Post editing timeout

[StevenB]

The timeout for editing posts seems rather short - perhaps a few hours?
I realize that this was probably set for good reasons which I may not be aware of, but I've had several occasions recently where I've wanted to go back and correct information in one of my posts but was unable to. Is there any chance it could be made longer?

If there is concern that editing posts would allow a discussion to change after it had been replied to, perhaps this could be mitigated with a forum strikethrough tag and a warning box above the edit form reminding readers to strike information rather than remove it.

[Al Skierkiewicz]

Steven,
Moderators can be asked to make some changes. It is highly recommended that posters read what they are writing before hitting the "submit" button. Often times you may have an opinion that sounds good in your head, but when you write it and read it it sounds awful.

[EricH]

IIRC, it's something like 18-24 hours.

I've also had occasion to ask for a post to be edited/deleted after that point.

FYI, when you edit, if your post has been quoted, it's too late to change that information. The edit doesn't affect quotes later.

[StevenB]

I'm pretty careful to preview and reread all of my posts, so I'm not concerned with striking something "from the record", or changing the substance or even the wording of my posts. But there are some cases where a correction or additional information would be useful for later readers of the thread.

I feel that CD is not merely a discussion board - it's a massive repository of knowledge. As such, there will be at least some people reading threads long after the discussion has happened. Sometimes a few clarifying words can greatly improve the readability of a thread, helping transform it from a tangled web of thoughts into a useful reference.

Suppose, for example, that I posted a thread about a particular quirk in the game and spawned a 100-post thread. If the GDC posts an update that makes the thread moot, it seems reasonable to at a note at the end of the first post simply saying, "This issue is clarified as of Team Update #12", rather than make future readers wade through a hundred posts to get to the point. Or take threads where a file is posted (such as this one) and then that file is updated. In my opinion, it makes sense for the poster to be able to update a post with the understanding that the content should be preserved. This is common on the Ubuntu forums, and posts can be updated if a new version changes things or more information is discovered.

Again, I realize there are probably good reasons behind the current policy, and I should just contact a moderator in these instances, that's understandable. It would be nice if the FAQ gave specific details about the editing timeout and the best way to contact a moderator. The current stock answer on editing posts isn't very helpful.

[Al Skierkiewicz]

Steven,
In your example, a moderator can close the thread if needed. Most readers will have known about the change in short period of time so it is not needed in most cases. There are many of us watching and we do communicate.