In doing some maintenance tonight (specifically, adding the "off-topic" forum), I made a minor change in the title of the main distance learning forum. This, in turn, confused the software, which saw all of the threads as belonging to a different forum than the one they were actually in. The result was that some threads were not accepting new messages, giving an error message instead. I've run the maintenance routine that is supposed to fix such things, and it appears that function is back to normal again. I apologize for the confusion. Thanks Chip
For once I was about to write something interesting.Because of you it was not possible and meanwhile I have forgotten what I wanted to write. I do NOT thank you Chip. Ulrich PS Why did I tie a knot in my handkerchief.Oh yes."Click Submit Reply"
Chip, First of all - thanks for all of your hard work in keeping the forum running. I do have one question/suggestion: is there a way you can enable a 'edit after you post' function (as I have seen on other UBBS systems)? Thanks again!
And I had something even MORE interesting in response to Ulrich, but because of Chip I never even had a chance to think of it.
Originally posted by uxu: Chip, First of all - thanks for all of your hard work in keeping the forum running. There are certainly days when all of us who administer and maintain the board think it's not worth the hassle, but many more when we enjoy it. Thanks!! I do have one question/suggestion: is there a way you can enable a 'edit after you post' function (as I have seen on other UBBS systems)? The lack of editing capability is an intentional choice we made in setting up the board. Because of the controversial nature of the discussions, the occasional appearances by spammers, etc., we felt it better to ensure that comments and statements can be preserved, without someone being able to later alter or delete them. The downside to this, of course, is that if you make a typo, there is no way to correct it. We believe that, on looking at the entire situation, that preserving the integrity of posts is more important. [/B][/QUOTE]
"The lack of editing capability is an intentional choice we made in setting up the board." In setting up? Really? In your initial regulations the members were explicitely allowed to edit what they wrote. Now my question.Have the members,despite the published permission to edit,never been allowed to edit their messages or did you change this rule suddenly and surreptitiously applying the new rule to messages that were sent before? Whichever case,it was unethical. Best regards.
Originally posted by Ulrich Bozzo: In your initial regulations the members were explicitely allowed to edit what they wrote. We have never, ever, allowed members to edit posts, not even during the non-public beta testing, which was done with a few people signed up for Bruce's a.e.d. list, and went for about 10 days or so prior to the public opening of the board. The FAQ, which is a generic one that comes with the BBS software, was unclear, stating that "editing of messages is posslble, unless the administrators of this board have disabled the feature" or something like that. It was corrected the first time someone asked about it, which was within the first month that the board was operational. Now my question.Have the members,despite the published permission to edit,never been allowed to edit their messages or did you change this rule suddenly and surreptitiously applying the new rule to messages that were sent before? I think the answer above is clear. There was never any clear expectation that editing was possible. It says nothing about it in the TOS, which is the document that ultimately determines policy for the board. Even the FAQ, while it implied the possibility, qualified by saying "unless disabled", so I must respectfully disagree that there has been any ethical breach.
