We need a few minutes grace to correct spelling

March 6, 2008

This is one of the few forums that places an 'edited' tag at the bottom of an edited post even if it is edited immediately. Most other forums give the poster a few minutes grace before adding the 'edited tag'. Would it be difficult to implement that on this forum. I imagine that it would be a simple option in the board software.

14.3k · March 6, 2008

This is one of the few forums that places an 'edited' tag at the bottom of an edited post even if it is edited immediately. Most other forums give the poster a few minutes grace before adding the 'edited tag'. Would it be difficult to implement that on this forum. I imagine that it would be a simple option in the board software.

I've noticed that too...

9.5k · March 6, 2008

This forum also gives you the opportunity to preview your post before you post it. I suggest you make use of this before clicking on the Submit.

14.3k · March 6, 2008

This forum also gives you the opportunity to preview your post before you post it. I suggest you make use of this before clicking on the Submit.

I do that but I still overlook things. It's not a big deal if says "edited," but it would be "nice" if it worked the way other forums work in that regard. Those other forums also let you preview...

March 6, 2008

This forum also gives you the opportunity to preview your post before you post it. I suggest you make use of this before clicking on the Submit.

All forums give you that opportunity, however Murphy's Law 5.1 sub paragraph 1.4.4 says, and I quote...

The longer one spends checking spelling and grammar the more likely it is that an error will slip through that is noticed instantly that one posts

Most other forums recognise that a couple of minutes grace is a good idea as it encourages corrections which make the forum more pleasant.

Is there any reason *not* to give this grace period? Obviously the reason for adding the 'edited' tag is to stop an ambush, but that's not going to happen in two minutes.

7.2k · March 6, 2008

May I suggest that you use Firefox if you don't already. A spell check program is built into it, text that is spelled wrong is highlighted automagically, you can add words to your own custom dictionary and all you need to do is right click to correct spelling. As I type this, "automagically" has red dots under it to highlight it. If I right click on it, I can add it to my dictionary.

The other thing, for those of you in the stone age that still use Internet Explorer :rolleyes: , is a cool program called IE Spell. You have to download it and load it on your computer, but it does the same thing in IE that Firefox does as described above.

http://www.iespell.com/

March 6, 2008

That doesn't work either due to the fact that misspelled words are often not picked because they are still actual words. In fact these are exactly the sorts of things that get missed in the preview. Even grammar checks don't work as it often picks up things that are not grammatically incorrect.

No, the easiest solution for a better neater looking forum is to do what nearly everyone else does, (with good reason).

EDIT: had to add a comma after "No"

Edited March 6, 2008 by gallet

7.2k · March 6, 2008

Part of the reason is because of some of the angsty posts from the past. I've seen some stuff typed and quickly edited. I know, because I've quoted it as it was being edited. My quotes showed the pure post as it was originally typed. The original post goes out to those watching the topic but is lost to those who just read them and see it after the edit. Now you have to take responsibility for your posts as you type them and if they are edited quickly, it gets tagged. I don't see that changing, but who knows.

It seems very easy to load the program I suggested for IE or to use Firefox and see the errors as you type. I see this issue as a "so what" issue in the grand scope of the priority list at Groundspeak. That's just my personal feeling about it though.

March 6, 2008

@'mtn-man

I don't see that changing, but who knows.

Well let's hope that those who care will look into it again and maybe give it a trial. I've only ever seen that sort of 'make a quick post tell someone to *** and then deleted it' thing only once a few years ago. The internet seems to have grown up to the extent that hardly anyone deems it necessary any longer. The posters here seem pretty mature to me.

It seems very easy to load the program I suggested for IE or to use Firefox and see the errors as you type. I see this issue as a "so what" issue in the grand scope of the priority list at Groundspeak. That's just my personal feeling about it though.

I've already addressed the spell check issue above. Sure, it's not a change that is going to shake the world but that's not a reason to not make an easy improvement is it?

Even the apple.com discussion site allows one to completely remove the tag, or are you saying that the geocaching site has a much greater share of morons than all the other sites?

I know it's not going to get done unless someone says something precisely *because* it is not that important, but now that it's been pointed out perhaps the boards gods will see fit to reconsider?

Anyway, I've made my point, and I'll leave it at that.

2k · March 6, 2008

I don't see the big deal about having an edited line under my post. It doesn't make things messy as the number of times people go back to edit are generally small. I don't even see it unless I look for it.

Edited March 6, 2008 by ChileHead

21.9k · March 6, 2008

I don't see the big deal about having an edited line under my post. It doesn't make things messy as the number of times people go back to edit are generally small. I don't even see it unless I look for it.

I see you edited your post. It was probably a good idea to remove the part about mtn-man's ugly puppy.

2.4k · March 6, 2008

I don't even see it unless I look for it.

I see it, and it usually bugs me... so just now I've decided to force myself to get used to it by seeing it all the time, whether I edit a post or not. So I've changed my sig line accordingly :rolleyes:

18.9k · March 6, 2008

I don't see the big deal about having an edited line under my post. It doesn't make things messy as the number of times people go back to edit are generally small. I don't even see it unless I look for it.

I see you edited your post. It was probably a good idea to remove the part about mtn-man's ugly puppy.

:rolleyes: <_<

The line doesn't bug me either - better to see that then the silly error I just typed with my fat fingers.

March 6, 2008

The line doesn't bug me either - better to see that then the silly error I just typed with my fat fingers.

'

Er...I'm not suggesting we shouldn't be allowed to edit posts.

btw going back to the previous argument that someone can write a quick insult and edit it. So what, if they do that how does that prove what they wrote, all it proves is they edited their post.

3.2k · March 6, 2008

EDIT: had to add a comma after "No"

Feature Request - Have the system remove all instances of "EDIT:" and subsequent text. These types of lines are superlative and annoying.

March 6, 2008

This is one of the few forums that places an 'edited' tag at the bottom of an edited post even if it is edited immediately. Most other forums give the poster a few minutes grace before adding the 'edited tag'. Would it be difficult to implement that on this forum. I imagine that it would be a simple option in the board software.

Great suggestion.

I would also like to have the ability to edit the Subject Line of a post. (Some of the crazy misspellings in the thread subject lines really look bad, especially when they glare you in the face day after day.)

Btw, in cache logs, if you edit your post quickly (within a minute?), you won't get an "Edited" note.

3.9k · March 6, 2008

Anyway, I've made my point, and I'll leave it at that.

If you could go ahead and edit your post above, and use quote tags, that would make the post look a lot cleaner.

Mmkay? That would be greaaat, thanks.

2.3k · March 6, 2008

I would also like to have the ability to edit the Subject Line of a post. (Some of the crazy misspellings in the thread subject lines really look bad, especially when they glare you in the face day after day.)

Another reason to have the ability to edit a Subject Line (and also to correct spelling in general): Misspelling a word in a post will prevent that post from showing up in results from forum searches that include that word.

--Larry

1.4k · March 6, 2008

May I suggest that you use Firefox if you don't already. A spell check program is built into it, text that is spelled wrong is highlighted automagically, you can add words to your own custom dictionary and all you need to do is right click to correct spelling. As I type this, "automagically" has red dots under it to highlight it. If I right click on it, I can add it to my dictionary.

The other thing, for those of you in the stone age that still use Internet Explorer , is a cool program called IE Spell. You have to download it and load it on your computer, but it does the same thing in IE that Firefox does as described above.

http://www.iespell.com/

I use Seamonkey which also has the built in spell checker and correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Firefox doesn't have the built in email client, which Seamonkey does.

March 6, 2008

Note that logs for actual caches DO give this few-minute grace period to edit your cache logs before the 'log edited' notice will appear.

So Groundspeak clearly sees the benefit here :huh: It's likely just a config option in IPB they could set.

7.2k · March 6, 2008

I know it's not going to get done unless someone says something precisely *because* it is not that important, but now that it's been pointed out perhaps the boards gods will see fit to reconsider?

The surefire way to get people to make sure they put your issue in front of other issues it to throw personal insults at them. Yeah buddy. Great move on your part for sure.

Perhaps I could interest you in a class on "How To Win Friends and Influence People"? :huh:

Continue down this road and I will be happy to introduce you to your warning meter.

March 7, 2008

I know it's not going to get done unless someone says something precisely *because* it is not that important, but now that it's been pointed out perhaps the boards gods will see fit to reconsider?

The surefire way to get people to make sure they put your issue in front of other issues it to throw personal insults at them. Yeah buddy. Great move on your part for sure.

Perhaps I could interest you in a class on "How To Win Friends and Influence People"?

Continue down this road and I will be happy to introduce you to your warning meter.

In what way is the term "boards gods" insulting?

7.2k · March 7, 2008

That is usually used in the same light as "forum nazis". They are forum administrators, not gods.

2k · March 7, 2008

I don't see the big deal about having an edited line under my post. It doesn't make things messy as the number of times people go back to edit are generally small. I don't even see it unless I look for it.

I see you edited your post. It was probably a good idea to remove the part about mtn-man's ugly puppy.

I thought so too. When you have a prize winning (*) goldendoodle, sometimes you forgot that some people just have ugly dogs.

(*) prizes awarded by my kids

2k · March 7, 2008

I know it's not going to get done unless someone says something precisely *because* it is not that important, but now that it's been pointed out perhaps the boards gods will see fit to reconsider?

As far as I know, this is off-the-shelf software that Groundspeak doesn't write or manage. The Waymarking.com forums use different software - does it have the same "issue"?

1k · March 8, 2008

That is usually used in the same light as "forum nazis". They are forum administrators, not gods.

Godwin's Law has been reached, time to close this thread. :anitongue:

And just to keep on topic...

Edited March 8, 2008 by ShowStop

March 8, 2008

This is one of the few forums that places an 'edited' tag at the bottom of an edited post even if it is edited immediately. Most other forums give the poster a few minutes grace before adding the 'edited tag'. Would it be difficult to implement that on this forum. I imagine that it would be a simple option in the board software.

Did I miss the point? Why do you care if it says that you edited this post? Are you self conscious about such things?

March 8, 2008

This is one of the few forums that places an 'edited' tag at the bottom of an edited post even if it is edited immediately. Most other forums give the poster a few minutes grace before adding the 'edited tag'. Would it be difficult to implement that on this forum. I imagine that it would be a simple option in the board software.

Did I miss the point? Why do you care if it says that you edited this post? Are you self conscious about such things?

It is a waste of bandwidth and a waste of server space.

7.2k · March 8, 2008

It is a waste of bandwidth and a waste of server space.

Funny. I was thinking the same thing about this topic.

I'll edit my post just for the fun of it though. I wonder how many milliseconds longer it takes for the topic to load? Someone with some time on their hands can let us know.

Edited March 8, 2008 by mtn-man

3.3k · March 8, 2008

Raise your hand if you have an edit option in your email software that allows you to edit a sent email before it is delivered. :anitongue: Not me. Engage brain before clicking send or pressing enter.

9.4k · March 8, 2008

That doesn't work either due to the fact that misspelled words are often not picked because they are still actual words. In fact these are exactly the sorts of things that get missed in the preview. Even grammar checks don't work as it often picks up things that are not grammatically incorrect.

No, the easiest solution for a better neater looking forum is to do what nearly everyone else does, (with good reason).

EDIT: had to add a comma after "No"

Wye don't ewe reed you're righting bee fore posting? :anitongue:

March 8, 2008

It is a waste of bandwidth and a waste of server space.

Funny. I was thinking the same thing about this topic.

Wow. You really don't have a clue.

That's ok, though. :anitongue:

7.2k · March 8, 2008

Wow. You really don't have a clue.

Hmmm. I do have more respect for people than you do at least.

This is what J.C. thinks about your comment...

Bandwidth for that picture provided by mtn-man.org at no charge.

In my second post in this topic, I was helpful enough to explain why this forum does it the way they do. In my first post in this topic I suggested two ways to help the entire community with making sure they spell correctly at least. What have you done to help? Throw out an insult at a moderator? Nice one.

I do think you have me confused with someone else though. I think you might have been thinking about this cacher. I have the ability to use this cool feature called "Preview Post". Actually reading what I write before I post it shows that I have no clue? To quote you, "Wow".

I also have a picture of Jeremy with some llamas. I'll waste some more bandwidth for you.

And, once again, I'll edit this post just to kill two more milliseconds of time.

Edited March 8, 2008 by mtn-man

21.9k · March 8, 2008

The happy dancing hamsters say

mtn-man ROCKS!

(They are being nice in the hope that the puppymonster doesn't eat them.)

EDIT: to add more hamster.

Edited March 8, 2008 by Keystone

2k · March 8, 2008

EDIT: to add more hamster.

Because, really, you can never have enough hamster

Edit: well, because.

Edited March 8, 2008 by ChileHead

22k · March 8, 2008

We need a few minutes grace to correct spelling

Oh Spelling God(s) may we be blessed with correct spelling and proper grammar. May our diction be clear and our prose unembellished. We ask this not only for ourselves but also those who type in cap. Amen.

7.3k · March 8, 2008

I know it's not going to get done unless someone says something precisely *because* it is not that important, but now that it's been pointed out perhaps the boards gods will see fit to reconsider?

As far as I know, this is off-the-shelf software that Groundspeak doesn't write or manage. The Waymarking.com forums use different software - does it have the same "issue"?

I don't know a lot about this, but the last time I was in the Waymarking forums you could edit a post without having an edit tag (at least I think so).

3.2k · March 8, 2008

I don't know a lot about this, but the last time I was in the Waymarking forums you could edit a post without having an edit tag (at least I think so).

They're asking about geocaching.com.

7.3k · March 9, 2008

I don't know a lot about this, but the last time I was in the Waymarking forums you could edit a post without having an edit tag (at least I think so).

They're asking about geocaching.com.

I know, I was responding to the post that I had quoted. They were wondering if it was the forum software, and if the Waymarking forums were different. It could show/not show that it's a forum software issue.

7.2k · March 9, 2008

I was thinking that this was possibly an intentional thing as I explained above, but it might just be a software issue that cannot be changed. Looking at the bottom of the forums, this forum uses IPB 2.1. Looking at the Invision PB Forums, I found this post...

BUGS FIXED (IPB 2.1.2 -> IPB 2.1.3)

24. [AJAX] Edited by legend not appended to post when AJAX used

It looks like this was changed in an update. Since the administrators are more focused on Project Phoenix V2, I would not see them doing an upgrade to these forums any time soon. It always seems that updates cause little quirks, and right now there are no issues causing problems for all users across the board with the forums. I am sorry that a couple of you are so distressed by this, but it appears it is something you will have to live with. I personally would not want them to have any distractions and would prefer that they continue to work on the big picture issues of making the web site as a whole work better and better.

But, I am not totally sure.

We need a few minutes grace to correct spelling

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment