« Moderation filters UI
Disallowing edits to posts
Profile tab on the main menu »

Dismal Shadow

  • Madman in a Box
  • Me: Who is Arantor? Cleverbot: It stands for time and relative dimensions in space.
  • Posts: 1,185
“I will stand on my ground as an atheist until your god shows up...If my irreligious bothers you much, and if you think everything I do is heresy to your god I don't care. Heresy is for those who believe, I don't. So, it isn't heresy at all!


   Jack in, Wedge,
   EXECUTE!

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: Disallowing edits to posts
« Reply #16, on February 13th, 2012, 02:17 AM »
Sort of, although you completely missed the post of what I was asking :/

Whether we display who edited something is absolutely irrelevant at this point in time. Right now, the fact is that we now actually track *who* edited it, rather than just the name of the editor.

The point I was getting at here is that if a moderator edits someone's post, should we prevent the person whose post it is from being able to edit it back?
Posted: February 13th, 2012, 02:14 AM

Essentially it is implementing http://wedge.org/pub/feats/6966/storing-the-modified-post-user-id/
When we unite against a common enemy that attacks our ethos, it nurtures group solidarity. Trolls are sensational, yes, but we keep everyone honest. | Game Memorial

Dismal Shadow

  • Madman in a Box
  • Me: Who is Arantor? Cleverbot: It stands for time and relative dimensions in space.
  • Posts: 1,185
Re: Disallowing edits to posts
« Reply #17, on February 13th, 2012, 02:26 AM »
Got it. Well, if the post was edited my the moderator, it shouldn't be edited because it was edited for a reason other than abusing it.

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: Disallowing edits to posts
« Reply #18, on February 13th, 2012, 02:28 AM »
That's exactly my thinking - and now we can actively offer the choice to block it. So... if that were an option, would you enable it? Would you prefer it to be default?

(The whole matter of the linked thread, of whether it should be displayed or not, that's another matter entirely but I have some ideas on that too.)

Dismal Shadow

  • Madman in a Box
  • Me: Who is Arantor? Cleverbot: It stands for time and relative dimensions in space.
  • Posts: 1,185
Re: Disallowing edits to posts
« Reply #19, on February 13th, 2012, 02:38 AM »
It it can be edited if it was first enabled, then I see no reason why it shouldn't be enable by default.

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: Disallowing edits to posts
« Reply #20, on February 13th, 2012, 02:44 AM »
...this is a totally new feature that doesn't yet exist in Wedge, not something that just needs enabling.

Farjo

  • "a valuable asset to the community"
  • Posts: 492
Re: Disallowing edits to posts
« Reply #21, on February 13th, 2012, 03:31 AM »
Quote from live627 on February 12th, 2012, 10:27 PM
What about giving the mod the choice when they ed it a post if  they want to luck it from future author edits instead/in addition to it being  a  global admin setting?
I agree with this. We edit posts for two reasons - the first as you describe but the second and more common is to lend a hand e.g. to correct a link, to help show an image etc, and under this second circumstance we would not want the OP to be prevented from making edits to the rest of the post.

As for making it default - if the Mod has live627's choice I would make it the default, but otherwise I think you will get too many "bug" reports stating their members cannot edit posts any more ::)
Quote from Arantor on February 12th, 2012, 07:27 PM
I'm keen to avoid implementing technical solutions when there are more effective people solutions.
Is that the case here? Can admods just say "don't edit that again or you're banned / put into a group that cannot edit"?



(ps I really like the fact you can easily add quotes from two different posts :) )

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: Disallowing edits to posts
« Reply #22, on February 13th, 2012, 09:20 AM »
Quote
Is that the case here? Can admods just say "don't edit that again or you're banned / put into a group that cannot edit"?
It might be, you know. I wasn't sure so I figured I'd ask the question in case some folks wanted to make it happen.

I'm now seeing more of a balanced approach being required, so perhaps this should be left alone for a while and turned into a plugin rather than a core feature (and if people like it, we can make it core)

Nao

  • Dadman with a boy
  • Posts: 16,082
Re: Disallowing edits to posts
« Reply #23, on February 13th, 2012, 10:55 AM »
I can imagine that this is a bit frustrating -- if anything, adding a flag for "can edit" isn't really linked to knowing whether an admin edited the post -- e.g. they can simply not edit a post but prevent someone from editing their post, so that makes the storing of editor IDs a bit less useful than if an admin editing a post would block it automatically. If you know what I mean.
Posted: February 13th, 2012, 10:54 AM
Quote from Arantor on February 13th, 2012, 12:13 AM
Subject, no, but the others could be I guess.

But I don't see that as a 'right now' thing, though certainly now would be the sort of time if it were going to happen.
It's not like the messages table has too many fields, like the members table that really, really needed a data field (even though we're not using it much for now... I think?), but it can be seen as betting on the future, especially for plugins. :)

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: Disallowing edits to posts
« Reply #24, on February 13th, 2012, 10:58 AM »
I agree that a data field is necessary but care *must* be taken about what goes in it. Modifier name/poster name for example shouldn't, because if the related account gets deleted, bad stuff is going to happen because there's no way to update it easily in MySQL (as it doesn't have any notion of serialize)

Nao

  • Dadman with a boy
  • Posts: 16,082
Re: Disallowing edits to posts
« Reply #25, on February 13th, 2012, 11:36 AM »
That's why I didn't suggest moving modified_member over there, but I think modified_name could go, because, technically, we're never updating the name as it's being changed/deleted... Are we?

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: Disallowing edits to posts
« Reply #26, on February 13th, 2012, 11:39 AM »
Quote
but I think modified_name could go, because, technically, we're never updating the name as it's being changed/deleted... Are we?
We're not currently, but if we drop the modified_name as standard and rely on the modified_member only, then replace it if the account is deleted, then we'd *have* to update it.

Nao

  • Dadman with a boy
  • Posts: 16,082
Re: Disallowing edits to posts
« Reply #27, on February 13th, 2012, 11:43 AM »
Suggesting to simply check for modified_member when deleting a member, and if found, unserialize data and serialize with last known member name.

Although I'd rather we store the actual username as modified_name in data, instead of real_name (display name), and we put the priority on showing the (display) name as found through modified_member. Then if modified_member is associated to no name, we can use modified_name in its place.

Arantor

  • As powerful as possible, as complex as necessary.
  • Posts: 14,278
Re: Disallowing edits to posts
« Reply #28, on February 13th, 2012, 11:55 AM »
Quote
Suggesting to simply check for modified_member when deleting a member, and if found, unserialize data and serialize with last known member name.
Which still means doing it every row, as opposed to UPDATE wedge_messages SET modified_name = 'name' WHERE modified_member = id...

TE

  • Posts: 286
Thorsten "TE" Eurich - Former SMF Developer & Converters Guru
« Moderation filters UI
Profile tab on the main menu »