Admin restriction from editing - 5 min rule

Will you please remove this time limitation on edits.
It is quite annoying and troublesome.
If for some reason you are unable, will explain why?

I'll just give you an example here, Beloved.


Say I'm a troll, and I post something ugly to you. Then you, taken aback, say something in retaliation. I then edit my initial post, to say something nice to you, and report your post. The mods come along and see the following exchange:


JimJimmers: "Have a nice day, HisBeloved1! God Bless!"

HisBeloved1: "You foul-mouthed filthy creature!"

Hence, the mods set the editing limit at 5 minutes, to prevent them from having to spend hours trying to figure things like that out. We get a few trolls who like to stop by and keep thinks interesting.

Its not a problem if you take a few extra seconds to review what you're saying.

But there are a number of reasons for this rule that stems from this site being about 14 years old. So there are reasons behind it that come from years of experience.

There are already a number of threads up on this topic. You could search for those to get more detailed answers.

Heh seems like this is one of the biggest technical problems on CC that gets the most complaints. Personally I understand that Editting should have a time limit. That makes sense to prevent trolling and all that. However, it cannot be overlooked the fact that 5 minute time limit on Editting is one of the most re-occuring complaints on this site.

Personally, I think 5 minutes is way too short and have seen many people on the site complain on this. I think a sensible fix would be an extension to 10 minutes for editting time. That way it still maintains the integrity of the Editting system, and I feel 10 minutes would be ample time for legit Editting.

Just a suggestion, obviously I recognize I am not in the position to carry out such and I like this site so even if the suggestion is not taken I am all right with that. But please at least consider it. I think it would be a positive fix to help the site.

___________________________ _ _

First, other websites deal with these issues with no problem and it is a normal thing to edit one's post. Second, I cannot tell you how many times I find this frustrating. I have to keep quoting myself and post my grammar mistakes. My computer no longer works. So I use an Ipad. So it is difficult to write and time consuming to write on another document. If I use the Advanced feature sometimes it will not save my work if my browser cuts out (Which happens quite often). I think if the site charged a donation or a fee for being edit free, your donations will go up. It's a win / win scenario. I know I would fork over the money to edit with no restrictions (even though I don't have it). And I know others would, too. If someone is being duplicitous, their actions will be found out eventually. Leopards don't change their spots unless the Lord removes them by the fact that they seen the error of their ways.

I mean if you really want to be strict on this and are worried about people's behavior, you have to show that the person is not set out to attack others as a force of habit, too. They are interested in discussing the Bible and set out to attack the doctrine and not the person. They have a love for all people. If a person seems hateful towards others repeatedly on the forum, then they are disqualified (Unless they can prove that they honestly changed and are sorry for hurting others). This would obviously be folks who have a high post count and have earned themselves a good reputation or a good report amongst others. Perhaps a few referals would help, too.

So having "free unrestricted edits" would have to include:

#1. Donation.
#2. Good report that can be seen.
#3. High post count.
#4. 2-3 Referrals that you are loving and kind from other loving believers.

I think that such a thing would be more than sufficient to resolve the problem.

One of the reasons they cite (and have past experiences with it seems) is having people drastically change their post after people respond to it. Not even with ill intent, but for other reasons. Which then messes up the direct responses and if a number of people have this option it can mess up the flow of the chats.

And part of this short edit time seems to be to Prevent problems, not to let them happen and eventually try to catch someone.
Rarely does the short limit bother me anymore. And why is it more time consuming to write on one document, but not into CC?

Then, if this idea were put into place, there might be a flood of people sending requests. So now the unapid volunteers would have to spend hours going through the initial requests. Going over a persons post history, verifying that persons referrals.

Guess i don't get the need to have unlimited editing. I can see allowing donations to have longer editing times, but unlimited leaves a lot of problems open. And even then, extending the time, goes back to all the volunteer time spent in having to proof every person who requests it and going through their history.
But it's not my call. Just my 2 cents.

I agree with both Jim Jimmers AND Jason0047! I wish there was a fix for both problems in one simple solution and perhaps Jason0047 is onto something.

Look at what he said. Very interesting. He's not saying remove the 5 minute time limit. How about creating a non-anonymous subscription method (say $5.00 per month with the ability to donate as much more beyond that as a subscriber wants to donate as presently exists on CC) putting each subscriber's identity and information into the hands of CC admin so they aren't anonymous trolls anymore and once subscribers reach a certain level of reputation they can have unlimited editing ability over their own posts.

This, of course, could be revoked by any moderator and the site owner at any time for any reason if abused.

Sounds fair to me!

Yes, of course, people should aspire to be perfect. But since that's not possible...

​true..true..lol..

Can I pay to censor other people than if we are suggesting pay2win?

I am just offering a solution that could help the site owner and also help us. 200 people x 5 dollars = 1,000 a month. Or 50 substribers for unlimited edits at 20 dollars would be 1,000. Which ever way you look at it, I see it helping things. A person would not even be considered to be a canditate unless they reached a certain post count that was high. Sure, it would be a lot of work, but then the return would be good, though.

So greatly increase the workload of the people not being paid who already do a lot of work for free. Because not only will there be the extra hassle of figuring out who deserves it, then policing the changes that will be made. Because even long term members with huge post counts still often show petty and prideful behavior on a regular basis.

I wouldn't have bothered responding except you brought up a 7 month old post just to push your agenda.

I'm trying to wrap my brain around why you want to be a moderator so bad when you keep mentioning it's an unpaid thing.

Ya know, there's an option that admins have which allows them to see when a post was modified and that's all they really need. There is no need to prevent modifying posts by the poster when anyone who complains after the post can quote the post they are complaining about to show the proof of what was said. Trick there is, fake quotes, which then constitutes the sin of bearing false witness.