How long is acceptable to post again, rather than edit?

Discussion in 'Polls' started by kinezumi89, Dec 9, 2012.


How long is acceptable to make a new post, rather than edit an old one?

  1. Less than one hour

    2 vote(s)
  2. 1-3 hours

    2 vote(s)
  3. 3-5 hours

    2 vote(s)
  4. More than 5 hours

    2 vote(s)
  5. Never acceptable, always edit an old post if no one has replied since

    1 vote(s)
  1. kinezumi89Fishlore VIPMember

    Random thought I had, as I'm trying to avoid studying for finals. ;)

    If you make a post and think of new information to add a few minutes later, it is common practice to edit your post rather than make a new one. But if you want to make an update a day later, that's okay to make a new post (to bring it back to the top of the list so people see it). But what about one hour? Two? Where do you draw the line?

    I think for me it's around three hours but it depends on my mood :p
  2. JoannaBWell Known MemberMember

    I am all in favor of doing the unexpected. Maybe we should edit our previous posts months later to add something weird to them just to see whether anyone is paying attention?
  3. MagooFishlore VIPMember

    Lol I prefer to add a new post and that way more members will see :)
  4. monkeypie102Well Known MemberMember

    I normally will wait 2-3 hours if I find something new... however if it is a blog type of thing I don't think of a time limit...
  5. kinezumi89Fishlore VIPMember

    I think in the past I've waited too long and updated a post, but it was so far down no one saw it. I understand that the goal is to keep threads tidy (and keep people from inflating their post counts :p) but sometimes you need to update, like if a fish hasn't been doing well or something. Another of the many ambiguities of keeping fish :p
  6. JayseeFishlore LegendMember

    I wonder if editing a post puts it back at the top of the list or not.

    I would say 1-3 hours, in the event that you are adding to the conversation, and editing does not bump it.
  7. CichlidnutFishlore VIPMember

    Editing a post does not put it at the top again. I usually just post again. I'm a rebel like that.
  8. YeoyWell Known MemberMember

    There is nothing worse than going on to a thread and seeing...

    "What do you guys reckon..?"
    "She is still pregnant"
    "I need help now"

    With five minute gaps in between. After a few hours it is acceptable to post a new one so people don't miss out by not realising you edited the previous post.
  9. ryanrModeratorModerator Member

    Here's my view on it:

    - If you are trying to bump the thread, please wait 24 hours, it's just good netiquette.

    Otherwise common sense prevails. If you are adding pertinent information, that needs time to occur (developing symptoms), then an update is fine in a new post, as members who may have read the post won't see the new info.

    I would think within 15 minutes, edit the post, after that, a new post is fine. Again, common sense prevails, if you're posting at 3 in the morning (US time), then edit the post, chances are very few will have read the original post, if you're posting at 5-9pm (US), maybe a new post - UNLESS BUMPING! :D

    If there are a few back to backs, where time is not important (e.g. tracking symptoms developing), I'll typically clean up the thread a little and merge.

    The other consideration: if you're posting images, I'm pretty sure there's a maximum number of attachments per post, so back-to-backs may be necessary.
  10. kinezumi89Fishlore VIPMember

    I was hoping a mod would swing by ;) I know bumping is usually frowned upon, but I recently made a thread and hadn't received any replies after a day or two. Is bumping ever acceptable, or do I have to hope that someone happens to dig up the thread?
  11. JayseeFishlore LegendMember

    Bump after 24 hours :)
  12. JoannaBWell Known MemberMember

    Or pm a friend asking if he or she could please ask a clarifying question to help you bump your thread. :)
  13. ryanrModeratorModerator Member

    Yep bumping is fine, preferably 24 hours before bumping :D

    If it is exceptional circumstances, possibly sooner is acceptable. E.g. post at 9am, and you need to know by 3pm so you can get to the store for medications. Bumping stating "Sorry to bump so quickly, but if I need to go to the store....."
  14. kinezumi89Fishlore VIPMember

    Makes sense, thanks :)
  15. soltarianknightFishlore VIPMember

    I would say that the only reason to post back to back is if you have new/important information to add after your thread has been up for longer then and hour or so without activity. Such as "I am waiting for my fish to have fry" and then 20 minutes later she starts showing complications. But a bump is a bump and there is an etiquette for that.
  16. pirahnah3Fishlore VIPMember

    I agree, I think it is all situational.
  17. Akari_32Fishlore LegendMember

    If I'm in my own blog subforum, I'll post however I want, but in a normal thread, mine or not, I'll typically edit my previous post. And obviously, if i have more than 10 pictures, I'll post back to back, as it's the only way to post them all with out waiting for replies lol
  18. AquaristFishlore LegendMember