The Lemon Fool

Spellcheck works for me in Firefox (here) and Chrome (some other sites).
But.... first, it's an American spellchecker, grr, and secondly, it may be the correct spelling of the wrong wad.

If I quote a poster and there is a typo in the quoted post, I might silently correct it.
Or not.

Not a job for mods.

V8

pje16 wrote:

csearle wrote:I expect it is to prevent a kind of rewriting-of-history. I reckon it probably helps with the quality of posts because the user knows he/she/it will have to stand by what has been said. C.

Ah ok I hadn't thought about that, very good point

And yet I can think of at least one example straight off of where you've done that yourself (rewritten history). I'm sure you know when.

csearle wrote:

scotview wrote:Why do some posts get an editing message and date stamp while others can be amended without getting an editing message ?

When editing a message there is a field at the bottom called Reason for editing this post: When this is filled out then the text is appended to the post, when not, it isn't. That's my experience anyway. C.

The "Last edited by ..." date stamp also appears if you edit a post after someone has posted further post, i.e. if the post you edit isn't the last one in the thread. That gives readers a chance to spot where history might have been rewritten.

Personally I think that a post should be locked immediately once there's a further post in the thread, as that'll stop it being rewritten on seeing replies to it (in the narrow window of time that's currently possible).

pje16 wrote:Is that a Mod option
I have never seen "Reason for editing this post:"

I think it must be. I've never seen it on here either, also curiously it is present on the other site I mentioned, upthread.

88V8 wrote:Spellcheck works for me in Firefox (here) and Chrome (some other sites).
But.... first, it's an American spellchecker, grr, and secondly, it may be the correct spelling of the wrong wad.

In Firefox go to Settings -> Extensions & Themes (or about:addons in the address bar) and click on Dictionaries to see which one(s) you are using.

You can install additional ones, personally in both Firefox and Thunderbird I use https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefo ... tionary-2/

In Chrome go to Settings click on Languages. You'll see you can Add languages and order them, and further down choose which ones you use for spell checking. I added and use English (United Kingdom, Oxford English Dictionary spelling)

mc2fool wrote:

I opted for this one
https://languagetool.org/
and in Firefox it works here
still somewhat baffled as to why Firefox own spell check works on some sites and not others

Thanks for the Add-ons tip @mc2fool

mc2fool wrote:

88V8 wrote:Spellcheck works for me in Firefox (here) and Chrome (some other sites).
But.... first, it's an American spellchecker, grr, and secondly, it may be the correct spelling of the wrong wad.

In Firefox go to Settings -> Extensions & Themes (or about:addons in the address bar) and click on Dictionaries to see which one(s) you are using.

You can install additional ones, personally in both Firefox and Thunderbird I use https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefo ... tionary-2/

In Chrome go to Settings click on Languages. You'll see you can Add languages and order them, and further down choose which ones you use for spell checking. I added and use English (United Kingdom, Oxford English Dictionary spelling)

Thankyou.
So... Firefox...Settings..Extensions... Addons... it shows no dictionary, but if I type Dictionary into the search box it gives me a choice.
I add one....
Now, here, in this text box where I'm writing as I speak, right-click... Languages... it gives me a choice of dictionaries, the US version that's standard with Firefox and the English one I just added.

So now there will be no more color, and if it approves the wrong wad at least it will be an English wad.

V8

https://languagetool.org/ is excellent
It's even correcting my grammar, prompting for commas and apostrophes etc

Pedant corner here I come

One area, where it may be desirable to edit a post, is when the OP has made a mistake with either company name or EPIC. Perhaps better to do so in a mod box.

TJH

mc2fool wrote:Personally I think that a post should be locked immediately once there's a further post in the thread, as that'll stop it being rewritten on seeing replies to it (in the narrow window of time that's currently possible).

But that subsequent post might not be a reply to your post, in which case edits should still be allowed. If the software is clever enough to differentiate those two cases, that is.

But is "rewriting history" a common problem? I can't say I have ever noticed it. I use edit usually when I re-read a post I have just made and see an error, or a phrase that could be written more clearly.

pje16 wrote:

csearle wrote:I expect it is to prevent a kind of rewriting-of-history. I reckon it probably helps with the quality of posts because the user knows he/she/it will have to stand by what has been said. C.

Ah ok I hadn't thought about that, very good point
How about being able to edit for 12 hours, you should have spotted your typo by then

Sobered up?

I think the most that a mod should be doing is possibly correcting an obvious error in the heading. There are times when that infuriates me. Within the text of the post itself, no I do not think that a mod should touch it. The error belongs to the author, and as most authors say in books, 'any errors are mine alone'. In fact that is almost worse than a mod deleting a post and not telling the poster. The post can easily lose its integrity if a mod starts mucking around with it.

Dod

Lootman wrote:

mc2fool wrote:Personally I think that a post should be locked immediately once there's a further post in the thread, as that'll stop it being rewritten on seeing replies to it (in the narrow window of time that's currently possible).

But that subsequent post might not be a reply to your post, in which case edits should still be allowed. If the software is clever enough to differentiate those two cases, that is.

But is "rewriting history" a common problem? I can't say I have ever noticed it. I use edit usually when I re-read a post I have just made and see an error, or a phrase that could be written more clearly.

No, it'd take some AI to differentiate those cases! Even if a later post replied-with-quote (as you and I have done here) the respondent might not be responding to the sentences/paragraphs the original poster changes. And then, of course, some people reply without quoting at all, so it's not really possible, certainly not at all reliably.

I edit much as you do, but is rewriting history a "common" problem? I dunno about "common"; I know I've had it happen to me a couple of times, not many over the many years we've all been here. I've noticed it a few times in other people's exchanges on the more political boards; sometimes it's dead obvious 'cos a respondent replies to a post with quote but what's in the quote is different from what's in the later edited post being quoted. But in any case, I wouldn't care to even guesstimate at how common it is beyond saying, not a lot....

I wouldn’t want to burden the mods with this. No need to change things unless the meaning can be misconstrued.

Besides in my case it would be a waste of time. I’m borderline dyslexic, something has to be really badly spelt for me to notice.

(Spellcheckers - an innovation for which I shall be infernally grapefruit)

Could I suggest extending the editing time window somewhat? Otherwise one could request a correction via a pm to a mod - if one knew who to send it to.

XFool wrote:Could I suggest extending the editing time window somewhat? Otherwise one could request a correction via a pm to a mod - if one knew who to send it to.

That's easy, just report your own post. But really, you think it's appropriate to bug the volunteer moderators to fix up your spelling errors & typos?!?

There's a Preview function one can and should use to check your post before submitting. Inevitably there are occasions when, even after previewing and carefully checking your post, you click Submit and then (groan!) spot some typos you'd somehow overlooked. It happens.

I think the editing time window should be shortened. Having a brief window to fix up the odd typo is one thing, having the time to rewrite the post is another....

mc2fool wrote:

XFool wrote:Could I suggest extending the editing time window somewhat? Otherwise one could request a correction via a pm to a mod - if one knew who to send it to.

That's easy, just report your own post. But really, you think it's appropriate to bug the volunteer moderators to fix up your spelling errors & typos?!?

Well, yeah or nay? It wasn't me who originally suggested this.

mc2fool wrote:There's a Preview function one can and should use to check your post before submitting. Inevitably there are occasions when, even after previewing and carefully checking your post, you click Submit and then (groan!) spot some typos you'd somehow overlooked. It happens.

Exactly. I find this far more irritating in my own posts than in those of other posters. The preview and editing window gets you so far, but by no means all the way for more than one reason.

I find it is often just not possible to see obvious spelling mistakes, because you read what you meant to write, not always what is there. Secondly, it's far more than spelling mistakes - at least it is with me. It's also unnoticed errors (such as stray words) left behind after editing; grammatical or stylistic errors, or corrections; and lastly it is actual changing of the text because you realise lots of things: You've left things out, put in unnecessary things, the wording is ambiguous, open to misinterpretation, it gives the wrong impression - not reading quite as you intended etc. (Perhaps it's just me!)

But I suppose there needs to be a cut-off somewhere and perfection isn't possible. (But then, I find some people on TLF are so literal in their interpretation!)

mc2fool wrote:I think the editing time window should be shortened. Having a brief window to fix up the odd typo is one thing, having the time to rewrite the post is another....

I strongly disagree with that! Indeed I would still like it extended. (It was me who asked for the original default TLF editing window to be lengthened). What's wrong with a "rewrite" of the post, as above?


NB. So far I have made around FIVE post posting edits to this post. +1, +2, +3 Err...

mc2fool wrote:

XFool wrote:Could I suggest extending the editing time window somewhat? Otherwise one could request a correction via a pm to a mod - if one knew who to send it to.

That's easy, just report your own post. But really, you think it's appropriate to bug the volunteer moderators to fix up your spelling errors & typos?!?

There's a Preview function one can and should use to check your post before submitting. Inevitably there are occasions when, even after previewing and carefully checking your post, you click Submit and then (groan!) spot some typos you'd somehow overlooked. It happens.

I think the editing time window should be shortened. Having a brief window to fix up the odd typo is one thing, having the time to rewrite the post is another....

One thing that has been useful to me on a handful of occasions is the ability to edit a post that with hindsight I regret making.

I can report that for deletion of course. But if I edit it to nothing and just leave a line saying "posted in error" or some such, then I do not have to bother a Mod.

That assumes nobody has responded already, of course.

Information
You can no longer edit or delete that post.

Damn!

"Blatant" errors in spelling, or missing punctuation, in a subject header (or even Board names" can really grate, especially for those on the spectrum, or who have OCD (or similar). It's not so amusing but a form of invisible disability. Something we are used to living with, but recognition or simple solutions can help.

How Do I Invest https://www.lemonfool.co.uk/viewforum.php?f=88

Does Anybody Know? https://www.lemonfool.co.uk/viewforum.php?f=9

Can you spot the difference?

Would you prefer moderators to silently correct blatant spelling errors / typos?

Just as a topical point of interest (maybe?), if one splits an infinitive in the question of a poll there appears to be no mechanism for editing it away! C.