Editing old posts prohibited

[orudge]

Due to a spate of vandalism of old posts by various users, some recent, some not so recent, editing out old posts to remove content entirely, destroying historical conversations and so on, I have imposed a 7-day limit on editing old posts.

I realise this may cause issues for users who wish to update first posts of graphic release topics, etc. I will look to see what can be done about this, but what I think I may do is allow editing of post #1 of a topic past 7 days, but no others. When content is posted on the forums, unless it is in some way illegal or inappropriate, it forms part of an archive, a reference for people wanting to discover TT-related content, and I don't like to see it messed up.

If you have any comments or thoughts on this, please feel free to post them. And if you have posts that do need editing at the present moment and can't edit them yourself just now, feel free to PM me and I'll do that for you at the moment.

[FooBar]

From the canadian stations question thread:

I do have old backups of posts, attachments, etc. I've not decided whether I will restore this vandalism yet, it'd be a bit of a pain, but technically possible.

Something like this?

Code: Select all

INSERT INTO `target_table` SELECT * FROM `backup_table`WHERE `user_id` = '123456789' AND `date_field` BETWEEN '2011-01-01' AND NOW() ON DUPLICATE KEY UPDATE

Of course fictional table and field names and assuming MySQL. This may or may not import the occasional deleted post, which may be good or bad; depends a bit on how deleted posts are handled database-wise (i.e. kept and flagged as deleted or removed entirely). But I believe phpBB has options to remove any unwanted trash introduced by this.

[orudge]

Not exactly along those lines, but yes, I know what I want to do and how I want to do it, it's just finding the time to do it.

[FooBar]

Ok, then I'll shut up now.

Oh no, wait. I forgot to mention that the 7 day limit is a good idea.
First post exeption is a bit tricky. Generally the newest releases of something are in first posts, which then still could be deleted. Is it possible to allow editing of a first post, but not the attachments? Then one can upload in a new post, but still link to it from the first one.

[orudge]

Not really. And if people do delete the attachments, then generally others will have copies (or I'll have backups), so it's not such an issue. I just don't like people blanket-deleting all their stuff.

[bremerjoe]

As much as I understand especially due to current incident that many people will welcome this decision I doubt that it is the right way to go. Of course you can start such change effective now for any new posts. But prohibiting people from deleting/editing their old posts although no such limititation was in place when they posted is foulplay I think.

[orudge]

There has never been anything guaranteeing that the editing facility would remain available. If it was subject to abuse (as I'd argue it has been), there was always the possibility it could be removed. That said, I will remain amiable to genuine requests for posts to be edited where there is appropriate justification for this.

To clarify, I have amended the forum rules by adding a paragraph to the "Copyright Disclaimer" section regarding publishing rights of content.

[Leanden]

I think this is completely out of order, and a change like this would disuade me from using these forums in the future, you can't force people to keep their work here if they don't want to and you have no right to reinstate items the author has chosen to remove.

[orudge]

I have no intention of reinstating attachments, due to the potential copyright minefield, and because I appreciate that an author may wish to remove their content in some situations. However, I don't see why the content of messages can't be reinstated, considering an implicit grant was made that content could be published by the act of posting on the forums; and now that is made more explicit by the new rule. Whether I actually will is undecided, however.

This whole thing could potentially have been avoided had the users in question (OzTrans is one, but there have been others before) had just informed me of their intentions and possible a more amicable solution could have been settled upon.

Nothing is 100% decided yet, anyway - I want to get the opinion of users before implementing a permanent policy. This is currently a temporary restriction to prevent further vandalism in the mean time.

[Leanden]

While I may agree that the method by which he moved may seem unjustified, its largely due to the attitudes of people within this community, (further reinforced by this recent decision by yourself as a reaction), which has cause Oztrans, SAC, Myself and others to migrate to new webspace.

Before grabbing your torches and pitchforks against these people (in this case Oztrans it would seem), perhaps you should look upon yourselves and determine why such a decision has been chosen by these otherwise active graphics developers.

[orudge]

Before grabbing your torches and pitchforks against these people (in this case Oztrans it would seem), perhaps you should look upon yourselves and determine why such a decision has been chosen by these otherwise active graphics developers.

As I understand it, there was the recent issue over BaNaNaS and some disagreement with the OpenTTD developers. I don't see what that has to do with the forums though (other than the fact there was a discussion about it here), and why it should be cause for a user to delete all their posts? I've done nothing but encourage people to develop and contribute here. If something has changed that I'm not aware of, then please make me aware of it!

[bremerjoe]

There has never been anything guaranteeing that the editing facility would remain available.

Absolutely agree with you so far but in law I think this would qualify as custom due to the longterm practice of allowing people to edit their old postings.

If it was subject to abuse (as I'd argue it has been), there was always the possibility it could be removed.

Here I also agree but I would argue that this is only acceptable for new postings after the chage of custom has been announced.

To clarify, I have amended the forum rules by adding a paragraph to the "Copyright Disclaimer" section regarding publishing rights of content.

Very good decision but I suggest to also make sure it shows in the very beginning of the Board rules. Such fundamental restriction of rights hidden in some ToS has been declared invalid by plenty of courts in various countries. (EDIT: I know this is not a legal battle but my understanding of how people should interact with each other is built by rules and many of the laws just represent rules for living with each other in a way that everybody can get along.)

PS: I am really sad to see such things going on here on the board and really hoep it will not deter anyone from participating. I got to know this board as very friendly and helpful and am surprised to see so much drama here.

[orudge]

Here I also agree but I would argue that this is only acceptable for new postings after the chage of custom has been announced.

There's no really easy way of doing that technically, but as I say, if people have issues with old posts that need editing, then they are certainly free to contact me about it.

[lawton27]

I'd say reinstating the old posts is a perfectly reasonable idea (without attachments of course). In respect to the editing of old posts, the 7 day limit sounds good to me, perhaps there's a way to remove attachments after longer than 7 days also? I assume it's not too much bother to ask a moderator to help out on that one however.

[orudge]

You'll always be able to ask a moderator or administrator if you have any concerns, or want things modifying - we may just ask for the reason behind it in such a situation. However, I suppose I would like to encourage, if possible, an atmosphere where members don't feel the need to go and remove all their posts and attachments, as we've seen recently.

[Level Crossing]

How about prohibiting a user from editing more than 20 posts in a day, and notifying you if a user hits that limit?

If it's possible, it would allow normal editing but contain the rampages of post-deleting.

[pavel1269]

I understand the current issue, but in my opinion, this solution is even worse. One issue replaced by other. Even if its temporary, its still bad. I understand your intention, but why not create a solution and then apply it? For me, you generally now force people, to not use this forums for their work. Only advertise here and move elsewhere. Why would I have to contact someone when I want to update my topic? How many users might go mad til you will figure some solution? For how long it won't be possible to edit posts? Like all authors of something need to edit their first post. And for the record, sometimes its not even the first one.

[frosch]

Comparing with other sites I know, my opinion on this matter is this:

1. Restricting editing is a valid restriction a forum may enforce. There might be some limited time to allow people deregistering etc., but there is no need to keep old rules for old stuff.
2. A user has no copyright on the posts he/she makes (not counting attachments). Only personal rights apply. (e.g. (mis-)quoting inappropiately)
3. Restoring the text content of posts (without the attachments) is completely fine according to 2.

Wrt. deregistering:
4. If people deregister, it is correct to keep their posts on public discussions as well as in PMs to other users.
5. The mailbox of the deregistering user him/herself should be deleted.
6. All posts and PMs by the user should be made anonymous, e.g. by replacing the username with something like "deregistered person".


Edit: After some research the deletion issue is apparently not so easy (surprise ). While some argue that personal rights even give you control about any small comment, others argue that posts with longer content imply copyright.

[Alberth]

I do edit posts sometimes, usually within minutes after posting to fix a small error.
However, I don't really like doing that, changing history feels wrong, as it may mess up conversations.

Ever after my first post here, I am still amazed that you really keep all posts. I am not sure how useful it is though, do people ever find useful stuff in posts 5 years back or so?


As for the 'edit first post' problem, maybe instead allow adding new first posts?

[SAC]

While not going to argue with Owen about his decision to enforce restrictions to members here at TT-forums, as it's quite frankly none of my business what-so-ever, I'd like to point out that my decision of deleting and moving my attachments has its reasons - some of them rather obvious. And in the end, attachments are the property of the owner itself, and in the same manner I can't be sure that attachments posted by members over at Simuscape will remain intact either. But it would go against my beliefs to restrict a user from deciding in what way he or she will handle their files, and so I wouldn't consider a similar solution myself.