My preference (no way to enforce it well, though) is that only editorial corrections to a post should be made once others have viewed it. If substantive changes are made, then it often makes the thread very confusing because some number of the responses after the post are responding to what the post used to say and not what it says now. So my recommendation is that if people need to make a substantive change to a post, they should make a new reply, quote the original post (trimmed as appropriate) and then note that they are making a correction and add the additional information.

Your point is well taken - and, indeed, such is my aim with 'addendum posts' -- though I fear such may be annoying in 'other ways' (not the least of which being the appearance of 'bucking' for an increased post count)

In any event, I wholeheartedly agree that a new post (as you describe) is preferable to a post advising: "please review my edit{s}"

Best regards and many thanks for your feedback and consideration!
HP

 

My preference (no way to enforce it well, though) is that only editorial corrections to a post should be made once others have viewed it. If substantive changes are made, then it often makes the thread very confusing because some number of the responses after the post are responding to what the post used to say and not what it says now. So my recommendation is that if people need to make a substantive change to a post, they should make a new reply, quote the original post (trimmed as appropriate) and then note that they are making a correction and add the additional information.

I think editing posted code with an annotation that the code has been corrected is an exception. That discussion came up on another forum that had implemented a time limit on edits. Every contributor to the microcontroller subsection agreed.

As for other categories of posts, it is not infrequent that subsequent posters misunderstand a post. The best place to clarify is in the ambiguous post.

Finally, some members seem to read only the first post and respond. Oftentimes, the helpers ask for additional information. In that case, I think adding such information to the original post is entirely appropriate and helps avoid confusion later on.

In any of the three instances just mentioned, the poster who edits his posts should have the good judgement whether to make an additional post pointing back to the corrected post. For example, "Original post has been modified to add missing information, correct code, etc." will suffice. That hits both bases, those who only read the first post and are new to the thread and those who have been following the thread.

John

 

I still would recommend that if someone makes a substantive change to a post, they should indicate, in that post, that a substantive change has been made. In some cases they should leave the original content intact and add the updated contact after it (with suitable annotations) while in other cases it is reasonable to just update the content and include a note that it has been updated. When to do which would depend on how much the original material (that is being changed) has been used in subsequent replies. It's definitely a judgment call.

 

Noting a significant editorial change is the beauty of HP's proposal. Instead of having to make an inline post to highlight it, all the poster needs to do is hit the "Edit Alert" button. It would also be nice if we could highlight sections of code that have been changed. That has been discussed here, and apparently is not possible with current forum software. Of course, with other content, the change can be highlighted if not obvious. Many of us simply add, "Edit (date optional): ..."

John

 

Noting a significant editorial change is the beauty of HP's proposal. Instead of having to make an inline post to highlight it, all the poster needs to do is hit the "Edit Alert" button. It would also be nice if we could highlight sections of code that have been changed. That has been discussed here, and apparently is not possible with current forum software. Of course, with other content, the change can be highlighted if not obvious. Many of use simply add, "Edit (date optional): ..."

John

Just integrate Git in the forum and it can keep track and log changes...