30 minutes for new users. 30 days for members and senior members.
I am a senior member, and am not able to edit my posts up to 30 days later. I just checked a few of my posts, and there is no Edit button available.
And honestly, 30 days feels kind of excessive, if that were the case. One day (which I think is longer than the current window I have anyway)? Sure. But 30 days opens things up to shenanigans.
I apparently gave outdated info; it looks like Mike tightened the window for members and senior members, so I’ll let Jon address.
Looks like editing is disabled after a few days (or at the most after a week)?
@CC_Jon please address this and other changes the membership isn’t aware of. An enlightened membership is the best kind of membership, correct?
I removed the restriction for editing posts in slow mode. It wasn’t a blanket restriction, but the time limits made it much harder to edit than normal in slow mode. If we see any problems with the new setting, I might need to revert the change.
I summarized the current editing restrictions in a new thread: When can I edit my posts?
And I saw a message that said it was too late to edit the post that was posted 3 days ago.
Well, thanks for lifting the edit restriction, but its 3 days later and it now says too bad, so sad… too late to edit! Why not drop from 30 days editing window (I agree thats long) to maybe a week for senior members?? Not just a day.
Slow mode is the best thing that has been brought to this forum, and very underutilized. Every time it is invoked, it shuts the debate down. I would argue that it should be the default mode for threads, with default timing of 24 hours, not 10 minutes or 30 minutes. There is no reason for a person to post more frequently than once per day on a topic. This would incentivize more thoughtful and reflective posts. (A word limit may also need to be implemented so people don’t post a novel.)
I agree Slow Mode is good when things get contentious but I see no need to have it for every topic. There is plenty of valuable back and forth and sharing of ideas that happens on the college specific threads.
Making everyone wait a full day to post again in any thread would be the death of CC.
For non college related threads I can see your point although 24 hours seems a bit lengthy. But in college threads it’s important to be able to engage with the OP on a more timely basis.
If Slow Mode for every topic in every area was the norm, with 24 hours between posts as @OhiBro suggests, then the page views and engagement would go way down on CC. I’m sure that’s not what the owners want.
Agreed. The contentiousness of a topic is usually obvious from the outset. But to be more proactive in discouraging debate (without burdening moderators to constantly monitor for debate ), it seems there needs to be some way to get out in front of the debate. The most extreme response would be to make slow mode default on everything. For reasons you mention, maybe this should only apply to Parent Forum… or some other less invasive way.
In several cases, slow mode seems to become a thread killer . Maybe that is the intent, but that’s unfortunate. There used to be an option that kept threads from being bumped up to the top of the list when someone responded. It would kinda “sink” down and one would have to look for it to respond. That was an interesting option, IMO.
As a mod who has frequently used slow mode, there’s no hard and fast rule as to how often slow mode is used and how long the gaps need to be between posts. Once a day would really limit a conversation and at that point, if the thread was that contentious, it might be better to close it.
For me personally, I look at how rancorous a thread is. Are people tagging other users in a way designed to provoke or call others out in an unhelpful way? Are tons of posts being flagged? Are lots of TOS and Forum Rules being broken? Is profanity being used, or name calling, or obvious ill-intentioned jabs at another user?
The same applies to debate and going off topic. There’s a difference between people having back and forth discussion that moves the topic forward, and rapid-fire replies that begin to turn nasty. Sometimes a post going off topic helps give more perspective to the conversation at hand, and eventually goes back to the topic. A thread can be like a road with a few cul de sacs, as long as it gets back on the main road at some point. There can be a few bends in the road, but as long as it goes back to where it’s supposed to, that can be okay.
But again, for me, the main criteria for using slow mode is how nasty the thread is getting. If it’s not too bad, I might set slow mode for 10 or 15 minute intervals. If it’s worse, maybe it could be every 30 minutes or once an hour. Sometimes we close something for the day and reopen the next day. Sometimes we close threads to see how many problematic posts there are.
These decisions rarely happen in a vacuum. We have conversations about the best course of action. This all relies on human judgment. There isn’t a rule book for every possible type of action that can be taken on every possible way a thread can go off the rails. We do our best to keep things going, but there are occasions when something shouldn’t be kept going. We try our best.
Thank you mods!
As someone whose primary participation here is in the “Parents of the HS Class of 20xx” threads, where much of the purpose is to develop community, this is an absolutely false statement.
And also, we have threads here where people throw around demonstrably false claims about academic issues (e.g., academic dishonesty definitions, published admissions policies at specific institutions), and limiting factual corrections to once per day is actually a danger to the public record.
Nobody on the CC end, AFAIK, is advocating limiting posts to once every 24 hours, so let’s not get caught up in that. Even on the most contentious threads, I’ve never even contemplated doing that. I personally interpreted the suggestion to be in the spirit of A Modest Proposal. Apologies if the analogy conjures up nightmares of HS English class.