I think editing a note is the equivalent of a photograph with filters. It simply does not represent what we are in the non-virtual world. If I understand the objective of all this correctly, do we not seek to be as authentic as possible? If we offend or make a mistake in the non-virtual world, we must take responsibility through dialogue, an apology, a footnote, etc. What is not representative is the permanence of our mistakes because if this is like speaking outside of the protocol, the mistakes are forgotten (not how we make others feel, of course). Perhaps the core of the discussion is that: the possibility that an error disappears over time. Ultimately, I believe, no one remains static in their thinking. We evolve, we grow, even our last breath. So expiring notes? 😉
I don't think correcting typos and technical errors takes away from authenticity.
Of course not, but when you open the edit door you can't filter the kind of edit.
You can if there's a time limit and a one-time edit restriction. If users had a 90sec window after posting a note to make corrections, I think the focus of those edits would inherently be on technical errors (punctuation, spelling errors, missing words), and not on the substantive content of the note.
Oddbean new post about login | logout