Seeing and editing unapproved posts (Site Questions & Tech Support, FAQs, etc.)

[Nohbdy 4,108]

This issue doesn't really apply to me, but I wanted to see the public's opinion on it.

 

When regular (that is, non-staff) members post in the Site Questions & Tech Support forum, or other areas that require posts to be mod-approved, their posts will disappear until approved. The problem here is that these users can't edit their posts, even when doing so is beneficial to both the poster and the topic. 

 

For example, if a user posted in the Site Questions thread, but realized he could have worded his post more clearly, he can edit his post (visible only to him and the staff) before it gets published. This way, he'll have more confidence in his answer (as well as increasing the post's chances of getting approved), and the asker will receive a more accurate response when it does get approved (the answerer may not be around when this happens). 

 

In other sections of the site, such as FAQ, blog, or profile comments, the ability to edit unapproved posts can go a long way toward improving the quality of comments. Users who realize they made inappropriate comments can be able to change them before they get deleted. This shouldn't be a problem because they haven't been shown to the public. After all, the point of the system is to ensure that posts are appropriate before they're revealed. 

 

I know that I've personally been frustrated by my inability to edit (or even see) my posts. While that isn't much of a problem now, I can imagine others being similarly annoyed by the system. 

 

What do you think? 

[Harmonic Revelations 8,835]

I find the idea useful in the Site Questions and Tech Support because that's pretty much the way support tickets work, so why not posts in that subforum.

 

However, in general, I find that implementing this feature in other areas of the site besides suggestions and tech support has infinite potential for abuse by regular users, especially in the sense of avoiding the consequences of what they post/changing abusive posts before moderators see them so they can avoid being banned.

Edited August 1, 2013 by Harmonic Revelations

[Jokuc 8,173]

Yeah, it will really be something useful. I don't really make much threads in site questions and tech support myself, but this is quite annoying while answering too if you want to edit your post.

[SCS 7,537]

I support your suggestion wholeheartedly. In a way similar to how staff are able to see unapproved posts, users could be allowed to see their own unapproved posts in that section specifically. What if their posts were denied, though? Do you think this feature should be extended so that they could fix it, and possibly have it approved? 

 

I don't see a problem with users being able to edit their unapproved comments elsewhere as well, such as in comments on FAQ articles.

 

One point I should raise though is the issue of the moderation queue. If a user has the moderation queue placed on them, then they should not be allowed to edit their unapproved posts, due to the fact that it is supposed to be a form of restrictive disciplinary action.

[Nohbdy 4,108]

I find the idea useful in the Site Questions and Tech Support because that's pretty much the way support tickets work, so why not posts in that subforum.

 

However, in general, I find that implementing this feature in other areas of the site besides suggestions and tech support has infinite potential for abuse by regular users, especially in the sense of avoiding the consequences of what they post/changing abusive posts before moderators see them so they can avoid being banned.

Sorry for the late response. I checked with Chaotic Discord to make sure I was right. Here's how it works: if your post requires approval, and that post happens to break a rule, then it will simply be deleted. If they changed it to make it presentable in public, then it shouldn't be a problem. Typically, you wouldn't get punished for breaking the rules when your post requires approval. That's why the feature exists, in the first place. 

 

The admin does bring up another issue that could surface, however. Users could grow impatient and wonder why their posts haven't been approved yet, which could lead to a bunch of issues including people complaining about the staff being too slow. 

[NavelColt 22,880]

I find the idea useful in the Site Questions and Tech Support because that's pretty much the way support tickets work, so why not posts in that subforum.

 

However, in general, I find that implementing this feature in other areas of the site besides suggestions and tech support has infinite potential for abuse by regular users, especially in the sense of avoiding the consequences of what they post/changing abusive posts before moderators see them so they can avoid being banned.

 

While I am rather unsure of the suggestion overall, I have to note that, it doesn't matter if someone edits their post. Staff can view edit history on posts :3 If you screwed up, it can be seen, no matter what you edit. Now granted, it usually isn't obvious that edit history needs to be checked, but still.

[Emperor Posh 360]

I must agree, this would be a very useful tool. There isn't much in a way of abusing this tool as @~Chaotic Discord~ has stated that edit history can be viewed by staff members, and the post is not public unless approved by a staff member. I would definitely love to see this feature implemented in the future as I have had times where I wished I could go and add to my post because I either explained it wrong or I found a better solution.
 
I wouldn't have much to say outside of what is quoted below.

For example, if a user posted in the Site Questions thread, but realized he could have worded his post more clearly, he can edit his post (visible only to him and the staff) before it gets published. This way, he'll have more confidence in his answer (as well as increasing the post's chances of getting approved), and the asker will receive a more accurate response when it does get approved (the answerer may not be around when this happens).    
 
In other sections of the site, such as FAQ, blog, or profile comments, the ability to edit unapproved posts can go a long way toward improving the quality of comments. Users who realize they made inappropriate comments can be able to change them before they get deleted. This shouldn't be a problem because they haven't been shown to the public. After all, the point of the system is to ensure that posts are appropriate before they're revealed.

The admin does bring up another issue that could surface, however. Users could grow impatient and wonder why their posts haven't been approved yet, which could lead to a bunch of issues including people complaining about the staff being too slow.

As for this issue, I couldn't see it getting very bad. Allowing posts to be edited before approval wouldn't be too different than how the system is now.

Edited November 27, 2013 by Emperor Posh