback -> Bug Reports -> Timed Edit Mod Feedback:
spanky wrote:To clarify: ... The policy discussion forum is not editable. ...
The consensus that has been brought up (in Edit Discussion) in the last few weeks is that we want an Edit button, reassured by agreement that an Edit button would be re-instated, albeit an Edit button with a time-limit, and made doubly self-evident by the fact that we are now testing an Edit button module. To make the Policy Discussion forum ineligible for the Edit button, but all the while making the Edit button available to the Drunk thread, doesn't make a whole lot of sense! And it certainly is not congruent with consensus. The unilateral proclamation that the Policy Discussion forum simply will not host an Edit button is, at face value, an act of laziness against fulfilling the mandate of the consensus.
The 'Timed Edit Mod Feedback' thread seems more of a place to write test-posts. The 'Edit Discussion' thread is the established thread for discussion of the Edit button. We should discuss this (t)here- What is the rationale behind no-Edit button within Policy Discussion? Why should our ability to restore dropped words and fix typos be denied, especially in an area where writing requires a lot more nuance in carrying across complex ideas when examining board policy? Let's discuss this.
p.s. Upon my posting, it was discovered- the Edit Discussion thread has been locked! Admin, please unlock the Edit Discussion thread and move this message there to where the discussion can continue in its appropriate thread, where we can maintain continuity. (Don't be so quick to lock threads!)
Sincerely yours,
Captain Fuckwit
Re: Segregation of Areas w Edit
Captain Fuckwit wrote:Upon my posting, it was discovered- the Edit Discussion thread has been locked! Admin, please unlock the Edit Discussion thread and move this message there to where the discussion can continue in its appropriate thread, where we can maintain continuity
It was my plan to unlock the discussion on the matter, but it seemed that folks were moving to a bug report-type of posting in there, which I wanted to push over to the appropriate forum. Now that a few days have passed and it seems bug reports are at a minimum, or at least, being logged in the right area, I will unlock the post. Done. Enjoy!
~Spanky
-
- Posts: 34
- Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2005 4:28 pm
Redirect (Segregation of Edit)
The post above titled- 'Segregation of Areas w Edit'
is being re-directed to the 'Edit Discussion' thread.
It's new title and location is '(No) Segregation of Areas allowing Edit'.
Responses to the post above should be followed up in the 'Edit Discussion' thread's end. Go there.
Sincerely yours,
Captain Fuckwit
is being re-directed to the 'Edit Discussion' thread.
It's new title and location is '(No) Segregation of Areas allowing Edit'.
Responses to the post above should be followed up in the 'Edit Discussion' thread's end. Go there.
Sincerely yours,
Captain Fuckwit
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest