Heroes of Might and Magic Community
visiting hero! Register | Today's Posts | Games | Search! | FAQ/Rules | AvatarList | MemberList | Profile


Age of Heroes Headlines:  
5 Oct 2016: Heroes VII development comes to an end.. - read more
6 Aug 2016: Troubled Heroes VII Expansion Release - read more
26 Apr 2016: Heroes VII XPack - Trial by Fire - Coming out in June! - read more
17 Apr 2016: Global Alternative Creatures MOD for H7 after 1.8 Patch! - read more
7 Mar 2016: Romero launches a Piano Sonata Album Kickstarter! - read more
19 Feb 2016: Heroes 5.5 RC6, Heroes VII patch 1.7 are out! - read more
13 Jan 2016: Horn of the Abyss 1.4 Available for Download! - read more
17 Dec 2015: Heroes 5.5 update, 1.6 out for H7 - read more
23 Nov 2015: H7 1.4 & 1.5 patches Released - read more
31 Oct 2015: First H7 patches are out, End of DoC development - read more
5 Oct 2016: Heroes VII development comes to an end.. - read more
[X] Remove Ads
LOGIN:     Username:     Password:         [ Register ]
New Server | HOMM1: info forum | HOMM2: info forum | HOMM3: info forum | HOMM4: info forum | HOMM5: info forum | MMH6: wiki forum | MMH7: wiki forum
Heroes Community > Turban Tribunal > Thread: Who owns posts at HC? The poster or the community?
Thread: Who owns posts at HC? The poster or the community? This thread is 4 pages long: 1 2 3 4 · NEXT»
Binabik
Binabik


Responsible
Legendary Hero
posted April 11, 2006 12:46 AM

Who owns posts at HC? The poster or the community?

Due to recent events the question has again been raised. Who owns the posts at HC?

One side says that the posts belong to the community. That deleting a post robs the community of something important. That deleting posts can ruin the flow of a thread. One analogy even compared it to the death of a person. When they pass away, they leave a legacy of their life's accomplishments....a memory of who they were and what they contributed to the world.

The other side says if a person makes a post that they should have the right to delete it. Maybe they said something they regretted later, and wanted the post removed. Maybe they simply said something embarrassing. Sometimes a mod might request a post be deleted to stop a flamewar.

Maybe some type of compromise. Like maybe a QP post can not be deleted, but others can.

To create "rules" about when a post can, or can not, be deleted would be difficult. Even if rules could somehow be agreed upon, they would have to be coded by Val with some sort of intellegence.

In my opinion, things should be left the way they are. With one exception. That a member can delete a post, but Val has the right to restore the post(s) when he feels there is a good reason....such as what happened recently when there was a major purging and disruption of threads.

What say you?
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
dimis
dimis


Responsible
Supreme Hero
Digitally signed by FoG
posted April 11, 2006 01:10 AM
Edited by dimis on 10 Apr 2006

Quality Posts should stay.

I think that +QP posts should not be edited/deleted once they are given the +QP. These are the main attractors of the forum and these urge you to give the best of yourself and try to contribute constructively (sometimes even for a better world! - and yes I am romantic ). By writing on this forum, one states publicly what he thinks on a specific situation. It is the posts (and the posters) that make a forum. Hence, if someone wants to be a member of a forum (let's say HeroesCommunity), then he/she agrees that whatever he/she writes is part of the forum-community as well and can be reproduced by referring to that particular saying. Anyway, this is the way I see my posts.

One more: Perhaps -QP posts should be un-editable as well, so that all can see and judge what really happened and how one received a -QP. Perhaps a MOD should reproduce a series of posts which result in a -QP and then assign the -QP.
EDIT: Of course in this latter case, censored material should not be reproduced ...
____________
The empty set

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
LegendMaker
LegendMaker


Promising
Famous Hero
The Metal Specialist
posted April 11, 2006 01:22 AM

Authors, Audiences and Team Works

This is an important issue for any open forum or public place. Laws and policies may vary a lot depending on the country and/or the domain.

A basic rule of thumb is this : private material is private. Public material is public.

For instance, I once had an account at a direct chat site. Turned out they not only made backups of any and all conversations in any and all chatrooms, they even posted them in their forum for users who were offline then to read later on !

This was an obvious violation of privacy. When you go into a chatroom, you don't expect what you say in the moment to be later scrutinized by ppl who weren't even chatting with you.

A public open forum like HC is quite the opposite. When you make a post in a forum, you expect ppl to read it. Potentially lots of people. Surely at least some people you don't know, and that don't even know you.

It's nothing private. Just the other way around.

That said, the timeframe makes a big difference, imho.

Deleting a recent post can be perfectly justified for various reasons. It's even often a useful feature, both for the poster and for readers. It's not very likely to do much harm anyways, since a recent post usually won't have lots of replies yet.

Deleting an old post that is a part of an old thread and has had loads of replies and views is something much less justifiable.

Think of it this way : I write songs. They are MY songs. I do whatever I please with them. Noone has any right to even hear them if I don't want them to !

OH yeah ?! Oh NO !

NOT once I signed a bloody contract and released them officially to the public ! Then even though they are still MY song, and I keep some control over them, the public has the RIGHT to access released copies of them.

And I don't have the right to take them back. No matter how I feel about the audience or the critics. It's too late to take them back once I made them PUBLIC.

This is even much more clear in the case of a COLLECTIVE work. Just because an actor is disappointed by his looks in a movie, once it's already distributed, he can't tell the director, his fellow actors and all the people involved in the movie " **** you ! I take my face back " !

Sure, some did (mainly for humiliating material). But they BOUGHT the WHOLE movie to be able to do so ! NOT jus their lines !

So, technically, Xarfie or any other member shouldn't have the right to delete such posts untill Val SOLD them the whole forum.

That's my point of view on that matter.

* Any individual post intertwined in a long thread including many other posts and/or replies shouldn't be allowed to be deleted unless Val and/or the mods think it won't harm the thread it's a part of.

* Any +QP awarded post should be automatically protected from deletion and editing, like Csarmi suggested earlier on.

* After a certain time (say, maybe a year or so), all posts should be archived and given a "read only" status.

Legend.
____________
LM

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Nebuka
Nebuka


Promising
Supreme Hero
Save me Jebus!
posted April 11, 2006 04:07 AM

For me this would be best.

Leave 30 mins, hour, 2 hours, maybe even one day of time to edit post after it was first posted (with deleting option as well).

After that, no editing at all. Post stay there forever. Til purge.

That's all for normal users. Mods should still be able to edit or delete posts.


____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Binabik
Binabik


Responsible
Legendary Hero
posted April 11, 2006 09:04 AM
Edited by Binabik on 11 Apr 2006

Dimis, are you saying only QP posts should be locked?

What about significant posts in the middle of a thread? Everything following which refers to that post makes no sense if it is deleted. A person deleteing the post is not only deleting their own post, but damaging the thread as well.

Another case that happened recently is the deletion of the thread starter. Not the thread or post itself, but all the text of the post. Should a thread starting post be locked from editing? Many times the ability to edit the starting post is needed. Like when it contains an ongoing list compiled over time.

*****************
This same theory applies to all posts really. As long as the ability remains to edit a post, the entire text could be deleted without deleting the post itself.
*****************

Legend and Nebuka both suggest some type of time stamp. That might not be a bad idea. But I think a day would be too short, and a year too long.

One thing about all of this. It must be something easily implemented by either the mods or Val. I think it would be too much to ask for the mods to do any type of active monitoring. By that I mean actually making decissions on when to lock a post. Any type of automatic system would have to be coded by Val. An automatic system also becomes inflexible.

Currently Val has the ability to restore posts. So the question is, should he, and under what circumstances?
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
dimis
dimis


Responsible
Supreme Hero
Digitally signed by FoG
posted April 11, 2006 12:06 PM
Edited by dimis on 11 Apr 2006

My view on +QP

Ok, my point of view on the (any) forum:
I read through threads as if they are articles in a newspaper / chapters of a book/ etc.
Regarding the locks of +QP posts: There are +QP posts that can be awarded a +QP and nothing bad will ever happen due to someone's inability of editing. Now, regarding some other posts that serve as minor table of contents or that change gradually over time due to a long-term project (is there another category that I forget?) the author might be requested by a MOD to post one more message and the +QP is awarded on that one. This leaves the author with the ability of editing his actual +QP post (which of course should be retrieved if the user later makes it blank or nearly blank because he is pissed or for some other reason - this should be clear on CoC). Moreover, there should be one more minor editing even on +QP posts: The user can edit the links (either direct or indirect {i.e. an image}) so that they work and are identical to the originally awarded +QP post. Up to this point everything is mechanical and hence can be coded. Of course another issue into consideration is what if someone edits a link of a +QP awarded post with a censored link/etc? Perhaps this kind of editing should be made by a mod after the user applies in a thread for the necessary editing. (I believe this is not much work or I can volunteer for the matching so that in case there is a problem I receive a penalty or I am banned.)
One more thing regarding +QP posts: Even on directly-awarded +QP posts, I think there should be two phases always:
* First phase: The post is candidate for +QP by another post made by a mod willing to apply a +QP and the user is allowed to edit it (finalize) within a week or so.
* Second phase: After that, the user declares that post is ready (or time has expired), +QP is awarded on actual post and those 2 (perhaps more by other users) posts are deleted from thread, since it is plain spam.

Regarding normal posts: The timestamp idea is interesting, yet I also think that a day is very short period and of course I am referring to the latest edit not the time that post was first generated. But there are some more issues on this subject, the timestamp and the way it can be implemented so that people don't have problem in the forum. I will refrain from posting my thoughts on these with a later post, so that I have some time to think about it and have a crystal-clear point of view.

EDIT: It would be interesting to hear the comments of the rest of the members of this community as well.
____________
The empty set

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
LegendMaker
LegendMaker


Promising
Famous Hero
The Metal Specialist
posted April 11, 2006 06:47 PM

HC Policy

Quote:
Moderators often delete or clean threads that are more than a few days old and do not contain any information relevant to the future. If you have posted in one of those threads, your post count will be adjusted accordingly as those posts are deleted (-1 post count for each of your posts deleted). Interesting threads with good ideas do not get deleted regardless of how old they are.
Of course, Val should restore all of Xarfie's posts that were relevant parts of a thread.

One actor decide to retire. He has the right to burn all the private stuff he made on his own. But if he burns his scenes of a movie that he was only a part of, then by all means the producer has the right to restore them.

HC isn't Xarfax's forum. Not In The Manual isn't Xarfax's thread. The tavern rumor isn't Xarfax's project.

That problem showed up earlier in my HC experience, with a former Library thread created by Fofa that was called "Will The Sorceress Ever Return ?".
She created the thread with a 2 lines long starting post. Then the thread went up to 5 pages long, and 80% of its content consisted of MY posts.

Then it slipped into personnal matters and Angel thrown it to the VW. Then I tried to save it, but it ended up deleted eventually anyways.

Fofa started the thread, so even though she barely posted 5% of its content, it was supposed to be HER thread forever.

That I'll NEVER agree on. Because :

HC's policy is VERY CLEAR on the question of "should I create a new thread or contribute to the similar one that already exists ?" The answer was ALWAYS "do not ever create a new thread if a similar one already exists" !

This in itself implies that ANY thread is meant to be COLLECTIVE material. Because the policy is that if, say, William creates a Titans thead, ANYONE wanting to make a post about Titans will have to post in THAT thread instead of creating a similar one.

So in my example, the Titans thread would NOT belong to William. It will be THE Titans thread of the forum.

Same applies for any and all threads. Anyone wanting to post something relevant to the "Not In The Manual" concept HAS to do it in the thread that Xarfax STARTED.

So it belongs to the whole community.

Legend.
____________
LM

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Valeriy
Valeriy

Mage of the Land
Naughty, Naughty Valeriy
posted April 11, 2006 11:15 PM
Edited by Valeriy on 11 Apr 2006

Thanks for posting some really insightful opinions.

I agree that everything posted in the public domain belongs to that public domain. By deleting or editing their posts a member can harm the layout of posts of others. Having QPs clearly does not make some members capable of keeping the good of the community in mind with their actions. In conclusion of that:

1) editing/deleting ability will be restricted.
2) we will be restoring some deleted posts.

Here's my current idea of the changes, feedback is welcome:

Ability to delete a post is not really needed in my opinion. Aside from deleting a duplicate post (which is very rare and often not done anyway), this function can be used to remove crucial pieces of conversation, or to insult someone and delete the post before a moderator can see it. I think it's safe to say that the need to delete a post is very rare and in those cases a moderator can be approached.

Ability to edit a post is useful to correct spelling, fix any mistakes, or to polish off an article. It can also be used to conceal what was said, or to delete the post by editing it out.

A good solution seems to be restricting editing of any post to one week after it was posted. That duration is more than sufficient to check the spelling and even rethink the content.

Loknar has sponsored a feature whereby you will have an option to edit a post without bumping the thread to the top of the forum.

The only instance in which editing a post beyond a week from when it was posted could be useful are lists, tables of contents, etc. In that case what a user can do is make a new post with the edited version. A moderator will delete the new post and put its contents into the first post. Moderators will of course retain the ability to edit any post in forums they look after.

Age of Heroes Coliseum forum does need longer editing timeframe, and it can be implemented for that forum only. For example three months from post date.

I think this is both the easiest and most practical solution to implement.

With regards to whether an author owns their posts, my opinion is reflected in how HC Messenger is designed. When you send an HCM, you can change your mind and delete it if it has not been read. Once it has been read you can not delete it any longer, it's the recipient's property. Same with what you post on the forums, except that it is public property.
____________
You can wait for others to do it, but if they don't know how, you'll wait forever.
Be an example of what you want to see on HC and in the world.
http://www.heroesofmightandmagic.com

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
LegendMaker
LegendMaker


Promising
Famous Hero
The Metal Specialist
posted April 11, 2006 11:34 PM

Legendarily Approved !

Quote:
Thanks for posting some really insightful opinions.
Thanks for taking them into account !
Quote:
1) editing/deleting ability will be restricted.
2) we will be restoring some deleted posts.
Good news !
Quote:
With regards to whether an author owns their posts, my opinion is reflected in how HC Messenger is designed. When you send an HCM, you can change your mind and delete it if it has not been read. Once it has been read you can not delete it any longer, it's the recipient's property. Same with what you post on the forums, except that it is public property.
This part is so important I think it should be included in the FAQ/Rules page as is !
Quote:
feedback is welcome
Val, this once my feedback will be fairly short (especially by my standards lmao) :

* This all makes perfect sense and is by all means legitimate.

* This will greatly improve the forum both for the community as a whole and for any individual poster.

* Please acknowledge that I, LegendMaker, mere member DO AGREE !

Thumbs up for the concept and good luck for the technical aspects !

Legendary
____________
LM

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
tigris
tigris


Supreme Hero
Supreme Noobolator
posted April 11, 2006 11:36 PM
Edited by tigris on 11 Apr 2006

I suggest that the QP posts can't be edited.This will be a incentative for mods to correct the content of a QP post and to make it flawless(im refering mostly to Heroes related QP's) and then that certain post is to remain for the comunity.

The rest of the posts can be edited at will.But valuable material needs to remain for the community

____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
maretti
maretti


Responsible
Supreme Hero
posted April 12, 2006 12:06 AM
Edited by maretti on 11 Apr 2006

I have sometimes deleted posts. I think it would be a good idea to still have that oppertunity for at least a short periode of time. You can edit your post by deleting everything anyway so why not make it possible to delete posts in the same periode of time as you can edit posts?
____________
Crag rules, Orrin and Ivor suck

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Consis
Consis


Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
posted April 12, 2006 12:06 AM
Edited by Consis on 11 Apr 2006

What Is A Post?

In my opinion: That is the question.

I think that a post is the action taken by a person to communicate a thought, a feeling, or a need. A post can be any combination or all three. The idea is that this form of action can be related to the act of writing. It is this same act that seperates us from all the other animals on this planet. The question then becomes: Why does a person write? What is its purpose or function? Does it have a meaning or many meanings? If we are to relate a post to writing then we might find the similarities to be highly congruous.

Some people who write, do it because:

~They want or need something from someone else. (i.e. person to person communication) Plants and animals don't write to each other. Why do we?

~Another reason might be because they are simply expressing themselves in a way that compels them to take action. This might mean they are describing something such as a thought, a feeling, or a need.

~Another reason might be to express the nature of their existence. Perhaps the written idea, thought, or need is representative of what answers the question: "Why am I here? Why do I exist? For what purpose?"

It is apparent to me that posting a thread or within one signifies a person making an attempt at one of the three reasons why people write. It is a characteristic unique to Human beings. It is also representative of ackowledging one's own existence.

We do not truly know the real-life of a poster. It could be a person who is very famous and gets lots of attention or it could be a child being ignored by all the people in his/her life. If you're a child who's being ignored even by your own parents and have no one to talk with then this online message board we call Heroes Community might be a good place to discover that you really do matter in this world. You really are special and have much to contribute. Perhaps this is a good place to meet someone who would gladly listen to the pain of your everyday life. Perhaps this is a place for you that won't judge you for someone that you aren't. Perhaps if you have no one else to talk with, you can come here, get involved in a fun game, be yourself, and feel comfortable without fear of being picked on, scolded, or otherwise demeaned.

What is a post? For some people it is nothing more than a small curious adventure with which you find yourself for 10-15 minutes a day. For others it is a place of sanctuary, of friendship, of meeting new people from many different walks of life, or simply a home away from home.

Who owns a post? Whether the post is kept or deleted makes no difference except to serve as a reminder that you were here, met someone new, made a friend, and having left it feeling better about yourself and the world in which you live.
____________
Roses Are RedAnd So Am I

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
Binabik
Binabik


Responsible
Legendary Hero
posted April 12, 2006 12:57 AM
Edited by Binabik on 11 Apr 2006

Note: this was written before I saw the last couple posts and I haven't read them.

Has the deletion of individual posts been a problem? I don't mean something that happens every now and then. But something that happens regularly?

As far as mass purging. One option might be kind of a reverse flood protect for deletions. Something with a long time period, like a day. Once a post is deleted, no more deletions can be done within a day. Maybe the same thing for editing. That seems like a good compromise to me.

I've thought about this a lot because I was involved in recent events and affected by them. These controversies are never about one person, or one incident. What it's really about is "what kind of a place should HC be?". The specific person or event is nothing more than a reason to open dialog. That's been true for every controversy that comes up.

Bottom line is, I was strongly affected by what happened. But you know what? I don't really care, not for myself anyway. It's not the end of the world.

I have really mixed feelings about this. And I even feel somewhat like a hypocrite. But the logical side of me doesn't always agree with what I "feel". The logical side agrees with most of what's been posted here, so I won't repeat it. But somehow it just bothers me. I have no strong logical argument to justify that side, but it's there. It just bothers me.

I've exchanged several HCMs with the person in question. Those conversations were private, so I won't give any detail. But I WILL say that I see his point of view. I don't agree with it, but I understand his point. There's a big difference between disagreeing with someone who has no valid point, and disagreeing with someone who does have a valid point.

This has nothing to do with the person in question, but only myself, my own example. There have been several times I've wanted to delete something I've posted that was a lot more than a week old. Why? I'll be quite honest, it was embarrassing, or stupid. Sometimes people just post things they wished later they didn't. I doubt there is a person here who can say this has never happened, unless they are new maybe. It's fine to say a person should think things through before posting. But everyone is human and these things just happen.

There's the logical side of things, maybe even a legal side. But HC is a place where real humans meet. Real humans with their human flaws. Do we want HC to be a place where humans are not allowed to have flaws, where they will be stuck with their mistakes forever? Or do we want it to be a place where people have a second chance, a place where they can correct past mistakes.

I can't say I have a solution. I just like to look at all sides of things. I see it as a trade-off, and the costs of both sides have to be weighed.....which one is more important?

Edit: Reading Consis' post reminded me of something. Some people consider writing as an art....and are never satisfied with it. Whoops, I just saw a type, better fix it...can't let that get through!
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Loknar
Loknar


Adventuring Hero
Missing Links
posted April 12, 2006 01:16 AM
Edited by Loknar on 12 Apr 2006

Deletion and Growth

[edit: This was written before I read Consis' and Binabiks posts]

The proposed inability to freely delete and edit your posts would be an extreme change to HC in my eyes, and I'm sorry to say, to the worse.

I often feel the need to delete a post that is more than a week old. Actually I mostly think about deleting posts not until after a week, since I delete them when there was no reaction to them or when they seem otherwise superfluous. Whether that is so, turns out not before a week after posting, but may just as well do so not before a year. I review my posts when the thread gets bumped, and edit and try to improve them if necessary. My first suggestion, if you cannot be convinced to drop this completely (which is what I actually wish), is to grant at least free editing for the last 20 or so bumped threads (per forum, that is .) I'd really like to edit and delete my posts by my own and by my own responsibility. Isn't the idea underlying to any forum that the posters take responsibility for their posts? Why not also trust them to take responsibility for the thread and its coherence, in short, for the community? (And can you enforce responsibility? A disturbing question. See democracy theory.)

The idea with the mods isn't viable imo, because frankly, I don't think they should be loaded with any additional duties. I asked Lich_King to delete this thread when Coliseum was created. It's totally obsolete and superfluous. But still there. (I said he needn't hurry, to keep that right.) But I wouldn't bother improving my posts under these conditions, because I'm sure when my version will get published, I'll already have something to improve about it. I'm sure I'll get heavily on the nerves of those unfortunate mods. (Moreover, it hampers reading if there are several versions of a post in a thread.)

And there is a more important issue: The question is not only who owns the threads, but also what should be affected by that. The thread question formulates an entirely legalistic point of view. If the publisher (the Mage certainly, perhaps also HC, but that is yet another wide field) becomes the owner, the poster still remains the author. So the question at stake is really: How far do you respect authorship? You are the publisher, yes, but as a really gifted author I would mind if my publisher wouldn't respect my wish to not further publish what I once trusted to paper but now wish to leave behind me. If the obviously talented Xarfax wants to wipe out his traces in this community out of anger, I think we should mourn over this fact, but not draw our swords for a holy crusade against it. And it would be wise to diminish the causes for doing so. And also keep in mind that creativity needs freedom - anarchy, that is. - But I agree that respect for the author doesn't exclude reinstating posts that are vital to the community.

Also I think the idea behind this, that HC should freeze only momentary states of an ongoing - anarchic (!) - conversation, is fundamentally erroneous, partly just because of that anarchic character. By hindering the worsening of a post (whereof deleting could be the extreme point), you also hinder the improving of a post (whereof deleting could also be the extreme point). It is noteworthy that the forum realization of the momentary is the spam, where you just write what crosses your (intoxicated? brain-dead? frustrated? psychopath? ivory intellectual? ) mind. Don't think - just write. Don't you see the contradiction between your stated ideals and what you're up to? By freezing the momentary and not allowing it to become more than that - lasting, that is, you favour spam over quality posting. (And from one perfectionist to the other: How can you even think of that? )

And one last thing, the Non-Reviving Edit feature I sponsored would be totally pointless for me if I could only use it on threads a week after posting. My idea was that I could silently work on my threads that went wrong (like my most interesting failure, the quality thread), make something of them and my posts (mainly the first and the last of course) that could be of more interest to the others. (See an example of this.) Become a better author (and refine my english and iconic language). And remove stuff that was too momentary, repeal random discharges of my temperament.


[edit (already ): Changed order of thoughts, removed some fruitless side-branches and also concealed some of my momentary disappointment. It was certainly an alteration, hopefully also an improvement. Please IM me for an historical version. ]

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
LegendMaker
LegendMaker


Promising
Famous Hero
The Metal Specialist
posted April 12, 2006 03:00 AM
Edited by LegendMaker on 11 Apr 2006

Let's try to all speak about the SAME subject, folks !

Note : I've thoroughly read all above replies but LoknAR's, which I only read once (yet ).

1) Consis and the Philosophical point of view

Hi, Consis. First, now seems to me as good an occasion as any to let you know that I've read quite some posts of yours and that, more often than not, I really appreciate your insightful and just plain good writing style.

Now to the point. Your post here makes sense and is a fine analysis of some of the reasons for which and contexts in which a post can be done (not all, but the two extreme examples you chose at least nicely define the range of possibilities).

This is of course interesting in itself. But, with all due respect, not directly relevant to what we're discussing in this thread, imho. We're talking about the posts themselves. NOT about what caused them to be posted (let alone written).

Still it's always good to look at the different sides of things, to get some perspective. I mean, I appreciated your post. But it didn't add any valid point for the topic at hand, in my humble opinion, that is.

2) Bin and the Emotional point of view

Yo, Bin ! I can perfectly understand and even relate to your point of view, here. You guys all know I'm a writer in real life, I think. And a songwriter / musician also. So I do really know the feeling you're talking about.

I personnaly know quite a lot of authors and artists who wish they could go back in time and do a certain album or a certain book differently. Or even undo it, because it doesn't reflect their current style and/or because it's just plain embarrasing.

But they can't. And I'm glad they can't. And it's only FAIR they can't !

If the Metallica of 1991 had had the right to click "delete album" on some magical screen, I wouldn't be listenning to their brillant work of the 80's.

Because in 1991, Metallica wanted a fresh start as a commercial pop rock band aiming for the largest possible mainstream audience. So, in many respects, their landmark thrash metal masterpieces of the old days were quite embarrassing for them.

Yet, 10 years later, in 2001, Metallica tried to make a "back to the roots" revival album, switching back to their original metal style (well, trying to, that is lmao). And guess what ? The music trends has changed so much in between that it worked more than well for them, commercially wise ! So they've done a giant revival world tour for which their setlist mainly consisted of those 80's cult songs that used to be so embarrassing in the 90's !

They couldn't have done so, if they had deleted them back then, right ? Even worse : actually, if they had had that magical power, there would currently be NO album by Metallica at all. In the 90's they would have deleted their 80's stuff, and in the 2000's their 90's stuff. And their 2000's stuff obviously wouldn't exist at all, since it's only a revival of something that would never have existed in the first place !

Do you now see the whole of my point ? Weigh it this way, Bin : what's the most important ? To save what's good or to delete what's bad ? Bearing in mind that :

* What's bad can be ignored even if it remains.

* What's good cannot be resurrected once it's ceased to exist.

The imperfections are precisely what makes us humans so unique, folks. It would be a shame to get rid of them !

What would you rather read, honestly :

* A brilliant post dating back to 2001, with "edited yesterday" clearly stated ?

OR

* A lousy post dating back to 2001, unchanged ?

History has its share of things anyone wish didn't happen. Doesn't make no valid excuse to pretend it's the case. Just the opposite, actually.

@Maretti : Big difference between a post edited as blank and the same post deleted. In the former case, readers KNOW there was a post there, and they KNOW it has been edited out.

In the latter case, readers will assume there was never a post there in the first place. That's history rewritten. It doesn't make any kind of chronological sense.

Legend.
____________
LM

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Loknar
Loknar


Adventuring Hero
Missing Links
posted April 12, 2006 03:06 AM
Edited by Loknar on 12 Apr 2006

LegendMaker
Quote:
Big difference between a post edited as blank and the same post deleted. In the former case, readers KNOW there was a post there, and they KNOW it has been edited out.

In the former case, readers will assume there was never a post there in the first place. That's history rewritten. It doesn't make any kind of chronological sense.
This could be quite easily remedied (and improved) if the posts were automatically numbered, like I had suggested once (but deleted the post afterwards ). You could then also view the work of the mods. If you care for history, this would be the way to go.

[edit: Removed communication of momentary interest.]

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Binabik
Binabik


Responsible
Legendary Hero
posted April 12, 2006 03:28 AM

What's more important, the reading or the writing?
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Loknar
Loknar


Adventuring Hero
Missing Links
posted April 12, 2006 03:30 AM

Both equally. If it isn't written, it isn't there, and if it isn't read - it doesn't make a difference if it's there.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Binabik
Binabik


Responsible
Legendary Hero
posted April 12, 2006 03:36 AM

You cheated

Of course they are co-dependent. But it seems to me this entire thread boils down to that question.
____________

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
LegendMaker
LegendMaker


Promising
Famous Hero
The Metal Specialist
posted April 12, 2006 03:42 AM
Edited by LegendMaker on 11 Apr 2006

Quote:
What's more important, the reading or the writing ?

Of course they are co-dependent. But it seems to me this entire thread boils down to that question.
Precisely.

The thing is, if we followed your logic (or rather, like you yourself pointed out, your feeling), the very word "sorry" wouldn't exist. The very concepts of good and bad wouldn't exist.

This would be a perfect world, huh ?

Legendary ADDIT :

This here post and the previous one include all the elements of my comments pertaining to LoknAR's main post here. So, instead of repeating myself, I'll ask you to gather those pieces from those 2 posts, please, Loknar dude !

PS : If need be, I can further explain the statements about "sorry" and "the good and the bad".
____________
LM

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Jump To: « Prev Thread . . . Next Thread » This thread is 4 pages long: 1 2 3 4 · NEXT»
Post New Poll    Post New Topic    Post New Reply

Page compiled in 0.1256 seconds