What's up with the short fuse for editting?

thanks, but wondering how you know what I need? I proofread before and after posting, but still find spelling and grammar mistakes, that’s just the way my mind works (or doesn’t work). And I’m not sure why you think people will “move the goal posts”.

really, you know this because? you’ve tested with our forum cohort and know how many dirtly deletes we’d be piling on the moderators?

(post deleted by author)

Because I’ve seen it. Many, many, many times. I’m sure you wouldn’t do it, but unfortunately the rules have to be configured for the worst among us.

Consider this. Your posts get read once, and almost definitely within a couple of hours, a day at most. If you make changes after that, very few people will see them. So why bother?


ok, a day sounds good.


The expiration period for editing a post is there for a reason.

You need clarity and consistency.

Too oftentimes people will edit their posts not so much to correct grammar but to actually change the substantive content of their original post (and, really, fuck, this is the Internet, the phrase “correct grammar on the Internet” is like saying “I like my toast prepared wet” - what??)

Sometimes this is because their original post got too much blowback from the Hungry Onion hoi polloi or after a few hours sobering up the poster realized that their cheap 60 proof vodka got the best of them.

But for whatever reason, allowing changes to be made to the substantive content of a post after a certain period of extended time disrupts the flow of conversation b/c undoubtedly and invariably there will have been replies to the original unaltered post, making those subsequent repliers sound either stupid, ignorant, or just wrong, or a combination of all three.

This is neither fair, nor conducive to free-flowing conversation.

The better solution, and really the only one in my opinion, is if the poster wants to change a post after the expiration period to edit expires, is to simply quote in verbatim the original post and reply to it by noting the changes, amendments, or alterations.


No, because I’ve been a denizen of the interwebs for a good long while now and I see the utter chaos that trolls and attention wh*res cause when they’re allowed to change things for as long as they want.

I’ve been a member and a mod on multiple forums going back to listgroups and live chatrooms. Its a sh*tshow and it never, ever ends well.


This used to be a mega issue on another (not food) forum I used, with a couple of people changing their original remarks and then claiming harassment from those who had criticised the original.

I have not noticed that sort of thing here. Maybe it does go on but, these days, I try to steer clear of potentially contentious threads.

We have been there. As another moderator @ipsedixit has explained situations, we have already members (maybe no longer members now) that has reversed context and claimed to be victims. Not every modifications in HO can be traced either if the changes are made very shortly one after another. There are also members deleting the conversations for sabotages.

If you want to change grammar, feel free to contact any of the moderators, after the initial one-hour window is closed.


Perchance the poster doth protest too much?

1 Like

Good quote from HAMlet, for a food forum



1 Like

My favorite thing about this thread is that there’s a typo in the title. So meta!



1 Like

Yeah, me too. Sometimes it’s autocorrect and I didn’t catch it. Other times I changed a sentence but didn’t catch everything.

Agree, for you and me, it’s really annoying. I’ve wondered whether 2h would make a difference vs 1h (I think that’s what chowhound was), but usually I don’t figure out the issue until much later, usually when some replies to my post and I reread it and go “AARGH!” :joy:

But having read or occasionally participated in threads that turned contentious, I could see how a long edit window would allow some people to unfairly rewrite entire posts that don’t go quite as they anticipated or cast them in the light they want.

There have been a few situations with people being passive aggressive to downright baiting / nasty that resulted in them being held responsible for their writing and eventually removed, where the facts could have been changed had they had a long edit window.

In one case a poster even started an entire identical thread as a way to distract/deflect from their own earlier nasty responses, because of course they couldn’t edit those.

It’s a lot for the (volunteer) mods to deal with already, for what’s supposed to be fun and recreational activity.

I’ve occasionally flagged my own posts to ask for an edit if it’s really bothering me (@moderators — does that do something bad in terms of some overall flagging stats or anything?).


I saw that too, wondered if it was on purpose.

gasp That would be something.

1 Like

I am sure it happens/happened but again, I wonder how often and if it justifies the current window. I’m guessing no one kept/has any metrics on frequency.

In any case, I’m obviously whistling in the wind here, time to move on.

1 Like