Is it right to eolith remove posts?


...or should you let them stand regardless?

I've only been posting for a little while and am very much learning as I go along.

At the moment I thing it should stand as is - typos or not unless feedback suggests it's offending readers.IMHO posts should be spontaneous rather than polished

what do you think?

 

Comments (4)

  1. Steve Lamb says:

    D’oh! I made a typo in the title of this post!

    It should read "edit" not "eolith!: -of course I’m not going to correct it!!!’

  2. Radhakrishnan Mukkai says:

    I agree with you. However, I was wondering if Microsoft tells its employees to remove posts, if it does not approve of it.

  3. Michael Kaplan says:

    Personally, I think the editing is fine, though substantive changes should be marked as such rather than trying to appear smarter or moer careful than one is.

    I lay it out in my editorial policy at http://blogs.msdn.com/michkap/articles/275412.aspx and no one has boycotted me yet as far as I know. 🙂

  4. Ed Bott says:

    I usually allow myself to correct a post for upto an hour after it appears on my blog. Few people will see it during that time, so I cut myself some slack. After that, my rule is that I will correct typos any time. That’s not a substantive change and it’s just common courtesy. ("Eolith"? I was totally confused!)

    If I feel like clarifying something or adding extra details after making a post, I will do so by adding text and prefixing it with an "Update" label. That alerts anyone that the post has changed.

    If I need to correct something in a post because I made a mistake, I will use strikeout to indicate what was incorrect and then use an update to indicate the new text.

    Those are my rules, and I’m comfortable with them.

Skip to main content