Are you one of those “one size fits all” kind of people?
May be stop pointing fingers and think for a moment, WHY there’s limits in first place?
1 Like
I wish to direct your attention to a post I made before you said this.
Obviously, I wasn’t talking about you. I put my post up there before you ever started typing.
(It’s not like I edited it with your post in mind, or anything…)
Edit. Oh, and I never said that. The record doesn’t show it, and my inauguration was the most attended in history.
1 Like
that was my mistake clicks , I regret it now.
1 Like
I am not sure what your point is/was or if you even meant to reply to me.
All I saw that was even tangentially relevant to my comment was some vague afterthought about the possibility of some (as yet articulated) abuse.
Care to elaborate?
Sure.
Being able to edit a text entry, after it’s been made, read, and a reply has been (at least partially) formulated, is to invite the abuse of the original poster baiting a later posted into saying something in reply, that would permit them to go back, alter their statement to make the reply seem to mean something entirely different.
As an example, here’s an extreme version.
OP: The Allies should have been brought up on war crimes for what they did.
R: You’re an idiot. They did what they had to.
Revised OP: The leaders of Germany during WWII should have been exhumed and hung, like they did with Oliver Cromwell.
1 Like
Nothing prevents you from making your own edits or pointing out that the OP revised his comment.
All in all your “extreme” example is pretty unimpressive.
If you spent any time worrying about this, you would have chosen something that has illegal or bannable content ie. Threats of RL violence, admissions of criminality, etc.
But even that assumes that logs do not show the edit. So an investigation by the relevant authorities would not be ‘fooled’.
1 Like
You are right that the powers that be would not be fooled by such editing. These boards, which allowed me to paste in that afterthought to your comment hours after you made it, and hours after my original post was made, will continue to show that my comment was edited, and I, and they, can review my comments.
However, these boards are resistant to such behavior, as they are prone to a longer form of comment. Not a sentence or two, but a paragraph, or two. It is should be less common for a reply not to describe what they are objecting to, since the post they are replying to will typically have more than one element.
That said, the goal of such tampering wouldn’t be to confuse the GM’s, but to (threaten to) shame the replier in the eyes of the public. To make them feel like they have to defend their statement, and to raise their blood pressure.
And yes, it’d allow a person who feels like they lost the argument to retreat without “giving internet points” to the person who bested their ideas. They never said that. The record doesn’t show it, so it never happened.
As it is, I feel it is better that typos be preserved than that someone can use such a system to troll their fellow commenters. And I am bad about typos. I frequently misplac ethes pace, and oter tyops when I"m typin gfast.
I’d still rather the record be fixed.
Edit: I am well aware that the current system can be used to troll. I’m saying, why add another tool to the arsenal?
1 Like
Good move CCP 
I like that I’m not the only one against editing chat, though it’s even worse than what you’re suggesting. Even in a benign situation, it’s still bad communication.
Example:
a: So that thign, right?
b: yeah totally that[…]
a: *thig
b: […]thing, it’s totally […]
a: *think
b: […]absolutely a thing, and […]
a: *twig
b: […] apparently not actually a thing. Ok, screw you, I’m never talking to you again.
Bad communication. Edits only work in non-realtime communications, and it’s why when people who actually respect their own communication do edit an article or post or whatever, they make it clear what they did, and for a serious edit, they have the self respect to be embarrassed by it.
1 Like
Everything you mention here is ego based.
You care about how you look in a video game because of ego.
You care if someone changes a post to rob you of ‘points’ because of ego.
You are concerned about small time trolls…because of ego.
So, it looks like you are agreeing with what I said. 
The mentioned edits problem is already endemic on the forums here. Especially in the in character sections. Certain pilots are notorious for going back and editing or deleting posts they later don’t want to stick by.
Sure it’s ego based. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t a problem.
I can’t decide if I am
-
jealous because you life must be so blissful that a forum post on a video game is a real problem in your life.
-
sad that your life is so small or horrid that a forum post on a video game site is so large or painful in your life.
Anyway, the context of the conversation can be found in my first post.
Quick tldr paraphrasing:
Someone said even editing typos should not be allowed because posts are about communicating an idea. Editing for typos is just editing for ego (not communicating ideas). But then complained about people changing what they wrote which invalidates a half written response.
Glad to catch you up. But honestly stop being lazy.
Editing for typos is girding ones own ego, at the expense of no-one, unless, of course someone has already called them on the typo.
Editing to change the argument is at the expense of the repliers ego. Especially if it can be done in a manner that changes the perceived meaning of the reply.
Eve is an MMO. Ultimately, ego is going to be a major factor because if it wasn’t, why aren’t we all playing in single-player mode?
The thing is, what’s the difference between correcting a minor typo and completely changing the meaning of a message to confound who said what? Removing, or adding, the word “not” could significantly change the meaning of a statement. Adding a smiley to the end of a post, in order to suggest that it shouldn’t be taken (so) seriously (as the original form did), would also be a minor edit.
How many verbal bullies have used the term “Gah! I was only joking! You need to lighten up.” When the argument goes against them?
Why, we could end up with a whole new version of trolling. chat-revision PvP.
Edit: This is an experimental edit. I want to see if it shows up in the quote. 0149UTC
That was a lot of words to say:
“But…Muh forum PvP!”
Well, I didn’t want to be lazy.
1 Like
See what he did there? Quoted the entire post to prevent editing a viable vector of attack. Sad that such measures have to be considered but at least there is that approach as some makeshift solution.
Edit: On a second thought quotes can be exploited (modified before posting) too so that isn’t a solution either. 
I have confirmed that the quote takes a snapshot, rather than just linking to the post.
Is there a solution to the ts3/eve audio problem? My client and ts3 lose sound all the time.