Originally Posted by sibhusky
I think you should read what you are posting before you post it, then again immediately after you post it. If you're fine with it then, you should stand by it. I understand totally the problem the moderators were having with people changing the content (not some misspelling) of their posts and the whole thread becoming totally confusing. What possible reason would you need to come back a week later to change a post? Especially since the moderators are willing to help you out, say, with a no longer working link or something.
Well on one occasion I was selling a pair of skis, and after they didn't sell, I thought I'd like to lower the price a bit, but since when people are ski shopping, they are much less likely to read beyond the first post, I edited the actual AD which eliminated any questions as to what the actual price was.
The only reason it was done was to prevent people doing hit and run disparaging remarks, and using eidting to aid them in denying that they'd said what they said. I have never done that, but I have thought to change something I felt differently about later, after I'd cooled down.
The truth is, that once someone becomes emotionally escalated, it takes at least ninety minutes for the escalated state to subside. So, this one hour rule is an unrealistically short amount of time for one to self moderate based on human emotional biochemical reality. It is more geared (though perhaps not consciously so) to catching people in their words than allowing people to practice responsible self governance.
The continuity argument is meaningless to me. It seems like it only would come to bear if someone uninvolved in a dispute was seeking to insinuate themselves into the midst of it. If it doesn't make sense due to changes, perhaps one could deduce that it was not a place they needed to put their attention, and say to themselves, "Hmmm, I must have missed something, oh well."