Should we remove the edit post feature?

[MarkG]

I have discussed thoroughly with Dan on the issue for days now.

We were not sure what stance to take on the issue. On one hand was the significant results of the poll. On the other the fun value of not allowing people to correct their mistakes for eternity.

We then created a secret committee of experts Apolytoners and asked them questions: a priest ("should we allow people a second chance? what do the Olympic Gods have to say about this?"), a psychologist ("how often do Apolytoners mess up and post silly and why?"), a computer technician ("what would be the server load value of removing the feature"), a marketer ("should we go against the will of the people? perhaps make it a PLUS feature?") and ottok ("remove ok feature?")

The committee consulted and gave a single answer: "NO"

They gave no further explanation, so....

[PLATO]

Originally posted by panag
and the one who voted fruit , .....

[Panag]

hi ,

been asked , been answered , and why on earth would we change something as good as that , ....


shoot those three who voted yes

and the one who voted fruit , .....


have a nice day

[Arnelos]

Originally posted by Mr. President
Be careful when generalizing. I remember in the first ACDG when Archaic ran uncontested for some post or other. He lost to "Banana".

Wow, and here I thought the only election where anyone ever lost to the banana was panag in the Civ3 Democracy Game (I believe he lost to the banana more than once, actually).

[Mr. President]

Originally posted by Arnelos


If you leave out one-person elections in the democracy games, you're probably right... that said, I doubt that even any of the very lopsided one-person elections got a FIFTY-ONE to three vote.... and I'd have to dig through far too many threads to find out for sure.

Be careful when generalizing. I remember in the first ACDG when Archaic ran uncontested for some post or other. He lost to "Banana".

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Frozzy
It's always in a question form (e.g. What is the fruit of Apolyton), and anyone who says "Banana" has conceded "100-0" to whoever asked the question.

And that's about as childish as saying "Umm, not 'llowed to same umm!". Cue next child to repeat phrase. Repeat ad nauseum or until teacher enters room.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by DrSpike


That's pretty close to an own goal since I was supporting you.

Its closer to being a joke.

[Skanky Burns]

Originally posted by Dauphin
And I think Spike was accusing me of not being on the ball.

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by Dauphin

And I think Spike was accusing me of not being on the ball.

That's pretty close to an own goal since I was supporting you.

[Frozzy]

It's always in a question form (e.g. What is the fruit of Apolyton), and anyone who says "Banana" has conceded "100-0" to whoever asked the question.

However, you can set off the "trap" by simply stating "Own Goal".

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Dissident
shameful admission. I never really understood this own goal thing.

I just pretend to understand it.

Hopefully not being too basic here. Its derived from a football/soccer expression which means to score a goal for the wrong team. In the boards adaptation it means to say something that self-implicates, contradicts your position or otherwise makes you look an idiot.

[Frozzy]

Originally posted by Skanky Burns
* Skanky Burns hits Frozzy with a technicality

[Dis]

shameful admission. I never really understood this own goal thing.

I just pretend to understand it.

[Skanky Burns]

/me hits Frozzy with a technicality

[Frozzy]

Originally posted by Skanky Burns


No, just because he failed to notice an own goal doesn't mean that one did not occur. Surely he noticed my original post that he quoted was facetious enough not to be serious. I can understand non-native English speakers taking the post at face-value, but you and BC? I have to say, I am disappointed.

It's not an own goal because it wasn't a question...