Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I thought the clock on the 1 hour editing grace period applied from the time one posted. However, in a recent relatively longish post where I meandered to other things mid-construction (I have other interests lawstudents!) I was unable to edit the moment after I hit publish. I noted a few errors immediately, per usual, and wanted to correct them but to no avail. Time had expired!

Anyways, just a heads up to look at the editing delay. Perhaps it is set to begin the moment someone composes a post, which normally would not be materially different from the time after one posts. But in some cases it could make such a difference.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is why I type all of my comments in MS Word, send it to my editor, then revise again myself before posting.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I know, the clock should run from the time of posting, not the time you start composing the message. Perhaps @Morgan has some insight?

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, AllanRC said:

I thought the clock on the 1 hour editing grace period applied from the time one posted. However, in a recent relatively longish post where I meandered to other things mid-construction (I have other interests lawstudents!) I was unable to edit the moment after I hit publish. I noted a few errors immediately, per usual, and wanted to correct them but to no avail. Time had expired!

Anyways, just a heads up to look at the editing delay. Perhaps it is set to begin the moment someone composes a post, which normally would not be materially different from the time after one posts. But in some cases it could make such a difference.

Apologies that happened! I’ve tried to reproduce and can’t - the way the edit code actually works is also based on the post time stamp (and not any sort of time tied to when the draft is started). You may have found a bug! Let me know if it happens again and which subforum you are posting a comment in. Was it a new topic or a reply?

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, AllanRC said:

I thought the clock on the 1 hour editing grace period applied from the time one posted. However, in a recent relatively longish post where I meandered to other things mid-construction (I have other interests lawstudents!) I was unable to edit the moment after I hit publish. I noted a few errors immediately, per usual, and wanted to correct them but to no avail. Time had expired!

Anyways, just a heads up to look at the editing delay. Perhaps it is set to begin the moment someone composes a post, which normally would not be materially different from the time after one posts. But in some cases it could make such a difference.

Also if you haven’t gotten this offer already. If you send me a link to your post with the revised text, I’ll edit it for you (assuming no substantive changes). We will slip rule this one. 😂 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, almostnot said:

Also if you haven’t gotten this offer already. If you send me a link to your post with the revised text, I’ll edit it for you (assuming no substantive changes). We will slip rule this one. 😂 

Lets be honest. My reputation is already pretty sullied, so a few more grammatical eorrors, and repetitive words, won't do it any harm! 

But do appreciate the offer 

3 hours ago, Morgan said:

Apologies that happened! I’ve tried to reproduce and can’t - the way the edit code actually works is also based on the post time stamp (and not any sort of time tied to when the draft is started). You may have found a bug! Let me know if it happens again and which subforum you are posting a comment in. Was it a new topic or a reply?

 

Happened in a reply  under the Articling Students and Lawyers sub-forum. It was interesting because the EDIT button exited, was clickable, and took me inside the post to edit (EDIT button usually seems to disappear if a post is beyond time). However, after changes were made and I clicked save, it informed me time had expired (EDIT - To clarify the editing process was relatively quick so that was not what bounced it out of time). 

BTW intended or not I am taking your comment to mean I have carte blanch in post length (for testing purposes...) so now when I get carried away & people call it out, I can point them to here and say "Morgan said I could do it!"

Edited by AllanRC
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/14/2021 at 3:11 PM, AllanRC said:

Happened in a reply  under the Articling Students and Lawyers sub-forum. It was interesting because the EDIT button exited, was clickable, and took me inside the post to edit (EDIT button usually seems to disappear if a post is beyond time). However, after changes were made and I clicked save, it informed me time had expired (EDIT - To clarify the editing process was relatively quick so that was not what bounced it out of time). 

Actually, this might be a bug. I had a similar experience while editing my most recent post (also a reply). The edit button was there and clickable, but after I had made some changes, the 'save' button didn't seem to be working. This happened twice, I think. In each case I dealt with it by exiting the editor and then trying again, only to find It working fine on the second attempt. However, I didn't get (or didn't see) the 'time expired' stamp, and I was able to perform the edit on the second attempt each time. So maybe this wasn't the same problem — but it does sound similar. 

Edited by GreyDude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Recent Posts

    • A few things, my man: -I don't think @JusticeLordDenning was making the sort of value judgement you read in to that. Asking how students fare outside the formal recruit is not saying that the formal recruit jobs are necessarily the best jobs out there. -Both the DOJ and provincial Crown prosecution service participate in the formal recruit, so that's a poor example to illustrate your point. "Jobs in the recruit" isn't synonymous with "BigLaw." -I highly doubt that there is a huge difference in the level of interest in the formal recruit between Canadian law schools in general, and especially between Queens and Western as a specific example. And just to be clear, I'd be the last person to boost BigLaw or claim that working at a smaller firm outside the GTA is somehow inferior.
    • Some of this is might be based on what I consider to be a false assumption:  That law students who secure jobs at big firms in an urban area have succeeded while those who do not have failed. For example, a Queens student may have the career goal of securing a foot in the door with the Crown in a rural area and a Western student may want to get into business law with a small firm in a medium sized city.
    • Having those two years working with members of Parliament is an added bonus, the significance of which is proportional to the nature of your role. You should get one or two acceptances from those law schools provided you keep your grades up. You seem like the type of person who will make the right decision about this. Good luck!
    • Probablement parce qu'ils n'ont pas reçu assez d'applications? J'espère quand même qu'ont va commencer à recevoir des réponses en mars...
    • On this site I regularly see people with LSAT scores 20-30 points lower than mine making ridiculous assertions about the amount of work that is supposedly required to get a top score. By contrast my personal experience was that the prep required to get a 99th percentile LSAT score consisted of learning basic logic game diagramming and writing a handful of practice tests. I see people with scores in the 150s knowing all the names of the different types of logical reasoning questions and discussing the logic behind them in terms I never learned and don't understand. All I know is if you put the test in front of me I intuitively understand what almost all of the answers are, but I couldn't do a good job of articulating why--the answers simply seem self-evident and to be taken for granted. Just chiming in because your statement squares with my experience (although I didn't reach 177). But by and large people with mediocre scores invariably claim that the LSAT is all about effort and just don't want to believe that innate aptitude has anything to do with it, because they tend to view it as an attack on their intelligence in general. (Just so I don't seem like a totally arrogant douche, everyone: for what it's worth I've put in serious effort trying to learn instruments and second languages and my innate aptitude in both of those areas is abysmal--I found such endeavors nearly impossible. Also the innate LSAT aptitude did not translate into innate law school aptitude, and I certainly would have preferred the latter. But yeah, the fact that I suck at other things but can effortlessly get an LSAT score in the 170s just emphasizes how much of it is innate. And the degree to which there are different kinds of intelligences that people have varying aptitudes for. The LSAT is irrelevant to me now in practical terms but I do find the subject interesting from a psychological perspective.)

×
×
  • Create New...