• Frank H
  • Former PunBB Developer
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2003-03-16
  • Posts: 1,423

Topic: Silent edit option, inverted perhaps?

I'd rather see the checkbox unchecked as default.

The silent edit is IMHO something one makes very rarely, and if you're a moderator/admin editing your own posts, I don't mind it showing. (I do this more freq than someone elses that I need to make a silent edit on, i.e. never so far, if I edit I want my edit to show)

I guess the silent edit can be good for something, but having it as checked as default is something I dislike... sure it's possible to uncheck it everytime I edit a post, or fix it as a mod, but I don't see the point of having it checked.

Howcome it's checked as default?

  • From: 127.0.0.1
  • Registered: 2001-11-02
  • Posts: 9,167

Re: Silent edit option, inverted perhaps?

Well, if I as an admin or moderator edit a post, I always note what I changed in the post itself. When I do that, the "Edited by bla bla" doesn't fill any purpose. Usually, you can't just edit post and then not mention what you changed. People then have a tendency to believe you are censoring things.

"Programming is like sex: one mistake and you have to support it for the rest of your life."

Rickard's Website

3 Reply by Frank H (edited by Frank H 2004-09-06 19:36)

  • Frank H
  • Former PunBB Developer
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2003-03-16
  • Posts: 1,423

Re: Silent edit option, inverted perhaps?

That's how I do it, but it's still edited, so I want a timestamp so to say...as 'evidence'

I guess I'll mod my board then ... as I mostly edit my own posts (heh, I should learn to spell I guess wink) ... and I dont like the silent edit of others posts

I would believe ppl can feel like there is possible censoring going on, if they see that a post has been edited, but there's no 'evidence' it's edited(i.e. the edited timestamp, just a note from a mod/admin).
If users are a bit paranoid, thoughts about posts can be edited without it beeing visible could put ppl off wink

But ... I'll just mod my board ... no biggie big_smile

  • From: 127.0.0.1
  • Registered: 2001-11-02
  • Posts: 9,167

Re: Silent edit option, inverted perhaps?

We shouldn't base the decision on just our two opinions. What do you other guys think?

"Programming is like sex: one mistake and you have to support it for the rest of your life."

Rickard's Website

  • Connorhd
  • Connorhd
  • Former PunBB Developer
  • Offline
  • From: Leeds, UK
  • Registered: 2004-06-13
  • Posts: 4,195

Re: Silent edit option, inverted perhaps?

maybe make it checked for editing other peoples posts and unchecked for editing your own (or is that too complicated)

FluxBB.
Connorhd.co.uk.

Connorhd's Website

  • Frank H
  • Former PunBB Developer
  • Offline
  • Registered: 2003-03-16
  • Posts: 1,423

Re: Silent edit option, inverted perhaps?

hmm... wonder if the quickest way while parsing code would be an admin option, if silent edit is allowed, then it can be checked by default aswell ... if silent edit isn't allowed, the option is never even there (I guess it could be combined with the code already there, with just another bool in the check?)