I agree it is a topic worth to discuss and not so easy as there are pros and cons on either side.

Personally (and I take this only for myself and would not want others to behave the same), I would - in case I need to correct a previous statement - create a new post with reference to that statement. Then the logical flow is still maintained and I was able to correct myself. This communication style corresponds to verbal communication as well and - as you say - shouldn't really be an issue with smart, cultural and creative folks.

Hi, I discovered a little problem on the website. I don't see anymore the possibility to edit older messages after a while. Only new messages can be adjusted. I hope this is not by design...

most internet forums have this limitation of blocking editing after some time. I don't know if 10 minutes is the right amount of time, or perhaps 30 minutes? But generally if and when forums are left wide open to edit any time, it will be abused, not only by spammers, but also by dishonest posters creating drama and controversy.

Think of a forum like a place where you express your thought, just as you would in real life speaking it; and once it comes out of your mouth, it's a permanent record. In other words, maybe in the future think twice before posting and check your words before you hit the post button. so then you will have 10 minutes in case there are some typos...fine. beyond that and you are attempting to change history. You said. live with it.

Glad to see my caution about toxic posters has been reiterated here (even though this reiteration involves some rather odd confusion between writing and speaking).

Overall, I'm currently thinking that having a time limit on post-send editing probably is for the best - given that it may curtail some nefarious gambits of not only the invasive commercial bandits but also the unwholesome toxic few hiding in plain sight among the members.

But I'm still asking for a substantial increase of that time limit.

@Ben said:
What would be your suggestion?

The use of the word “speaking” was intentional. In real life we make conversations by speaking and once it leaves your mouth you cannot edit it.

Ben, sorry I don't have a specific suggestion for you. Like I said above, I prefer to leave it to the design authority.

You can only edit for 600 seconds after posting?!? WTF?

I am firmly in the 10 minutes is enough to edit a post: if it takes longer than that maybe you need to make another post (or have spent longer on the original post). If this must be changed perhaps allowing editing until there has been a reply made would work.

rAC, interesting idea - allowing unlimited time until a reply has been made. Even though that still wouldn't altogether curtail sly abuses by the toxic few here, it's probably a good and reasonable compromise.

I'll reiterate the point I made above. Whilst this forum may of course be used like any of the big 'social media' platforms - in which users often make a virtue of contriving posts with minimal wordage - it is nevertheless fundamentally different here. Our topics can sometimes get technically and artistically very sophisticated. In those cases some lengthier and more complex posts may of course be necessary.

I'm deeply averse to any IT developments here that tend to make this forum more like X(Twitter), etc. As I see it, this 10 minute rule is one such unwelcome development. Dumbing down the VSL Forum? Whatever next!?

One idea I'm liking at present: at the very least let us delete a post that needs editing, such that a new edit can be posted without having to leave the old post behind.

And even if editing is not our aim, why can't we delete any of our posts without having to ask a moderator to do it for us? What's that all about?

Sorry, one more thing. To insist on conflating our faculties of writing and speech is simply absurd - to the point that it might indeed count as gaslighting!

@Macker said:

One idea I'm liking at present: at the very least let us delete a post that needs editing, such that a new edit can be posted without having to leave the old post behind.

And even if editing is not our aim, why can't we delete any of our posts without having to ask a moderator to do it for us? What's that all about?

Because we had some users who ruined entire threads by deleting their posts months or even years later. During the transition I had to delete many of such threads simply because they were no longer readable / made any sense. And that was the reason why we disabled deletion of posts.

Still, we kept editing open until this option was also being abused to unacceptable levels. Sometimes you can't have nice things because some people that will ruin it for everyone, sorry.

My opinion: Editing Posts is not meant to be used to revise the content your post, change your opinion etc. It's there to fix typos, formatting, etc. Some users have legitimate reasons to edit posts much later (for example edit links or add updated information), but most of these users are moderators and can do so anyways, and for the others I can only offer contacting a moderator by mentioning or sending a PM.
If you changed your mind a year later you simply write a new post. If the old one is really problematic for some reason you can always contact a moderator as well.

One suggestion I have is that if you want to write long posts which are essentially blog posts..then open an actual blog...and of course you would always post a link here or to any other forum you like that reference to your blog posts and discuss it at will. But these days there are literally dozens of ways to write short or lengthy blogs and post them online, completely for free, and you will have complete editing and deleting control, in some cases also the ability to format better, provide images liberally, etc.

Basically, it is so easy.

Think before you talk. Think before you write.

You do this in real life, too, so please do it also in forums.

And if it turns out that previously you said something incorrect or inappropriate, then create another post and state what the real content should have been.

I don't know why common sense rules of living and communicating should all of a sudden change just because we say words not by mouth but by a keyboard.

Compared to the old VSL forum, it's true we now have a few helpful new facilities in this version. But at the same time, the new restrictions appear to be totally unrelated to - even at odds with - not only those helpful new facilities, but also the old forum as a whole. At first sight it's bizarre (but my general waffle below may hold a key clue).

Furthermore, our expression of some of our most natural, common and harmless human freedoms is very obviously impinged upon here by these new restrictions, with hardly more than casuistic explanations given as to why 'it must be thus'.

It's not so much the forum itself that's important; it's the ethos that its structure, methods and rules tend to portray to its users. Are we to understand it's the ethos of VSL? (A purely rhetorical question.)

...

(More broadly, I'm very curious about what lies ahead in the current battle of a certain software-oriented minority (present company excepted of course!) who in recent years seems to have become obviously hell-bent on trying to turn back the clock by regenerating the grandiose, 'vertical', top-down mass communications of the past several centuries; versus the vast overwhelming majority of us who rightly enjoy the unprecedented, colossal, 'horizontal' peer-to-peer communications networks of today. Well maybe because I'm ex armed forces and then a weapon systems designer, cold-wars fascinate me; this one looks like it has legs and could be a whopper - even though it's hugely asymmetric.)

I do not even have an "Edit" option on my posts - I wish I did because I posted an Imgur link to a screenshot and only after posting did I realize there was an option to actually attach the photo within the post itself

I agree with Macker's request and suggest a time window of 7 days to subsequently change posts.

If misuse occurs, the time window could be shortened again.

@rajucu said:

I agree with Macker's request and suggest a time window of 7 days to subsequently change posts.

If misuse occurs, the time window could be shortened again.

Sorry, 7 days will not work.
Right now I have to delete 1-2 bots every 2-3 days. Without edit limit it was around 2 bots a day, many with GPT posts that are sometimes not easy to distinguish from real posts.
Currently the first post of every user has to be manually checked and approved by a VSL team-member, and this way I catch the majority of spam bots. If I increase the edit time-frame more bots will slip through the manual check and edit in their spam links a few hours after being approved.