|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2016 20:25:12 GMT -5
Title. This removes the ability from people to edit their arguments to fix all the little holes in them, making people think harder before they post and be punished harder for not doing so.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hunna on Oct 27, 2016 20:27:56 GMT -5
This community doesn't have the patience to think before they post a what they hope for it to be, a "meaningful argument". Also, removing the ability for them to ninja a stupid post could also help this.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2016 20:47:39 GMT -5
I don't see why this would be necessary but you have a good point...
|
|
WillFlame
Owner
Direful Reflection
An idea has taken root.
5,190 posts
Discord: WillFlame#5739
Favorite Level: Colourful Overnight
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"https://i.imgur.com/4y98NDS.png","color":""}
Mini-Profile Name Color: 00a3ff
Mini-Profile Text Color: ffffff
|
Post by WillFlame on Oct 27, 2016 21:23:19 GMT -5
If you can fix the holes in the argument, then the argument was good enough in the first place to be able to be supported that way. Bad arguments will have holes that can't be fixed through editing, and if the entire argument is changed completely it'll be obvious that it was changed (plus the fact that it says "edited").
If you really want to save what someone said you can quote said user's post, then you'll have your own copy that they can't edit or change.
|
|
|
|
Post by LuMaIchArgI on Oct 28, 2016 4:46:02 GMT -5
This is actually retarded imo
>No matter how hard you think, that doesn't stop typos
>If I'm debating about gd, half the words would be wrongly autocorrected because many gd words don't exist, and those autocorrects can make a whole argument incomprehensible
>Many people come up with stronger arguments some times after they've already posted
|
|
|
|
Post by Ezel on Oct 28, 2016 4:56:19 GMT -5
I don't think it's a good idea, because if someone does a typo or wants to add something more to their post, they'll have to ask mods to change them which would be a bit stupid.
I'd prefer to report posts that are spammy or useless in a specific thread. It will notify the staff and they'll punish the spammer.
|
|
6,222 posts
Discord: lordmuzik848#0191
|
Post by geometricbutton on Oct 28, 2016 8:25:19 GMT -5
What do yuo guys think of this argument?
>Gets locked up in Alcatraz for rest of life
But seriously, what's so satanic and criminal about patching up your minor mistakes?
|
|
|
|
Post by megaman9 on Oct 28, 2016 9:34:39 GMT -5
Most of the debates in that board aren't serious arguments, so I don't think this is necessary.
And like the other users above me said, typos happen.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2016 18:26:37 GMT -5
>No matter how hard you think, that doesn't stop typos I don't think it's a good idea, because if someone does a typo What do yuo guys think of this argument? >Gets locked up in Alcatraz for rest of life And like the other users above me said, typos happen. You can stop typos easily if you actually care. >If I'm debating about gd, half the words would be wrongly autocorrected because many gd words don't exist, and those autocorrects can make a whole argument incomprehensible You can disable autocorrect in both Android and iOS. Even if you don't want to do that, you can just back-space it and it'll undo. >Many people come up with stronger arguments some times after they've already posted or wants to add something more to their post Too bad, so sad. Think before you post. they'll have to ask mods to change them which would be a bit stupid. The entire point of this is to make people think before they post, not to make them ask a mod to change their post. I'd prefer to report posts that are spammy or useless in a specific thread. It will notify the staff and they'll punish the spammer. This is a whole lot more work than just enforcing something which makes people think harder before they post. But seriously, what's so satanic and criminal about patching up your minor mistakes? Fixing typos is fine but that could easily done by proof-reading. What isn't fine is redacting a stupid post because you weren't thinking or posting a massively insecure argument and then patching it up before anybody sees it. If you can fix the holes in the argument, then the argument was good enough in the first place to be able to be supported that way. Bad arguments will have holes that can't be fixed through editing Any argument that you can disprove head-on is a bad argument. The point of spending time and effort on forming an argument is for it to be solid enough that it doesn't need to be patched up later. Most of the debates in that board aren't serious arguments, so I don't think this is necessary. This is true, but why is the debate board used like that then? It's about debating, not polling. |
|
6,222 posts
Discord: lordmuzik848#0191
|
Post by geometricbutton on Oct 28, 2016 18:36:50 GMT -5
Honestly, how often do things like these actually happen?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2016 18:53:29 GMT -5
Honestly, how often do things like these actually happen? Stubbing your toe doesn't happen often but that doesn't make it any less bad. |
|
WillFlame
Owner
Direful Reflection
An idea has taken root.
5,190 posts
Discord: WillFlame#5739
Favorite Level: Colourful Overnight
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"https://i.imgur.com/4y98NDS.png","color":""}
Mini-Profile Name Color: 00a3ff
Mini-Profile Text Color: ffffff
|
Post by WillFlame on Oct 28, 2016 19:08:56 GMT -5
Like I said earlier, if you really want to save what someone said you can quote said user's post, then you'll have your own copy that they can't edit or change.
I understand your points but this just kind of seems like a mean way to take advantage of someone's lack of vision when making an argument.
Are there instances where this post editing happens while in a debate? I'd like to see exactly what happens and why you think it's important that this action be prevented.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2016 19:40:59 GMT -5
Just gonna point this out, this is the GD debate board, not some processional court case, what we are discussing is stuff like "which level is harder" or "do you think this person hacked?" not stuff like "did this person kill someone"
What we are saying isn't that important, so, we shouldn't have to proof read our arguments 3 times and make sure no one can refute our arguments. That would ruin the debate part anyways, if you shut down an entire thread with a super duper constructive wall o text with no holes to keep other arguments out, there wouldn't be any debate.
EDIT:(I'm editing this cause I thought of another point awhile later, and I don't want to spam this thread, good that I can do that right?)
Anyways, implementing this would also encourage double posting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2016 20:11:15 GMT -5
I understand your points but this just kind of seems like a mean way to take advantage of someone's lack of vision when making an argument. Why do you have a lack of vision when making an argument? If you don't think when making a serious post it should be noted. Are there instances where this post editing happens while in a debate? I'd like to see exactly what happens and why you think it's important that this action be prevented. It isn't that it's already happened but more of a way to encourage thinking/proofreading before posting. Serious posts for a serious board. I'm sure not being able to edit your post would make you want to think and proofread harder when composing it, allowing for more constructive posts than just yes or no answers/ad hominems. If you didn't think while composing a post, it would show. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2016 20:16:19 GMT -5
This could easily be evaded, people would just post, look for mistakes, and immediately delete their post and repost with something different
|
|
