Newest Major Reviews:.This Month's Most Popular Reviews: Best-Selling Albums:
. 1. Pinocchio
2. The Woman King
3. Samaritan
4. The Gray Man
5. Prey
. . 1. Dune (2021)
2. Spider-Man
3. Alice in Wonderland
4. Encanto
5. Batman
6. Wonder Woman 1984
7. No Time to Die
8. Ghostbusters: Afterlife
9. Murder on the Orient Express
10. LOTR: Fellowship of the Ring
. . 1. Space Battleship Yamato
2. John Williams in Vienna
3. Shang-Chi: Legend/Ten Rings
4. Glory
5. Superman (40th Anniversary)
  ScoreBoard Forum

  Re: Updates and Response to Feedback & Ideas  
View Responses
Return to Index
Read Previous Message
Read Next Message
Expand Entire Thread
• Posted by Mike the Rookie
• Date: Tuesday, June 27, 2006, at 6:52 p.m.
• IP Address:
• In Response to: Updates and Response to Feedback & Ideas (Christian Clemmensen)

I like the screenshots, and think including the profile pic in the post is a neat improvement over the avatar.

> Q: "An editing tool would be the best change."

> A: This has been the biggest issue I've been toiling with. Technically, it
> can be done; there's an editing tool in the admin version (I haven't even
> started that yet, but I know how I'll do it) that could be altered for
> public use. Here's the problem, though: I'd want to make three things
> happen in order to be satisfied with such a modification: 1. only allow
> editing for a post without responses (what's the point if the quotation in
> the response still has the original non-edited version of the first
> post?), 2. restrict the time period in which the edit could be made (1
> day, perhaps?), and 3. differentiate the edited portion with a different
> color of text. The first two aren't particularly hard to employ on a
> technical level, but the third part is a nightmare. In fact, I honestly
> think that to make the editing tool function as I would want it to is
> beyond my technical expertise in perl scripting. It would force
> JavaScript, I think, and I don't want to do that. But I'm going to keep
> tinkering with ideas on how to make this work. I'm not against allowing
> editing... I just want to do it right.

I like the first two requirements. It can be confusing when someone updates a post that caused a very interesting conversation. I'm not sure why number 3 is necessary... especially since many edits are because someone wants to fix a silly typo or clarify a point. What's the point of fixing a typo if the correction will be highlighted anyway?

Editing is a useful feature, to me at least, and I hate to see it go away because of some headache-inducing technical requirement.

 Messages in this Thread:   ( Expand )

Scoreboard created 7/24/98, Version 3.0 created 6/14/06, updated 8/1/06 (Filmtracks Publications). The "Scoreboard" Forum is Copyright © 1998-2009, Christian Clemmensen All rights reserved. The reviews and notes contained on the site may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of Filmtracks Publications. Software is a completely rewritten and highly modified 6.x version of WebBBS. The current Filmtracks Scoreboard motto: in Real Audio. Filmtracks takes no responsibility for any mental trauma caused by this forum.