There was some debate as to whether any user should be able to edit the post of any other user (imagine it happening to you). That posts can be edited stealthily (e.g. not filling out the 'Reason for editing' option) sways opinions in a more negative direction.Zhym wrote:Edit: I just tested it on a player's post in my game, and it didn't mark it as edited. I could have supplied a "Reason for editing this post," however.
I think the behind-the-scenes discussions, as Ethan mentioned this morning, centered on the reason why this permission is needed.
For simplicity, sure, but I don't think an example was provided where a game or GM process would "break" without this ability. If a player's post needed to be edited, and the GM was unable to do so themselves, it can still be accomplished by requesting that the player make the edit themselves.
Less efficient, sure. Game-breaking, not really.
Here are two examples provided/discussed surrounding the two permissions in question:
Edit Post
- Player Bob makes a post.
- The DM stealth edits Bob's post... without Bob realizing it.
- The current view of the post, that looks like it came from Bob, is not what Bob actually posted.
- Player Bob and DM get into a disagreement;
- The DM composes a "bad" post, with threats or somesuch;
- The DM changes the author of this offensive post to appear as if it came from Player Bob;
- The DM takes a screenshot of the offensive post (that looks like it came from Player Bob, even though Bob has no idea it even exists);
- The DM deletes offensive post and reports the "incident" to us using the screenshot (to a now non-existant post) as evidence.
