Editing Posts.

[ll_billym]

Ed I know this one has been going on for a jolly long time but my 2 pence is that a simple typo can turn a very good answer into a retard answer.

Yes we should read our posts before sending, no sometimes we don't.

90 seconds is plenty.

[THECORBYLOON]

Soz, am I missing something? What's the suggestion?

[Kidd72]

type like eric and ernie me thinks (or is that burt)

[ll_billym]

Editing posts.

[joko]

if someone can't be bothered to proof read an answer i doubt they will bother to go back in and edit later just because of a typo.

as long as the meaning is understood, typos aren't a problem - but if they change the meaning of your post, just post again explaining

[curlyperm]

.............................well youve all lost me?..........

[THECORBYLOON]

I got the editing posts bit but what is the 90 seconds about?

[ll_billym]

That you have 90 seconds to edit your post before it becomes set in stone. Or 5 mins if you like but I think that it is much needed feature.

[joko]

heres a novel idea - why not just read through what you have written before you submit?

there is really no need for a preview button let alone an edit facility - if people just did this - all the preview button does is open your text box in a new window!
why not skip the previw option and just read the thing in the original box - where you can edit it if need be?

ed got rid of text formatting in favour of the preview option - utterly pointless and useless thing to do

i know some people like the preview box - but instead of being able to do italics, bold etc?

i would say to those who do - just hang back for a second and read the original - then you will see there is no need to open a new window just to look at the same thing

its like me producing a page of writing, then taking a polaroid, and reading the text on there, looking for errors, memorising them, then binning the polaroid, and editing the original.