Abuse of the Edit Button

[Xunzian]

Not to be a stickler for the rules for the rules' sake, but the function of the edit button has been clearly defined within them. Editing a post to say, "Deleted" or "Nevermind" isn't it.

Look at posting here as a conversation. I know I've said a lot of stupid stuff over the time I've been here, and given the choice I probably wouldn't mind it being stricken from the record. But I've said them, and there they stand. Deleting one's posts is the cowards way out. If you've written something you have come to regret, apologize for it, retract it with another post, but don't edit it away like nothing happened. Heck, if it was a rough night and in the sober light of dawn you realize you crossed a few lines, PM me and I can send the thread to the cornfield after a review.

But stand by what you've said, at least enough to admit that it was said.

[Ned Flanders]

Isn't it just part of free speech to be able to delete your posts?

If certain people do it regularly it's obviously a pain in the ass for a thread, but then others will get to know their behavior and probably stop any dialog with them.

So, wont it just self correct? I don't see what the fuss is about. If you want all the discussions to be set in stone then maybe you should just lock up the board after a certain period of time. But I think people should be given a chance to retract whatever they have contributed. Obviously it would be better if they explained their retraction. But if they don't want to, why should they?

[Carleas]

Ned, what would that add to the board? How would that improve the quality of the discussions taking place here?

There are certainly ways to make it self-correcting, but it requires a feedback system so that there are tangible consequences for such behavior. Currently, the moderators serve that feedback function. In a perfect world, of course I agree with your suggestion, but in practice, it's just "a pain in the ass for a thread," and there's no reason to protect that act.

[Ned Flanders]

Ned, what would that add to the board? How would that improve the quality of the discussions taking place here?

There are certainly ways to make it self-correcting, but it requires a feedback system so that there are tangible consequences for such behavior. Currently, the moderators serve that feedback function. In a perfect world, of course I agree with your suggestion, but in practice, it's just "a pain in the ass for a thread," and there's no reason to protect that act.

I guess I'm not thinking about "protecting an act". More like "not punishing an act". I think there is a difference. I'm all for not punishing people who are simply being a pain in the ass, simply because I don't think being a pain in the ass is something to get all worked up about. Plus, if Xun starts punishing everyone for being a pain in the ass then I might be in trouble........

[Carleas]

Every infraction is in some sense a pain in the ass. Murder is the pinnacle of a pain in the ass. It's really inconvenient to die, or to have your friend or loved-one or employee die. It's such a monumental pain in the ass that a lot of jurisdictions will murder you in return out of spite.
Every crime is punished because it's a pain in the ass. It's just a matter of degree. Here, we have a pain in the ass that, though minor in the global sense, is pretty painful in the microcosm of this community. You are your posts here. The penalty of a temporary ban, or a warning or a reprimand or whatever the punishment is, it is pretty well justified in light of the pain-in-the-communal-ass-ness of the offense.

Furthermore, I'm still going to maintain that allowing that abuse of the edit function would be protecting the act. You are given the ability to edit your posts, but only to an extent. There is little difference between installing software that only allows a a certain number of characters to be added or removed, and having an administrator who says "don't do it and a group of moderators that reprimand you when you do. The latter is just more visible, and you can't ask a robot questions. So, not punishing someone would be extending to them the freedom to act in that way, and would be protecting the act to the same degree that your ability to express your opinions is protected, and that's not something that anyone here really wants.

[Maytacera]

What of posts that have been accidently placed in the wrong thread? It seems that an "Opps, I posted this in the wrong thread, sorry guys." would be a bit more helpful than a random post that has nothing to do with the topic at hand, and thus leads to three pages of people quoting the post and saying "This has nothing to do with what we were talking about."

[Xunzian]

I care about it less within a particular thread and more about when it is the thread. When I posted this, there had been a rash of posts made, where the original poster then decided that he or she didn't want to post that thread anymore and so there were several threads with the subject line: deleted and the OP was also deleted. In a few cases, there were also some peeved individuals responding to the now-absent OP. Clearly, that isn't a good way to operate since it allows for all kinds of abuses. Within the confines of a particular thread, I don't really mind it but in a perfect world, I would be PM'ed and I could move the post to where it belongs. Granted, that may take a while since (contrary to popular belief) I'm not always on the site, so do so at your own discretion.

[Impious]

But stand by what you've said, at least enough to admit that it was said.

There should be a delete button. Failing that, deleting your post with a '...' should be allowed. Why should I be forced to keep things on the public record that I no longer stand by? The rules are stupid.

[anon]

But stand by what you've said, at least enough to admit that it was said.

There should be a delete button. Failing that, deleting your post with a '...' should be allowed. Why should I be forced to keep things on the public record that I no longer stand by? The rules are stupid.

I completely disagree. Why should an internet philosophy site encourage the completely delusional belief that we exist in an abstracted state where our thoughts and actions have no tangible consequences? What's so hard about changing your mind? Why is it necessary to pretend that you are and have always been if not correct, at least consistent?

[Xunzian]

Warning 1: Bane, thread

[Impious]

But stand by what you've said, at least enough to admit that it was said.

There should be a delete button. Failing that, deleting your post with a '...' should be allowed. Why should I be forced to keep things on the public record that I no longer stand by? The rules are stupid.

I completely disagree. Why should an internet philosophy site encourage the completely delusional belief that we exist in an abstracted state where our thoughts and actions have no tangible consequences? What's so hard about changing your mind? Why is it necessary to pretend that you are and have always been if not correct, at least consistent?

The fact is, sometimes people post things that don't do them justice. They should be allowed to delete such posts- otherwise we all form a skewed view of the person in question.

[Xunzian]

I've said dumb things, as well as smart things. In person as well as online. The internet is a fundamentally alienating medium, and a large part of that alienation stems from the feeling that our actions lack consequences. Say something stupid on the internet and you can delete it and pretend it never happened. Say something stupid in real life, and there are consequences. At the very least you have to apologize, but all too often even though an apology is given it is insufficient, though the offended party may as, "I forgive you." That is because forgiveness does not nullify the transgression, merely makes the transgression acceptable provided that it does not happen again. And even then, the bereaved may still "hide the silverware" so-to-speak.

Freedom of speech has never meant freedom from the consequences of speech, and it certainly doesn't here.

[Impious]

Say something stupid on the internet and you can delete it and pretend it never happened.

The deletion of a post can grant relief from being unfairly haunted by the post in question.

[Xunzian]

If you wrote it, there is nothing "unfair" about having your past "haunt" your present.

[Impious]

If you wrote it, there is nothing "unfair" about having your past "haunt" your present.

Is that a fact? How about if we apply that test to everything you ever say. Hopefully it will force you to touch-up every statement you've ever made every time you realise you were wrong, until you are perfectly correct. Sounds completely fair, yeah? Certainly not a ridiculous burden that makes people wretched...

[Xunzian]

Bring it.

Honestly, for a self-described Nietzschean, I'd really recommend you re-read your Illiad. I've absolutely been wrong before, and if you call me on it, I will surely admit it. Not to do so would make me something between a "priest" and a "slave" in what is supposed to be your ideology.

It is things like this that lead me to believe that people who say they like Nietzsche don't actually understand him.

[Impious]

Bring it.

Honestly, for a self-described Nietzschean, I'd really recommend you re-read your Illiad. I've absolutely been wrong before, and if you call me on it, I will surely admit it. Not to do so would make me something between a "priest" and a "slave" in what is supposed to be your ideology.

It is things like this that lead me to believe that people who say they like Nietzsche don't actually understand him.

'Things like this'? like what exactly? I'm the first to admit that I was wrong in the past. Btw to suggest that you understand Nietzsche better than myself is quite simply an insult.

[Impious]

Bring it.

Let me add that even my worst demons have better wisdom than that.

Edit: I wish that I hadn't made this post. I would have deleted it if I were allowed to.

[Impious]

You realise, of course, that to force people to be haunted by what they've said even after they've realised that what they said was stupid, for the most part simply encourages people not to attack their own beliefs? To encourage people to intellectual stagnation is rather imprudent, wouldn't you agree?

[Xunzian]

What I disagree with is the narrative that they are always correct. If they realize their error, good. If they are called on their past comments, they can simply say that they were mistaken and move on. People are only haunted by their beliefs when they refuse to acknowledge them.

As for what I said being insulting, you're doing a great job of justifying my comment . . .

[Impious]

People are only haunted by their beliefs when they refuse to acknowledge them.

Sorry Xunzian but with this you are completely wrong.

[Maytacera]

Bring it.

Let me add that even my worst demons have better wisdom than that.

Edit: I wish that I hadn't made this post. I would have deleted it if I were allowed to.

In theory this will teach you not to make silly posts, and to think before you speak.

Harsh words, once said, can not be unsaid. The internet is no different.

[Impious]

Bring it.

Let me add that even my worst demons have better wisdom than that.

Edit: I wish that I hadn't made this post. I would have deleted it if I were allowed to.

In theory this will teach you not to make silly posts, and to think before you speak.

Harsh words, once said, can not be unsaid. The internet is no different.

It's not those posts that I'm worried about.

[Maytacera]

In the real world, you can not just unsay something. Being able to simply delete a post after you change your mind is similar to saying that you were never wrong. That is silly. If it is brought up, simply say "Since making that post I have changed my mind.".

[Impious]

Bah, why do I bother. This entire religion forum is just a huge pile of faeces.

Edit: except for most of the stuff the atheists say.