nartreb wrote: (but they might have a contractual right, if the website had promised them that they could, maybe even if the website had simply had a tradition of allowing it and changed its policy without warning).
/// they don't include a universal right of deletion like Lolli would apparently like.

I don't know if I like that.
I haven't taken any stance on that.

But, right now we have that contractual right you mention.

SoCalHiker

morally you're right, but not in practicality
you know as well as I do that some people prefer to read other member's post as the devil reads the bible (sic!)
and one can write posts until one is blue in the face and the fingers stiff without anyone caring
and it escalates
better to remove something easily misunderstandable, if one discovers it in time
but you maybe prefer flamewars?

gabriele wrote:

Lolli wrote:It has happened more than once, that I have come back a few hours later, realised that my post wasn't very well written
the wording maybe too harsh, easily interpreted in an unwanted way as inflammatory or mean or something
now I wouldn't be able to delete or redo it so it says what I really wanted it to say ?

So, you can change the meaning of your posts and the ones that answered may look stupid
example :
I say "Lolli is a great climber"
Lolli answer = "True"
I change my post in "Lolli should think better before posting"
and Lolli MUST say True !!!

Very funny indeed. Haha.
You're really a great humourist.
You can already change your posts like that. So what? Big deal.
If one is unhonourable, one is. Nothing new under the sun.

Lolli wrote:SoCalHiker

morally you're right, but not in practicality
you know as well as I do that some people prefer to read other member's post as the devil reads the bible (sic!)
and one can write posts until one is blue in the face and the fingers stiff without anyone caring
and it escalates
better to remove something easily misunderstandable, if one discovers it in time
but you maybe prefer flamewars?

deleting/editing posts in retrospect will create flamewars because some people "accuse" you of having said something in the past which you innocently deny

I used "you" as a general term btw

SoCalHiker wrote:

Lolli wrote:SoCalHiker

morally you're right, but not in practicality
you know as well as I do that some people prefer to read other member's post as the devil reads the bible (sic!)
and one can write posts until one is blue in the face and the fingers stiff without anyone caring
and it escalates
better to remove something easily misunderstandable, if one discovers it in time
but you maybe prefer flamewars?

deleting/editing posts in retrospect will create flamewars because some people "accuse" you of having said something in the past which you innocently deny

I used "you" as a general term btw

yes, that's of course a problem
for myself I have only changed before anybody has responded, in order to avoid that
and I have deleted a few posts afterwards with an explanation in it's place instead
(very few, I think they're countable with my fingers, and I have/had somewhere above 12.000 posts totally here)
I guess there's problems either way, one simply have to choose the one which one believes causes least ruckus

gabriele wrote:if "posts" means "posts in forums" I think they shouldn't never be changed or deleted
maybe this way some people stops writing silly things

Sometimes I miss a typo until after I "submit" the item. Editing gives me the chance to correct it. I also sometimes think of a better word to use after posting and go back and change it. All of this is typically within a short time after posting (a few minutes to maybe an hour).

SoCalHiker wrote:

Lolli wrote:Besides, who says Summitpost owns my posts?
Off-Route is one thing, but the other forums - there might be stuff & info the member owns.
With the right to delete or not. Copyright, to put it simple.

If this goes through, I want all my posts deleted first.

What do you mean with "own your posts"? You post something which is out there in a public forum, free for everybody to see, read, ... there is no copyright for what you say here. It's not a published work.

Actually it is published. Posting it here publishes it. By posting it here in a forum, you probably have put it in the public domain just as if it were news - in other words you have probably given up any claim of copyright.

Lolli wrote:Besides, who says Summitpost owns my posts?
Off-Route is one thing, but the other forums - there might be stuff & info the member owns.
With the right to delete or not. Copyright, to put it simple.

If this goes through, I want all my posts deleted first.

Your threat is disgusting. It's childish manipulative behavior.

Though I see there are arguments in favor and against, I still don't see: what is the problem for which this would be solution?

By the way, it's possible to find texts cached in that amazing worldwide web that the author thinks they have deleted. So it would be possible to nail the flamethrowers if that's what we want the forums to be about.

To bad this would take up more database space, but unlimited editing with a history button would be fun. I'm all and for being able to edit your posts, usually I don't have to, but sometimes I notice things like: spelling errors, could be phrased better, could possibly look controversial when not actually intending to, and stuff like that. I guess I could be fine without being able to edit my forum posts, but I find it useful.

But as for a time limit, that sounds reasonable I suppose, I vote 30-60 minutes.

Buz Groshong wrote:

Lolli wrote:Besides, who says Summitpost owns my posts?
Off-Route is one thing, but the other forums - there might be stuff & info the member owns.
With the right to delete or not. Copyright, to put it simple.

If this goes through, I want all my posts deleted first.

Your threat is disgusting. It's childish manipulative behavior.

Both the ignorance of your first post and the faulty logic of the second is evident. Nothing new under the sun though.

You're claiming that news would not be copyrighted...

...and it's not a threat.
To be a threat it would mean that it would be a loss if they disappeared. It's not.
It's a consequence. If A, so B.
If the contractual base which we now participate under on this forum changes in a way that I strongly disagree with, I choose the only remaining option.

The consequence of your reasoning becomes that you advocate that members have no right to exercise their free will. Once a member, always a member, however the rules change.
(Not saying one cannot being a member without participating in the forums.)

If I write a "letter to the editor" to a newspaper (or TV station), they surely own a limited copyright license in it that allows them to publish what I wrote. After all, when I wrote it I must have known that it might be published. When you write something on an internet forum, you know that it will be published (on the internet) so you are effectively giving the site a limited copyright license to publish it. When you state something in public, your statement or actions might be construed as something of public interest and therefore news; reporting news is not bound by quite the same copyright rules as other publishing - quotes freely given can be freely reported.

With only 16 votes in a week, I guess this issue isn't too important to most forum users. In an event, the No's won the vote.

So the current system will stay.

Thank you to those of you who voted and provided viewpoints.

Now on to the next question: http://www.summitpost.org/phpBB3/poll-embedded-quotes-limit-t57895.html.

So...........where's the delete button in Off-Route??

You guys are way too focused on the politics of the site. The 99.99999% of the rest of us non-politcal types need the delete button to correct honest mistakes, duplicate posts, etc. Who cares if someone said a naughty word and then deletes their post. Seriously.

Next thing you know, we'll do away with route pages because a few people wrote some bad pages.