Grammar Nazi option

[bluefirecorp]

Would it be possible to allow people to submit transcribed versions of text. Many times, I have to re-read a post about a dozen times because it makes me go "what?". With this option, someone can go in, modify the post, and allow people to see both the original and modified copies of the text? This would clear up a lot of posts imho, and save the moderators quite a bit of work.

Edit: A new idea was suggested, and this post explains it the best in the shortest amount of space:

This seems like a good feature. I like the way StackExchange does it, with proposed edits. I would make it a proposed edit, when either enough people say 'OK', or the author accepts it, then it replaces the main post.

[Cryptopher]

Would it be possible to allow people to submit transcribed versions of text. Many times, I have to re-read a post about a dozen times because it makes me go "what?". With this option, someone can go in, modify the post, and allow people to see both the original and modified copies of the text? This would clear up a lot of posts imho, and save the moderators quite a bit of work.

While I understand that you have a point about some posts being difficult to read, I don't really think that this option would be so useful. If you can't understand what is being said, then what makes you think that someone else might?

Even if somebody else did provide a transcription, how are we to be sure that the transcribed version captures any of the intended meaning within the original?

Can you provide any examples of other forums using this feature? I've never seen it before.

One simple solution would be to ask the OP to clarify their post, ideally within the form of an edit. Otherwise somebody else could 'transcribe' it within a reply.

[bluefirecorp]

Honestly, I've never seen an option like this either. But also, you'd be able to help correct someone's grammar nearly anonymously.

The reason I created this thread is because of the thread I created here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=621971.0

The idea might be a bit more spelled out in that thread.

[dree12]

I think a better idea of this would be a "suggested edit" feature like on StackExchange-type websites. The author will receive a notification when an edit is suggested, can read over it, and then approve the suggestion. This is more powerful than the Grammar Nazi mode because the edits are permanent and used by default.

[bluefirecorp]

I think a better idea of this would be a "suggested edit" feature like on StackExchange-type websites. The author will receive a notification when an edit is suggested, can read over it, and then approve the suggestion. This is more powerful than the Grammar Nazi mode because the edits are permanent and used by default.

Actually, this sounds like an even more better idea. Pretty much my idea was a user vote to change the text, but that sounds a lot better!

[Cryptopher]

Honestly, I've never seen an option like this either. But also, you'd be able to help correct someone's grammar nearly anonymously.

The reason I created this thread is because of the thread I created here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=621971.0

The idea might be a bit more spelled out in that thread.

Is the scale of the problem really that large that it would require a forum modification to try and address it? I dunno. I think that we need to remember what we are and what the forum stands for.

This is a forum, on the WWW, accessible by people all over the world. We should be grateful that others, whose first language isn't English, try to learn English such that they can communicate on topics that interest them.

While there are regional boards, I think that the problem you outline is not a significant problem; it's annoying for native English speakers at worst. Just try to understand the topic, ask for clarity, and if you get none then simple walk away.

I think a better idea of this would be a "suggested edit" feature like on StackExchange-type websites. The author will receive a notification when an edit is suggested, can read over it, and then approve the suggestion. This is more powerful than the Grammar Nazi mode because the edits are permanent and used by default.

This isn't such a bad idea, but I think that it might be something to look at in the new forum software.

[Cyrus]

This is a sort of solution I proposed in the other thread a few days back.

How about a "grammar police" in the new forum software? With a preview button to see the before and after such an 'officer' intervened, with the changes being highlighted(this way we can know for sure the message wasn't manipulated in any way). The post would of course have a 'grammar flag' that will bring shame to the poster(maybe making some of them double check their post before hitting "Post").

I was being a bit harsh about the whole 'bring shame to the poster', but it might be a solution if the quality of english is declining.

[bluefirecorp]

This is a sort of solution I proposed in the other thread a few days back.

How about a "grammar police" in the new forum software? With a preview button to see the before and after such an 'officer' intervened, with the changes being highlighted(this way we can know for sure the message wasn't manipulated in any way). The post would of course have a 'grammar flag' that will bring shame to the poster(maybe making some of them double check their post before hitting "Post").

I was being a bit harsh about the whole 'bring shame to the poster', but it might be a solution if the quality of english is declining.

It was your post that actually made me want to start this thread. Thank you. Thanks to you, we have a great suggestion (taking the feature from stackexchange).

[HeroC]

This seems like a good feature. I like the way StackExchange does it, with proposed edits. I would make it a proposed edit, when either enough people say 'OK', or the author accepts it, then it replaces the main post.

[Cyrus]

It was your post that actually made me want to start this thread. Thank you. Thanks to you, we have a great suggestion (taking the feature from stackoverflow).

And thank you for contributing with ideas towards the new forum software!

Also, speaking of the StackExchange method, I think some sort of punishment should be in place to discourage those who propose wrong/malicious edits.

[bluefirecorp]

It was your post that actually made me want to start this thread. Thank you. Thanks to you, we have a great suggestion (taking the feature from stackoverflow).

And thank you for contributing with ideas towards the new forum software!

Also, speaking of the StackExchange method, I think some sort of punishment should be in place to discourage those who propose wrong/malicious edits.

I'd say treat any abuse of this sort of system the same as you'd treat PM abuse. Maybe add a "report this modification" button or something.

[hilariousandco]

Is this really a good idea? It seems to me like putting words in peoples' mouths. The vast majority of the time you yourself can work out what they're trying to say regardless of how much of a mess or jumbled up it is, but what about the times that you get it wrong or interpret the exact opposite of what they're trying to say? Does the op get the chance to approve the suggestion? Could somebody just edit my posts at their own leisure and up vote them with alt accounts?

If this was implemented I'd only be ok with it if the op had final approval of it, or at the very least a moderator.

[bluefirecorp]

Is this really a good idea? It seems to me like putting words in peoples' mouths. The vast majority of the time you yourself can work out what they're trying to say regardless of how much of a mess or jumbled up it is, but what about the times that you get it wrong or interpret the exact opposite of what they're trying to say? Does the op get the chance to approve the suggestion? Could somebody just edit my posts at their own leisure and up vote them with alt accounts?

If this was implemented I'd only be ok with it if the op had final approval of it, or at the very least a moderator.

Yes. The OP gets to approve or deny the modified post.

You see a post that has a dozen typos, it's a fairly simple question -- but just asked weirdly. You propose an edit to OP that'd make it more understandable. OP would approve or deny the modification.

I thought this quote explained that well enough:

This seems like a good feature. I like the way StackExchange does it, with proposed edits. I would make it a proposed edit, when either enough people say 'OK', or the author accepts it, then it replaces the main post.

[hilariousandco]

Yeah, but it's the "when either enough people say 'OK'" that worries me. How many is enough? I still don't think it's a big issue really. I can see a lot of people getting offended by it.

[bluefirecorp]

Yeah, but it's the "when either enough people say 'OK'" that worries me. How many is enough? I still don't think it's a big issue really. I can see a lot of people getting offended by it.

It's not a voted option. OP either approves the edit or OP denies the edit. If it's common enough, OP won't really get offended by it in the least.

[ranlo]

Would it be possible to allow people to submit transcribed versions of text. Many times, I have to re-read a post about a dozen times because it makes me go "what?". With this option, someone can go in, modify the post, and allow people to see both the original and modified copies of the text? This would clear up a lot of posts imho, and save the moderators quite a bit of work.

Edit: A new idea was suggested, and this post explains it the best in the shortest amount of space:

This seems like a good feature. I like the way StackExchange does it, with proposed edits. I would make it a proposed edit, when either enough people say 'OK', or the author accepts it, then it replaces the main post.

I am 100% behind this idea. I've run into the same thing on multiple occasions (so much so that I don't even bother trying to read it again). I'm not sure how something like this would be implemented in the forums though.

[Baitty]

I don't think this would be a good option. In the uk you can say something which is correct but over in the us it is considered incorrect. this would be very hard to do.

[Cryptopher]

Sigh, this is still being debated? It is an unnecessary complication, and certainly there are many other suggestions that would trump this any day.

For now if you are unsure what the OP means, or any post for that matter, just ask for clarification from them, or another member of the forum.

[b!z]

I think that this is actually a good idea. It could also be useful for collaborative threads or stickies. For example, forum users could help update an outdated list of websites.

[Cryptopher]

I think that this is actually a good idea. It could also be useful for collaborative threads or stickies. For example, forum users could help update an outdated list of websites.

That would be a different, albeit quite similar suggestion. Collaborative threads would be an option specified at creation time, though perhaps the OP could enable/disable it at any time after.