Forum request

[dell_jockey]

just very recently, a user became a bit annoyed with reactions to his posts and deleted all of his entries. Too bad that most of his entries introduced new stuff to this forum, which is now lost.

I'm a member of a number of other boards, where editing one's entries is possible for appr. 10 - 15 minutes after the initial post. This gives you some time to read over what you just have published and edit the text in those cases errors & omissions are detected. After these 10-15 minutes, the post is final and cannot be edited anymore.

Is this possible with phpbb as well? If so, can you please implement a similar policy?

[traumatic]

+1 (if possible)

[#NULL]

but think of all the people updating their project-threads regulary, changing infos or links.. would they have to create new posts each change? that wouldn't be good either.

[AND51]

-1

How should users that have published codes in the subforum "Tips'n'Tricks" edit their first post to hold the newest code at the top?
Explicit example: Members like srod or gnozal cannot edit their 1st post to renew their announcements.
=> No extra rights for those ppl. all forum members are equal.
Editing ones own posts must be available at all times.

[inc.]

Isnt there a restore function available for this forum?
Means ... if possible those postings could be restored out of a backup (if done).

[Kaeru Gaman]

I don't see the problem...
if someone removes his posts, he looks like a fish to everyone.
if someone has guts, he doesn't need to edit his posts, even if he talked bullshit once.

so: -1

[Dare]

if someone removes his posts, he looks like a fish to everyone.
if someone has guts, he doesn't need to edit his posts, even if he talked bullshit once.

I agree with this bit.

But also agree with the request.

So +1



Edit <-- irony

Mind you, this presents a problem for some people.

The heavyweights who provide and maintain libs, etc, and who keep the links and news updated on the first post (so we don't have to wade through pages looking for updates) would get clobbered.

So unless there is some way to give the heavyweights editing rights (a user group or something) then I think perhaps we have to live with the gutless wonders.

[dell_jockey]

So unless there is some way to give the heavyweights editing rights (a user group or something) then I think perhaps we have to live with the gutless wonders.

a dedicated user group that allows members to edit their entries makes sense to me. Is this possible with PHPBB ?

[Kaeru Gaman]

and who decides who may and who may not?
it's the worst idea to split the community into a two-class-society...

stop that bullshit, leave it as it is.
tell people who delete their posts that they're wankers and that's it.

it's just a statistical accumulation that we have actual two cases where someone deleted their posts.

[Mistrel]

-1

Without the ability to edit posts long after the fact it would be very difficult to keep users informed about important information in an organized way (first/second post). Users might have to sift through dozens of posts to piece together the information.

Although you make a good argument I believe that this change would do more harm than good.

The user in question only made 35 posts so even if there were some golden nuggets it's very disproportionate in comparison to the wealth of knowledge that's still here.

[blueznl]

-1

It's impractical.

Though, an option would be to allow only editing of the FIRST post forever, all subsequent posts would be locked after a few days. That fixes both problems.

But I guess that means changes to the forum code?

[BriceManuel]

it's the worst idea to split the community into a two-class-society...

The staff does this enough as it is

[Dare]

* whacks Brice around the head with a wooden staff *

• # (n.) Plaster combined with fibrous and other materials so as to be suitable for sculpture in relief or in the round, or for forming flat plates or boards of considerable size which can be nailed to framework to make the exterior of a larger structure, forming joints which may afterward be repaired and concealed with fresh plaster.
  # (n.) A long piece of wood; a stick; the long handle of an instrument or weapon; a pole or srick, used for many purposes; as, a surveyor's staff; the staff of a spear or pike.
  # (n.) The five lines and the spaces on which music is written; -- formerly called stave.
  # (n.) Hence: A body of assistants serving to carry into effect the plans of a superintendant or manager; as, the staff of a newspaper.
  # (n.) A pole upon which a flag is supported and displayed.
  # (n.) The round of a ladder.
  # (n.) A pole, stick, or wand borne as an ensign of authority; a badge of office; as, a constable's staff.
  # (n.) A stick carried in the hand for support or defense by a person walking; hence, a support; that which props or upholds.
  # (n.) A series of verses so disposed that, when it is concluded, the same order begins again; a stanza; a stave.
  # (n.) An arbor, as of a wheel or a pinion of a watch.
  # (n.) An establishment of officers in various departments attached to an army, to a section of an army, or to the commander of an army. The general's staff consists of those officers about his person who are employed in carrying his commands into execution. See Etat Major.
  # (n.) The grooved director for the gorget, or knife, used in cutting for stone in the bladder.

The staff does this enough as it is

You're being elitist. Some of us users are pretty good at that as well!

[BriceManuel]

* whacks Brice around the head with a wooden staff *

Please, Sir, Can I have some more?

[Dare]