Pit will be offline for 10 mins for maintenance tomorrow.

[Lsuoma]

I'll be taking the Pit offline for around 10 minutes tomorrow for maintenance. I'll give around 30 minutes notice of the downtime.

This is to install the mod which allows versioning of comments, so that originals of edited comments can be retrieved.

When I've installed it we can kick the tyres and see what it looks like. At that point the two minutes currently allowed for editing may be extended, but we'll need to talk about how long the window should be. My thoughts are that we should keep it relatively short, perhaps an hour or two. Anything longer is an invitation to revisionism rather than correction and amplification, and may lead to the phenomenon of responses being included in postings UPTHREAD, which would be a royal PITA to track.

As always, comments and thoughts gratefully received...

[John Greg]

My personal feeling is that anything more than 30 minutes is far too much. And, even though I had earlier requested 30 minutes, in hindsight, I think 20 should bethe max. And even that might be too much, but, well, erm....

But thats only my humble pie.

[AndrewV69]

My experience over at Gene Expression is that you have 15 minutes to make edits, then your article, ready or not by then gets posted.


BTW:
Razib also heavily moderates people who post for the fist time, and if thinks you are behaving like an idiot, talking out of your area of expertise for instance (for example, your field is microbiology, opine on genetics and get it wrong repeatedly), banhammer time.

[Lsuoma]

Razib also heavily moderates people who post for the fist time, and if thinks you are behaving like an idiot, talking out of your area of expertise for instance (for example, your field is microbiology, opine on genetics and get it wrong repeatedly), banhammer time.

Hee-hee!

I hope your "fist time" is not a Freudian slip...

I can certainly understand modding and banning for crazy wrong stuff on a scientific site, especially if people are coming there to learn.

Here, that's not so much of a concern, I think...

[Wonderist]

Oh, I forgot in my previous comment on the editing poll thread, that even the 'trusted members' group was not allowed to edit their posts *after* anyone had posted a reply to that post. In other words, revisionism was impossible, because anyone replying to what you said would always be replying to what you said, because the reply itself locked in your most recent version of your post/comment.

Only mods could change posts after they had been replied to, and there was always at least one other mod to check the first mod's edit for bias. It was almost never a problem this way.

[Wonderist]

I can certainly understand modding and banning for crazy wrong stuff on a scientific site, especially if people are coming there to learn.

Here, that's not so much of a concern, I think...

I hope not. IMHO, bans here should be extremely rare, like David Mabus/Dennis Markuze rare. If we need to deal with persistent trolls, I hope phpbb has the ability to restrict users or user-groups to specific forums so that they are isolated but not banned outright. I also don't have much of a problem with temporary time-limited bans based on recurrent bad behaviour that isn't outright trolling.

Come to think of it, there should probably be a sequestering area for FfTB-style persistently disruptive trolls (I'm sure a few pop immediately to mind). On the other hand, maybe not. Something to think about anyway.

[Lsuoma]

I've already had thoughts about locking disruptive types away in their own sand pit. It's something I can implement if necessary, but I hope I'll not have to do it...

I have already banned one user/IP - Russian dating spam ...