Incidentally, I would encourage all to use the quote facility, when they reply to specific points. It has the following highly desirable effects:

1) It means that the original text is there for all to see, thus discouraging the sort of manipulation we're concerned about.

... and when we're replying to a specific point, we're

2) More likely to have read it accurately if we quote it, and

3) Making it easier for others to follow the discussion.

[quote="John"]As regards Mods having the tools and the will to edit a link for you that's not a problem and there's no reason why it should be.[/quote]Witness this example, which I think you might have misunderstood, John. If I've understood him, Martin was referring to the will to sanction, not the will to edit links.

Agreed. I don't for a moment think you should have to be the sole policeman.

I'd suggest, though, that in any cases where someone felt misrepresented by someone else's nefarious editing, it would soon come to light because they, or someone else following the thread, would report it. You'd soon get an idea of who the miscreants were.


Cutting off the ability of the mischief makers to edit posts will only address post editing. It won't address the fact that if they do that, they'll probably do other things too.

And those other things will have the same sort of insidious effects on the pleasant culture here.

I need to often enough for it to be a nuisance not to be able to.

I do think this is solving the wrong problem.

Deal with the guilty, don't punish the innocent.

This issue is a real reflection of what's going on in society more generally, I think. More and more, bad people are getting away with things, and good people are having to put up with more and more erosion of their freedoms as a result. Notice that in real life, the erosion of freedoms does not, in fact, do much to solve the underlying problem.

I can't believe that the person or persons abusing the edit facility are many - why not just take action against them?

They fit perfectly well physically, and if you want to do your own exposure calculations and use the camera in manual mode they're fine.

But on the K10D give they rise to exposure errors at any aperture other than wide open for a given lens.

This is because the camera has no way of knowing what the aperture ring is set to, on a lens old enough to have one.

So to take a meter reading with the aperture set to anything except wide open, it has to stop the lens down, meter the light, and then set an appropriate shutter speed for whatever the aperture happens to be. For reasons no one ever seems to have got to the bottom of, it overexposes, and the smaller the aperture, the more it overexposes.

If you search the forum for "stop down metering" you'll find a number of threads discussing this.

There are no such issues with A-series lenses (set to A) or later, since the camera can set the lens' aperture itself, without relying on the aperture ring. Therefore all metering is done with the lens wide open.

Afterthought:

I am assuming that it's one or more of the newer members to blame.

I may be wrong, of course, but if it's one of the longer-standing folk, there's even less excuse for such manipulation, and all the more reason for forceful rebuke.

I very much agree with George here.

It is much, much better, to punish the guilty than the innocent.

I've been a member here for about a year and a half, and in all that time I've been impressed with its self-policing nature. Even when some of the discussions have become heated, and I'd concede that I've occasionally contributed to the warmth, there's been no genuine malice and nastiness. Misunderstandings, unnecessary offence-taking, the occasional high-horse climbing, do occur from time to time - as in life - but they aren't the norm.

My case for allowing unrestricted editing has been based on the lack of evidence for a need to impose restrictions, and hitherto I've seen no such evidence.

But maybe there is some, now.

It would be a great shame if, due to the influx of a large number of new members, the culture changed, but I do see that it might happen that restrictions become more necessary.

Before such change happens, if it is happening, I think it would be best to deal with the individual offenders before imposing widespread restrictions on the civilised majority.

Otherwise, we will have the situation where culture change is effectively forced on us by those that have joined most recently, and who have therefore contributed least to the community. I don't think that's right.

Freedom is hard-won, and all too easily lost.

Cruel!

Sorry to hear this. I might take a closer look at mine now

I want to see the Lilly treatment of a Tube of Smarties, please.

_______
Edit: with the special blue ones clearly distinguished

Erm, type in the box at the bottom, click the "Add Comment" button. Preferably having clicked "Preview Comment" first, so that you can see how the post will appear.

Well you have done