Pages in topic: < [1 2] |
Idea: New type of thread ("Topic format"): Non-editable Thread poster: Katalin Horváth McClure
|
Maybe it could be like Kudoz postings, which can't be edited but only added to. I would favor implementing this for the forum in general (not making it merely optional). Oh, and it should definitely include moderators and staff members.
[Edited at 2019-05-08 03:18 GMT] | | |
Lincoln Hui Hong Kong Local time: 00:28 Member Chinese to English + ... Less rules, not more | May 8, 2019 |
The "inclusive" format was a bad enough idea, we don't need to make the mistake twice. All this does is encourage the spelling/grammar trolls. | | |
Despite what I suggested above, I definitely agree with you. The so-called "inclusive" format should not be encouraged to spawn any further. | | |
Altogether now: | May 8, 2019 |
Lincoln Hui wrote: Less rules, not more The "inclusive" format was a bad enough idea, we don't need to make the mistake twice. All this does is encourage the spelling/grammar trolls. Fewer! 😂😂😂 | |
|
|
Sheila Wilson Spain Local time: 16:28 Member (2007) English + ...
Chris S wrote: Lincoln Hui wrote: Less rules, not more The "inclusive" format was a bad enough idea, we don't need to make the mistake twice. All this does is encourage the spelling/grammar trolls. Fewer! 😂😂😂 That's Tom's job! There's no room for two Toms here ! | | |
Sheila Wilson wrote: That's Tom's job! There's no room for two Toms here ! I'm just waiting for someone to correct my own error... | | |
Sheila Wilson Spain Local time: 16:28 Member (2007) English + ... How much is it worth? | May 8, 2019 |
Chris S wrote: I'm just waiting for someone to correct my own error... Isn't that what we're all in business to do? You aren't really expecting a freebie, are you? | | |
Sheila Wilson wrote: Isn't that what we're all in business to do? You aren't really expecting a freebie, are you? Pop it on my tab with the craft beers | |
|
|
Sheila Wilson Spain Local time: 16:28 Member (2007) English + ... That's ALTOGETHER reasonable of you | May 8, 2019 |
Chris S wrote: Sheila Wilson wrote: Isn't that what we're all in business to do? You aren't really expecting a freebie, are you? Pop it on my tab with the craft beers I can't do it for FEWER than two beers, mind. Now - ALL TOGETHER - Let's get back on topic!!! | | |
Michele Fauble United States Local time: 09:28 Member (2006) Norwegian to English + ... Grammar and logic | May 8, 2019 |
Fewer beers, less beer More beers, more beer
[Edited at 2019-05-09 15:34 GMT] | | |
should your idea not be possible... | May 9, 2019 |
... maybe at least making the * [edited at ... ] * note at the end of the post as compulsory would help? It's been quite some time since I've been active here, so I may be mistaken, but I seem to remember that the post scriptum [edited at ...] can be removed before confirming the new version of a previous post. (I'll test here right after I post this). If indeed the note can be removed, thus providing no indication that the post has been subsequently edited (whether f... See more ... maybe at least making the * [edited at ... ] * note at the end of the post as compulsory would help? It's been quite some time since I've been active here, so I may be mistaken, but I seem to remember that the post scriptum [edited at ...] can be removed before confirming the new version of a previous post. (I'll test here right after I post this). If indeed the note can be removed, thus providing no indication that the post has been subsequently edited (whether for a typo or for rephrasing a remark) any replies or comments published before such editing would risk being out of tune or off-topic. ''''' edited 1.2.3. Test. No, I guess I was mistaken. The [edited at...] is automatically placed. ..... test edited again. If I reopen my post once again I can remove the first [edited at] though... Mmmm...
[Edited at 2019-05-09 13:38 GMT] ▲ Collapse | | |
Pages in topic: < [1 2] |