Only 1 person can edit a wiki at a time?

Community
21

There are still legitimate cases where I’d like to see the possibility to overwrite.

Remember that it is editable by everyone TL1+ so that means we need to trust users to be decent enough not to intentionally remove others from the list.

I’m afraid that this is completely outside the scope of the forum software. For example, Google Docs offers collaborative real-time editing. That’s an insanely big project…

5 Likes
22

Thanks @LemonadeJoe. Thanks for the direction!

2 Likes
23

If 1 thru 100 numbers are shown and only creator can edit list of numbers, as each participant bids and outbids via notification of prior bidders post number, would this not solve problem?

i.e.

Astrodude $9/ post 154 outbidding post 100

2 Likes
24

With nothing but respect Joe…

The wiki could always be edited again with successfully “save edit”
If conflict occurs simply continue with
“discard/delete” and retry when “save edit” is prompted. I realize theres a lot to consider which I dont have in mind. It just seems like an easy fix for the right person. I wont questio. It again as you are totally aware of the concern.

Thanks for responding Joe.

Grow4th!!!

25

How easy it is to edit the forum software depends a lot on the kind of access to the code @LemonadeJoe has. If this is a complete package that simply contains DLLs for the executable file to refer to, without the source code itself, that’s a much bigger project than you think you’re suggesting. Decompiling assembly code and attempting to hex edit DLLs to implement substantive changes without breaking the rest of the program is a nightmare when it’s possible at all… or sometimes, as the case may be, a Nightmare Redux. :wink:

5 Likes
27

Thanks Joe, much appreciated.

1 Like
28

Good morning everyone!! Hi @LemonadeJoe, as @DougDawson has clearly mentioned, the best option would be having good manners such as,“If you see overwrite, cancel and make sure you did cancel and restart the process!”. The problem is, there will always be a mixture of members who know what to do and respect the rules, as well as inexperienced ones, and worse but true, some others intentionally malicious or careless. Wonder whether there could be a combination of both worlds, good manners first and when that does not work, a warning is shown, if a member does overwrite a second time (admitting mistakes and or ill intentions!), then such member would be out of that specific giveaway… Hope it helps!

2 Likes
29

There’s already a very simple way to implement that; every edit is tracked, and whoever’s running the giveaway can simply start removing people from the list if they overwrite. That’ll definitely get people to start reading and stop spamming edits.

3 Likes
30

This is just one (Also the main one) of the reasons I don’t do ‘wiki’ . I just enter the folks names as they post,… granted it can be more work, but it seems a lot cleaner, easier way with no hard feelings then. Just my 2cents

Just to clarify lol I don’t consider myself to be a ‘control freak’ but rather an ‘anti-drama freak’ I dislike discord! lol :wink: :+1: :pray:

4 Likes
31

People should just smoke a joint and not take it so seriously… oh no u missed out on this one? Here choose from 10 others.

Then we wouldn’t have repeat topics of ppl upset that they missed out on seeds.

7 Likes
32

The problem is not only him but everyone can edit that list and overwrite again, so that removal can only be done when the wiki is closed and the free spots left would not be covered. The way to do it is what @JohnnyPotseed mentioned, more work for the OP but problem gone … beer3|nullxnull

2 Likes
33

Yeah, just limit time so your not working too hard.

2 Likes
34

I didn’t mean to break the wiki thing with those battles lol, I was looking for some fun. Kinda like seedbay where folks had to fight it out for the seeds they wanted lol.
Which leads me to if we opened a tab,a thread, whatever it’s gotta be called lol, allowed for users to enter a item, that item could then be allocated to those that select it, and then once all items are allocated, the original items page is locked and the poster notified that all items have been allocated. And a message with all users who selected the item be sent to the poster. I believe we could greatly reduce headaches on over writes.
Plus it would be a nice thing to see because it doesn’t just have to be seeds. Could be whatever. The. The two parties can do whatever from that point on. Allowing threads to be left to information and conversation, and the seed runs then are a bit less what you would see in a private message. Idk just my thoughts.

1 Like
35

At that point the problem is gone because the wiki is gone. :stuck_out_tongue: I’m pointing out that if the person running the giveaway wants to do a wiki and really doesn’t want battles to be a part of it, there are steps they can take to still run wikis and dissuade bad behavior. It’s still not perfect, but there doesn’t seem to be a perfect method. Either way, though, the solution to this problem is people changing their behavior imo, not a software one. If we don’t allow overwrites and don’t take into account the person running the giveaway having final say, what’s to stop someone from just entering their name into every space on the wiki? Nothing - because there’s no perfect system that people can’t break if they really try.

2 Likes
36

@Cormoran …cuz! lol It’s obvious that you’re an intelligent fella, no denying that point. You are also known to do a lot of research and thinking on marijuana related topics. I would venture a guess you’re that way on a LOT of topics! lol
But human nature is just too unpredictable… I think it’s called the ‘X’ factor or something like. Anyway, my point here is… people are going tp be people lol they won’t ‘change their spots’ just because it’d ‘help’ anything to be better.
I agree with you also, in that there isn’t any real perfect solution. All you can do is try to come as close to it as you can, and hope for the best results. That’s just my humble opinion.
Nuttin but luv, cuz…

2 Likes