Yes, there are issues. I think it's possible that @ekzyis has an idea in the works regarding the first issue- editability, which I think would be great for territory owners too.
I just don't want to see how SN became another reddit shit.... sad thing, is already moving towards that way. And that's why I do not want to post more stuff on SN (only urgent /important matters).
Some people even accused me that I am posting too much. So I said, ok I move away, I don't care. Let's see what shit are you posting...
Still watching to see the SN direction.
Just my opinion, but we need you here to keep the bitcoin focus, and also as a teacher. No question it's chaotic because of growing pains. Re territories, the new dev ones seem to increase deep discussion regarding building. Yours would too. I'm trying to increase adoption by pulling people from reddit to a sats based earning system, the way nostr is. I understand your worry, though.
People who say anyone else posts too much or wrong kind of stuff can close their eyes...or downzap.
Posts that get zaps get to the top, the rest quickly fade. I don't understand people who want to moderate by other means.
The zapping is the moderation!
Let the sats speak! This is the genius of SN.
271 sats \ 7 replies \ @ek 12 Feb
Unfortunately, I am not. At least no new ideas.
Imo, the UI should include a changelog for every edit (after the timer) but if the changelog should be similar to Github is not clear yet.
But in general, a lot on SN related to writing is inspired by Github.
For example, this is how it looks on Github:
Yeah, I don't really think that would be useful. You would want the edited post NOT to appear to be edited. Obviously you want the change record in github, but I don't think you need it for a post.
271 sats \ 5 replies \ @ek 13 Feb
You would want the edited post NOT to appear to be edited.
Mhh, why not?
Maybe I'm too worried about abuse, but I think commitment to your text within the current edit timer also has benefits.
With no changelog, there would also be no more edit timer.
The changelog doesn't have to be obvious but I think edits should be transparent 🤔
As far as I can tell, you want edits to work like currently just with no timer, right? For everything or just for posts?
Let me explain what I see as a use case. For what we think of now as a regular post, I think things are fine as they are. What I am looking for would be a static page, either like @grayruby 's idea of an expanded territory description, or a different type of post, that would be freely updatable and editable with the purpose of keeping items current, like an online bulletin board, index, etc. I think that's what @DarthCoin is looking for too, but I could be wrong. The purpose would be to update information without having to delete the old post and make a new one.
271 sats \ 3 replies \ @ek 13 Feb
So you're talking more about a new post type? Which can be edited indefinitely with no changelog?
Else I don't get how a changelog for everything (no need to determine beforehand if you want to edit this item in the future or not) would interfere with your use case.
Let's say I have a post with linked posts contained within it, like an index. Then let's say the stacker deletes that post and I want to replace it with a different link. It would be cluttered and pointless to have change logs visible if these updates are made frequently.
261 sats \ 1 reply \ @ek 13 Feb
It would be cluttered and pointless to have change logs visible if these updates are made frequently.
Yeah, I agree. But that's what I am trying to figure out: how to make it not cluttered and not pointless in general. I imagine "infinite edits" could generally be useful. We usually don't build something for, let's say, a very specific use case.
But maybe we can just implement this with no changelog (would also make it easier) and then iterate from there.
That's a good idea, and I don't want to complicate your life, but you are right about the importance of change logs if we're going to have limitless edits. I also worry it could fuck up discussions if the op is editing on the fly while people are responding to the original text. The current limit is a nice compromise. I'm really talking about a different type of post, not one that is necessarily meant to invite discussion. It is probably too much to ask.