|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2016 20:47:35 GMT -5
This could easily be evaded, people would just post, look for mistakes, and immediately delete their post and repost with something different That's literally proofreading but ten times less efficient. Why would you do that? |
|
|
|
Post by LuMaIchArgI on Oct 28, 2016 21:18:33 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. Â 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. Autocorrect has helped me, so turning it off does more harm than good, although it can cause problems. Thinking before you post doesn't change the fact that many people come up with a better argument a while after they post. This includes new info, false info, or you you were reminded of something minor you wouldn't have remembered when you were posting |
|
|
|
Post by megaman9 on Oct 28, 2016 22:36:22 GMT -5
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. Does it really matter? The Debate thread was originally made for people to have more serious arguments. Thing is, users decided not to do that because it was a better place for them to post polls than in General Discussion. There's nothing wrong with that, and a lot of the polls do make for interesting discussions and...well, debates. I do have a question for you though. Why did you suggest that we do this? Is it something that you see a lot? |
|
|
|
Post by QJrocks on Oct 28, 2016 22:45:01 GMT -5
This could easily be evaded, people would just post, look for mistakes, and immediately delete their post and repost with something different That's literally proofreading but ten times less efficient. Why would you do that? They'd do that because under your suggestion, they couldn't edit their post the normal way. People find ways to get around censors, Vitesse. This whole idea would just turn into an inconvenience, rather than a barrier. And as others said, there are way more benefits to allowing editing than downsides. This is an internet forum, you shouldn't have to do everything flawlessy first try. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2016 8:00:46 GMT -5
This could easily be evaded, people would just post, look for mistakes, and immediately delete their post and repost with something different That's literally proofreading but ten times less efficient. Why would you do that? because you wouldn't be able to proofread it in the first place .-. |
|
