moderated Option to expire message editing capability after a short time #suggestion


Paul Kanevsky
 

Members making multiple edits to their messages generate a lot of email traffic, often with repeated, very slightly altered content. Despite many discussions on this subject, members continue to edit and re-edit their posts.

One idea is to allow editing of a message only for a short time after it's first posted, say for 5 minutes. After 5 minutes, the Edit Message menu would disappear or be disabled. This can be an option for the owner in group settings, and would work well for large groups, where multiple small edits often overwhelm subscriber's mailboxes.

Regards,

    -Paul


Andy
 

Paul wrote, "Members making multiple edits to their messages generate a lot of email traffic, often with repeated, very slightly altered content. Despite many discussions on this subject, members continue to edit and re-edit their posts."

That's why we disabled editing them in our group.  It was one of the best changes we made, IMO.

Members can send a follow-up reply, hours or days later, which some do when the need arises.  A newly-composed follow-up reply goes over much better than a frequently re-hashed version of an old reply.

Andy


Bruce Bowman
 

On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 12:45 PM, Paul Kanevsky wrote:
One idea is to allow editing of a message only for a short time after it's first posted, say for 5 minutes.
Paul -- Please help me understand this. As I read it, messages would immediately post to the online message archive (so they can be edited), but not be sent out as emails until the selected editing interval has expired (so as to avoid all the dupes). Right?

Somewhat concerned here about how might this interact with existing moderation/hashtag functions, and also the delivery of digests.

After 5 minutes, the Edit Message menu would disappear or be disabled.
Wouldn't this require a browser refresh (on the client side)? I could see this being problematic if someone clicks what appears to be an active edit link and it "doesn't work."

Kinda like the idea in principle...the devil is in the details.

Regards,
Bruce


Dave Sergeant
 

I find it particularly annoying when I come in in a morning and find
several emails from the same person and they all turn out to be edits
of the same message. With the way my email program sorts them I always
read the initial (unedited) one first...

I have disabled edits on the groups I moderate and nobody has
complained. But most groups seem to leave things at the default editing
allowed.

Dave

On 25 Apr 2021 at 9:16, Paul Kanevsky wrote:

Members making multiple edits to their messages generate a lot of email
traffic, often with repeated, very slightly altered content. Despite
many discussions on this subject, members continue to edit and re-edit
their posts.

http://davesergeant.com


 

I think this could be great option in between allowing and disabling editing completely. I'd make the time interval shorter, like maybe one minute, although that could be a group setting as well ("allow editing for x minutes").
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


 

On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 10:14 AM, Dave Sergeant wrote:
most groups seem to leave things at the default editing
allowed.
That's not clear. All the groups I'm in, including beta, have editing disabled.
 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


Paul Kanevsky
 

Our group covers a pretty technical subject with a wide mix of highly technical and less technical members. Those who get to read the archives later may not discover the corrections posted further down in the thread, so editing a message to correct misinformation can be important. But, the unlimited number of edits/re-edits is what I think gets us into trouble with multiple copy emails. A five minute window during which the author can edit their post before the email is sent out would work well for us, I believe. This is something that's worked well on various web forums I've been a part of.

Regards,

    -Paul


On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 12:53 PM, Andy wrote:
Paul wrote, "Members making multiple edits to their messages generate a lot of email traffic, often with repeated, very slightly altered content. Despite many discussions on this subject, members continue to edit and re-edit their posts."

That's why we disabled editing them in our group.  It was one of the best changes we made, IMO.

Members can send a follow-up reply, hours or days later, which some do when the need arises.  A newly-composed follow-up reply goes over much better than a frequently re-hashed version of an old reply.

Andy


Paul Kanevsky
 

Hi Bruce,

On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 01:11 PM, Bruce Bowman wrote:
Paul -- Please help me understand this. As I read it, messages would immediately post to the online message archive (so they can be edited), but not be sent out as emails until the selected editing interval has expired (so as to avoid all the dupes). Right?
Yes. Post the message to the archives but don't send out the email until the editing window expires.

Somewhat concerned here about how might this interact with existing moderation/hashtag functions, and also the delivery of digests.
I'm not sure why this would change anything, it's just a 5 minute delay in sending the email message. The rest should work as before.

After 5 minutes, the Edit Message menu would disappear or be disabled.
Wouldn't this require a browser refresh (on the client side)? I could see this being problematic if someone clicks what appears to be an active edit link and it "doesn't work."
Yes, of course. But that's true about any change that might happen while someone is editing or viewing a stale webpage. If the editing time expired and the browser wasn't refreshed, an error message would be displayed to say that editing is no longer allowed.

Kinda like the idea in principle...the devil is in the details.
Which is why I'm not coding this myself ;)

Regards,

     -Paul


David Kirkby
 

On Sun, 25 Apr 2021 at 18:13, Dave Sergeant <dave@...> wrote:

I have disabled edits on the groups I moderate and nobody has
complained. But most groups seem to leave things at the default editing
allowed.

Dave
I too have disabled edits on the groups that I manage. I recall one person moaning, but that is all. 

You can not edit emails after sending them. Just post a correction if the change is significant, or ignore if insignificant like a typo, spelling error etc. 

IMHO the current system is fine - either allow or disallow edits. 

Dave

--
Dr. David Kirkby,
Kirkby Microwave Ltd,
drkirkby@...
https://www.kirkbymicrowave.co.uk/
Telephone 01621-680100./ +44 1621 680100

Registered in England & Wales, company number 08914892.
Registered office:
Stokes Hall Lodge, Burnham Rd, Althorne, Chelmsford, Essex, CM3 6DT, United Kingdom


 

On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 10:29 AM, Paul Kanevsky wrote:
A five minute window during which the author can edit their post before the email is sent out would work well for us, I believe
I can see a problem with the five minutes and/or the not sending of the message at all until the window is over. People are going to kick and scream about their messages being delayed, why has my message not posted yet, etc. etc. etc. So I think you either have to send out the original message and the edits (during the allowed time interval), or make the interval so short that the person posting the message doesn't notice the delay. I think this can be a tricky little nit.
 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


 

Another idea along similar lines would be to allow only a specified number of edits, instead of a time window. Of course, each edit would be sent out. Sometimes someone creates one terrible typo and wishes they could just change that one thing and resend.
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


 

And here's a third idea, which I like most of all: allow members to "preview" their posts, like craigslist (and possibly some other sites) do. This gives people a chance to read their message in full and do any editing necessary, for as long as they want, before clicking "send." It's the reason I have myself on moderation in my own group.  It allows me to preview and edit my posts as long and as much as necessary before finalizing them.
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


Chris Jones
 

On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 06:58 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
And here's a third idea, which I like most of all: allow members to "preview" their posts, <snip> This gives people a chance to read their message in full and do any editing necessary,
I would hope that people read their posts before sending as a matter of routine. OK; it can be easy to overlook a spelling mistake but reviewing what has been written is almost invariably time well spent. There is nothing stopping members from doing that now!

I suppose it all boils down to members being self - disciplined, which shouldn't be too much to expect.

On second thoughts perhaps it is too much... :(

Chris


 

 I was anticipating this kind of tsk, tsk response. It is very different reviewing a posted draft from an unposted one, for a number of reasons. Many sites provide this feature. In groups.io, one reason you may not have thought of is the ability to strip things like HTML. If I post a message with some parts quoted from elsewhere, with differing text fonts, etc, for example, I want to see how it will look in posted form. 

So please spare us the lecture about self-discipline.


On Apr 25, 2021, at 12:38 PM, Chris Jones via groups.io <chrisjones12@...> wrote:

On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 06:58 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
And here's a third idea, which I like most of all: allow members to "preview" their posts, <snip> This gives people a chance to read their message in full and do any editing necessary,
I would hope that people read their posts before sending as a matter of routine. OK; it can be easy to overlook a spelling mistake but reviewing what has been written is almost invariably time well spent. There is nothing stopping members from doing that now!

I suppose it all boils down to members being self - disciplined, which shouldn't be too much to expect.

On second thoughts perhaps it is too much... :(

Chris

--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


Duane
 

On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 12:58 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
allow members to "preview" their posts
That would only solve half the problem, at best.  It wouldn't do anything for those using email.

Duane


 

On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 01:49 PM, Duane wrote:
It wouldn't do anything for those using email.
It's true that it would be most useful for web posts. But it would certainly be possible to do via email as well, if truly desired (which, granted, it probably is not).
 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


Mike Hanauer
 

I have never allowed editing. I think it is, in general, a bad idea.

It changes history rather than amending it (via replys to correct) and leaving a trail, and produces different messages via email and those who later look at the web site. Also, immediate emails are often important in groups I moderate.

Like it is is how I like it.

Consider Better, not Bigger. So many advantages. Just ask. USA adds a Chicago to our overpop each year.
"Still more population growth is not our way to a healthy community, a healthy planet, OR enjoyable cycling."

    ~Mike


On Sunday, April 25, 2021, 04:52:53 PM EDT, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:


On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 01:49 PM, Duane wrote:
It wouldn't do anything for those using email.
It's true that it would be most useful for web posts. But it would certainly be possible to do via email as well, if truly desired (which, granted, it probably is not).
 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


Paul Kanevsky
 


My suggestion was to provide the limited editing window as another option at the discretion of the group owner, so you won’t lose the existing two options.

My group has thousands of users and many use the archives for searching for information, suggestions and previously discussed ideas. Having correct information is more important here than real time communications.

Regards,

   -Paul


On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 04:58 PM, Mike Hanauer wrote:

I have never allowed editing. I think it is, in general, a bad idea.
 
It changes history rather than amending it (via replys to correct) and leaving a trail, and produces different messages via email and those who later look at the web site. Also, immediate emails are often important in groups I moderate.
 
Like it is is how I like it.
 
Consider Better, not Bigger. So many advantages. Just ask. USA adds a Chicago to our overpop each year.
"Still more population growth is not our way to a healthy community, a healthy planet, OR enjoyable cycling."
    ~Mike
 
 
On Sunday, April 25, 2021, 04:52:53 PM EDT, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
 
 
On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 01:49 PM, Duane wrote:
It wouldn't do anything for those using email.
It's true that it would be most useful for web posts. But it would certainly be possible to do via email as well, if truly desired (which, granted, it probably is not).
 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


 

On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 03:28 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
 I was anticipating this kind of tsk, tsk response. It is very different reviewing a posted draft from an unposted one, for a number of reasons. Many sites provide this feature. In groups.io, one reason you may not have thought of is the ability to strip things like HTML. If I post a message with some parts quoted from elsewhere, with differing text fonts, etc, for example, I want to see how it will look in posted form.

 
This feature is already available. Click on the hamburger icon, then on the eyeball. This will display your formatted message in a popup preview window.
--
David Bryant
Canyon Lake, Texas
https://t-vog.groups.io/g/main    https://davidcbryant.net


 

On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 03:23 PM, David Bryant wrote:
This feature is already available. Click on the hamburger icon, then on the eyeball. This will display your formatted message in a popup preview window.
--
That would be a great feature, if it were working. But it's not. My test group strips fonts and colors and the preview does not. I just tested it. Maybe should file a bug report.
 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu