Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Hitler-Chan]

I've seen this happening a lot, a lot a lot in this new era of bijuu combatants. Am I the only one that see's this and cringes? For the longest time, it was immediate DQ if this was done, when did this change? >>

[Ѕhadow]

If it's edited after you post then it's an issue.

I don't really mind it unless they totally change their post then I complain.

[Teostra]

I would only edit if I realized I made a small error right after posting. Otherwise, I agree that it's bad manners to change your post in that instance. At least not without letting your opponent know if you waited a while and they still haven't posted.

[Hitler-Chan]

If someone posts, and there are egregious mistakes in grammar, I believe they are allowed to change anything within the first 5 minutes after posting. However, someone could come along, notice a serious tactical error, and let them know to change it, then it becomes BM, and unacceptable.(Bad mannered)

[Genesis]

If someone posts, and there are egregious mistakes in grammar, I believe they are allowed to change anything within the first 5 minutes after posting. However, someone could come along, notice a serious tactical error, and let them know to change it, then it becomes BM, and unacceptable.(Bad mannered)

I'd say an edit made 10 minutes after the initial post. Like, any grammatical mistakes. But the only problem I see that someone edits their post. and lo and behold, their opponent is writing a response post to the OG post. So, yes, it is a problem.

I'd say just put a simple edit history in your post. If it's a grammatical fix, put "Edit: Grammar" and etc.

[Iburi Ray]

Only reason I edited my posts were due to spelling errors which I made because I posted from a phone, other then that, unless a judge or your opponent knows you edited to fix a move name or whatever, it shouldn't be permitted, though maybe it is something you could set up with your opponent before hand.

[Vail]

I find it beyond shameful to edit one's post to correct a tactical error. Once it gets posted, it's there and shouldn't be changed (unless your opponent permits you to do so).

I've edited my posts in my current biju fight, but that's simply because I'm mildly obsessive with everything and if I see an error in my grammar, I can't help myself.

[Ѕhadow]

Every time I edit my post I always take a screenshot before to prove it wasn't anything major. I have like 5 currently in my photos that I've yet to delete.

[Hazama]

How do you know it is a grammatical edit, though? >.> If it is the first time you are seeing the post, you have no idea what they could have answered.

In my eyes, editing your post in a Bijuu fight is an immediate DQ, no questions asked o.o I don't care if you put fucking their instead of there, or spelled 'see' as 'sea'. It is an official fight, there should be no edits, at all. At least, that is how I look at it.

[Ace]

Here's the thing, no one knows how many times an edit was made.
Once an edit is made, that time stamp clearly overrides the initial post time stamp.

Only practical solution, if people actually find it to be a problem, prohibit editing posts all together for the time being, or for any significant matches. These 5 min or 10 min edit limits do not solve the problem, because as this topic tries to address, it is the trust factor that is in question.

[Ѕhadow]

The solution is a screenshot >>

[Ace]

The solution is a screenshot >>

A person edits, then screenshots, then edits again, does not screen shot, edits again, screenshots...
Well, the proof is of only two screenshots. The burden then remains on the other person to prove another edit was made. Not fair at all to place the burden of proving what was edited and what was not on the other person, obviously.

The author of the topic and others made a completely valid point, not much to discuss... =)
Again, trust factor, premise of the entire topic.

[Ѕhadow]

Then add a time limit?

Time frame to edit post is only 1 hour after. Any after that is DQ.

[Hitler-Chan]

How do you know it is a grammatical edit, though? >.> If it is the first time you are seeing the post, you have no idea what they could have answered.

In my eyes, editing your post in a Bijuu fight is an immediate DQ, no questions asked o.o I don't care if you put fucking their instead of there, or spelled 'see' as 'sea'. It is an official fight, there should be no edits, at all. At least, that is how I look at it.

THANK YOU! WE AGREE AGAIN! PRAISE BE TO SHINIGAMI!

[Ace]

Then add a time limit?

Time frame to edit post is only 1 hour after. Any after that is DQ.

Here's the thing, no one knows how many times an edit was made.
Once an edit is made, that time stamp clearly overrides the initial post time stamp.

Only practical solution, if people actually find it to be a problem, prohibit editing posts all together for the time being, or for any significant matches. These 5 min or 10 min edit limits do not solve the problem, because as this topic tries to address, it is the trust factor that is in question.

Time limits do not address the concern of the topic, the "problem" would still exist. That is *IF* members see it as a problem. I'm not advocating for limiting, disqualification, etc.

I am simply explaining why a time limit, screenshots, etc. would not work, or address the nature of the topic. =)

The next step after discussions would probably be for the Council to vote.
Now, seeing as how this was not addressed before hand or seen as a potential problem, it will be difficult to implement this now, as it would be unfair to battles that have already started or ended. But, anything is possible if all parties agree. ^_^