We noticed that you're using an unsupported browser. The TripAdvisor website may not display properly.
We support the following browsers:
Windows: Internet Explorer, Mozilla Firefox, Google Chrome. Mac: Safari.

Edit time limit is WAY too short

Ormond Beach...
Destination Expert
for Vermont
Level Contributor
7,881 posts
84 reviews
Save Topic
Edit time limit is WAY too short

The time allowed to edit a post is way (repeat WAY) too short. Folks should have at least 30-60 minutes to edit their posts...(or even better - no time limit at all). I've timed out at least 20 times when adding details or corrections to posts shortly after posting - which is pretty frustrating.

The current time limit is far too short for folks to do simple stuff like a few google searches for more details, or to check routes on mapquest, etc.... etc... It's an impediment to getting more/better infomation into our posts.

Let's update this to something that's more usable please. If you feel you must have some limit (for whatever reason..?...) I'd suggest 60 minutes - and put a note in the footer of the posting window so people know what the limit is.

Thanks!

Llanbrynmair...
Level Contributor
14,699 posts
13 reviews
Save Reply
31. Re: Edit time limit is WAY too short

As an example FFM, new posters sometimes respond to a number of replies to their OPs by clicking 'Reply' for some but not all of the contributions. This can result in as many as 6 consecutive responses with no indication of the posts they are referring to.

Pittsburgh...
Level Contributor
5,414 posts
72 reviews
Save Reply
32. Re: Edit time limit is WAY too short

It seems as if the longer edit time IS the "work-around," not the solution. It is a way to fail-safe a lack of forethought (which we are all guilty of, myself included). To Bertie, yes, any strand can have a seemingly out-of-context post. However, the argument here is that a long or unlimited edit time would exacerbate the problem. To the OP, this is not about being against "change." I'm for change when I think it would improve things. I'm against it when I think it would be a detriment. I don't believe in changing for the sake of changing. The edit time, in my opinion, is long enough. I see no benefit to extending it.

Oregon Coast
Destination Expert
for Crescent City, Oregon Coast, Oregon, Redwood National Park
Level Contributor
42,788 posts
1,036 reviews
Save Reply
33. Re: Edit time limit is WAY too short

>> Unfortunately TA hasn't quite gone the whole way and given us quote boxes etc <<

Thank Heaven they have not! I pop into another travel forum that has those and they are without question (IMO) the *second-most* irritating thing on forums!

The *most* irritating, you might ask?

Those statements (located at the bottom or side of each post in small print) that I don't know what they are called -- where somebody brags about who they are or what they drive or where they live or their cat's intelligence or whatever!

Then you add flashing emoticons or even small pictures and it all adds up to terrible clutter!

Vancouver, Canada
Destination Expert
for London
Level Contributor
54,611 posts
15 reviews
Save Reply
34. Re: Edit time limit is WAY too short

In my view there would be a great benefit to doubling the edit time, and having the option to edit remain after another post has been made.

I dislike the use of @ when addressing another post, as starting a sentence 'Chris_and_Liz ...' is quite acceptable. I am aware of the use of @ elsewhere (although I don't subscribe to that site and never will).

Pittsburgh...
Level Contributor
5,414 posts
72 reviews
Save Reply
35. Re: Edit time limit is WAY too short

I think there comes a point where we push for more and more redundant features in the name of convenience. Is it really any harder to edit in Word and copy/paste OR type a follow-up post than it is to type into a browser, preview, confirm, click "edit," wait for the new window to load, edit, preview, and confirm? Changing the time limit wouldn't really change anything related to how I post, but I still fail to see the real gain when doing a cost/benefit analysis. Again, the only upside I see is that it reduces the need for any kind of forethought and proof reading when posting. That isn't enough of a positive to offset the negatives as far as I'm concerned.

Edited: 09 April 2012, 02:32
NYC/Israel
Destination Expert
for Israel
Level Contributor
35,059 posts
35 reviews
Save Reply
36. Re: Edit time limit is WAY too short

I do all my editing, researching and fact checking prior to hitting submit. I usually live dangerously and don't do it in word, but right here in the TA reply box. I just open a second window in my browser and toggle between the two windows as I gather facts. I have also discovered the "preview" trick to get the earlier posts to be accessible on the right side of the screen (years ago they were always accessible)

After 5 minutes or after someone else responds to change the post will be to make follow-up posts look like they are random mutterings of nothing. If you are really upset with your initial post you can always remove it, However, with a little pre-planning this should be a rare happening.

Vancouver, Canada
Destination Expert
for Vancouver
Level Contributor
55,515 posts
60 reviews
Save Reply
37. Re: Edit time limit is WAY too short

rglady ~ I opened "new windows" for a long time, until I discovered "new tab." No more clutter of overlapping screens. Just click in the center of each tab that stretch out across the top of the webpage to switch from one to the other and then click on the 'x' to delete. Want to go off to google something? Just open another tab. Lovely. :-)

Ormond Beach...
Destination Expert
for Vermont
Level Contributor
7,881 posts
84 reviews
Save Reply
38. Re: Edit time limit is WAY too short

Hi exterior.. What are the 'negatives' that need to be offset? That's really the main gist of my suggestion: The 5 min limit adds no real value, and is just an unnecessary arbitrary limit. Don't see any down-side to extending it.

Yes... sure... with more forethought or a few extra clicks, we all can post the perfect responses every time. But... IMHO that's not a good justification for the status quo - and not making things as convenient and user-friendly as possible.

JMHO. :)

Edited: 10 April 2012, 17:06
Chester, United...
Level Contributor
59,672 posts
65 reviews
Save Reply
39. Re: Edit time limit is WAY too short

Even if TA did extend it you only have until the next poster replies anyway so if you were busy working away editing you post you could lose the alterations anyway

Pittsburgh...
Level Contributor
5,414 posts
72 reviews
Save Reply
40. Re: Edit time limit is WAY too short

Chris and Liz, the negatives have been discussed by several others already, the most important being the fact that unlimited edits make subsequent posts seem out of context. I'm not the only one against the change as you can see by reading the other posts. This is a discussion forum, and I (and others) think that allowing continuous edits would be detrimental to the integrity of the discussions.

Also, this is the age of computers. There are already plenty of features of a standard computer that give you all the editing opportunities you want that would not require any changes to the site. There are just as many "clicks" involved in your edit-til-the-cows-come-home option as there are in saving your post to a word file and copy/pasting into the browser. As I said, it seems that you're just asking for a redundant feature that would eliminate any need for any forethought or proofreading.

Now, I have to ask. Why would anyone (not just you) feel the desire to post before you actually had the information you need? I don't want to post something for all the world to read when I know beforehand that I don't have accurate information. Why is it easier to post THEN research than it is to research THEN post? It's the same number of steps. As others have pointed out, other sites don't allow any edits. 5 minutes is plenty to fix punctuation errors or other minor glitches. The rest, well, should either be done ahead of time or as a subsequent post (which again, isn't any harder than your idea).