Editing Proposals

Richard D. Bartlett Public Seen by 106

Matthew Bartlett

Mon 6 Aug 2012 10:26PM

This is okay; but I prefer Josh's 15-minute suggestion.

Jon Lemmon

Mon 6 Aug 2012 10:51PM

Hmm, sounds like you're not actually happy with this proposal. Why not Josh's idea about a 15 minute time-limit? I'd be happy to compromise with that.

Alanna Irving

Mon 6 Aug 2012 11:16PM

I think a better solution is to not allow edits at all after a certain time or after someone has voted

Joshua Vial

Mon 6 Aug 2012 11:27PM

+1 to disabling edits after a certain time limit or after someone has voted.

Benjamin Knight

Tue 7 Aug 2012 12:07AM

best interim solution before forking is developed

Aaron Thornton

Tue 7 Aug 2012 10:48AM

I am feeling users need to be notified or a new proposal started

Poll Created Tue 7 Aug 2012 10:12PM

That the 'edit proposal' feature be disabled once the first person has stated their position Closed Fri 10 Aug 2012 10:16PM

Context: At the moment, the person making a proposal can edit it right up until it closes, without any notifications or visibility in the discussion.

This means that people might agree to one thing, then come back to the discussion to find that the proposal has substantially changed, possibly into something they wouldn't have agreed with.

This has already been problematic in some of the 19 Tory St discussions, despite the pop-up warning that's already implemented.

Allowing proposal editing up until the first person has stated their position is proposed as an interim solution, until we can figure out a smooth way of forking proposals.

This seems less arbitrary than a 15-minute cut-off, and more relevant to the process (since it's only problematic/misleading to edit the proposal after a position has been stated), and allows for the fixing of typos or addition of context soon after the proposal has been put up.