5 ms·

It's unbelievable to me that Github allows repo admins to edit other people's comments.

by jonathrg 10mo ago

NeckBeardPrince 10mo ago
What would be a valid reason to allow this? That just seems mind-numbingly stupid.
- projektfu 10mo ago
  Censoring insults or illegal speech (depending on jurisdiction) would be the main reason I can think of.
  - merlindru 10mo ago
    That also means that some users will be pressured to censor illegal speech no? If you live under e.g. a regime that disallows or discourages criticism, now suddenly the onus is on you to do something about those comments because you have the ability to. If you couldn't edit the comments it's not your fault. Either way I think it's a pretty stupid feature the way it's implemented; it should show the edit more clearly or indicate that the comment has been written by multiple people (like StackOverflow does), especially if edits change more than e.g. 10% of the original comment.
    - projektfu 10mo ago
      It's not my feature, no reason to be angry.
  - matkoniecz 10mo ago
    in such case ability to delete comment would be enough
- halapro 10mo ago
  This is particularly useful when editing the top-level comment of a popular issue to specify the current status. Or when a peer opened a placeholder issue and you fill it up. Etc. If you actually use GitHub as a social network of sorts, there are many reasons to do edit comments. All the edits are visible anyway. You're on Git-Hub, you can already edit everything you have write access to.
  - tomalbrc 10mo ago
    In which world would you want others to be able to edit your posts in a “SOCIAL NETWORK”? In today’s age of misinformation? Greeeeeeeat idea.
    - jabbywocker 10mo ago
      For GitHub specifically? This world. This is a useful feature
- gucci-on-fleek 10mo ago
  Markdown is pretty tricky for new users to figure out, so quite often, users will just paste big snippets of code without formatting them, which is nearly unreadable. I'll usually edit these posts to add ```backticks``` around any code.
  - arccy 10mo ago
    or they'll do what i assume is the jira style code blocks with just `multiple lines of code`
- munificent 10mo ago
  I maintain the formatter for Dart, so a lot of my job involves maintaining the issue tracker for the formatter. I use this feature all the time. Users get Markdown wrong, give titles to issues that don't make any sense, have typos, etc. Being able to edit issues helps me keep the issue tracker easier to understand and navigate for maintainers and users. Every feature can be used. That doesn't mean every feature should not exist. The fact that the edit history is still visible means it's next to impossible to abuse the feature. It works fine.
the8472 10mo ago
That's a useful feature for long-running issues to include updates in the opening post. Or to improve formatting when a bug reporter isn't familiar with markdown. And that it shows in the edit history should at least discourage abuse.
- dannyfritz07 10mo ago
  Allowing the maintainer to prepend a comment to the top seems more sensible to me to be honest. Would make API use harder potentially, but it would avoid weird abuse like this.
  - the8472 10mo ago
    github is meant for collaboration, designing it around adversarial use would be a loss for everyone. Adding a function to report absusive edits rather than an entire post would be a better choice imo.
    - testaccount28 10mo ago
      reporting abusive edits requires moderation/arbitration. the rules can instead be changed to sidestep the issue, while maintaining the value of the feature.
    - pirates 10mo ago
      Report to whom? Github, who allows the behavior and therefore doesn’t see anything wrong with it, or the repo admins who have proven they they couldn’t give a rat’s ass about the very thing you’re reporting? The well is already poisoned, there is no reason to think that they’d suddenly change their stance and cooperate.
      - freehorse 10mo ago
        In this case at least, github (most probably) banned this account, presumably after reports. There are also other stories for github banning accounts for pr trolling kind of behaviours. So not sure if everything is perfect, but at least there are cases such things work.

It's unbelievable to me that Github allows repo admins to edit other people's comments.

NeckBeardPrince 10mo ago

What would be a valid reason to allow this? That just seems mind-numbingly stupid.

projektfu 10mo ago
Censoring insults or illegal speech (depending on jurisdiction) would be the main reason I can think of.
- merlindru 10mo ago
  That also means that some users will be pressured to censor illegal speech no? If you live under e.g. a regime that disallows or discourages criticism, now suddenly the onus is on you to do something about those comments because you have the ability to. If you couldn't edit the comments it's not your fault. Either way I think it's a pretty stupid feature the way it's implemented; it should show the edit more clearly or indicate that the comment has been written by multiple people (like StackOverflow does), especially if edits change more than e.g. 10% of the original comment.
  - projektfu 10mo ago
    It's not my feature, no reason to be angry.
- matkoniecz 10mo ago
  in such case ability to delete comment would be enough
halapro 10mo ago
This is particularly useful when editing the top-level comment of a popular issue to specify the current status. Or when a peer opened a placeholder issue and you fill it up. Etc. If you actually use GitHub as a social network of sorts, there are many reasons to do edit comments. All the edits are visible anyway. You're on Git-Hub, you can already edit everything you have write access to.
- tomalbrc 10mo ago
  In which world would you want others to be able to edit your posts in a “SOCIAL NETWORK”? In today’s age of misinformation? Greeeeeeeat idea.
  - jabbywocker 10mo ago
    For GitHub specifically? This world. This is a useful feature
gucci-on-fleek 10mo ago
Markdown is pretty tricky for new users to figure out, so quite often, users will just paste big snippets of code without formatting them, which is nearly unreadable. I'll usually edit these posts to add ```backticks``` around any code.
- arccy 10mo ago
  or they'll do what i assume is the jira style code blocks with just `multiple lines of code`
munificent 10mo ago
I maintain the formatter for Dart, so a lot of my job involves maintaining the issue tracker for the formatter. I use this feature all the time. Users get Markdown wrong, give titles to issues that don't make any sense, have typos, etc. Being able to edit issues helps me keep the issue tracker easier to understand and navigate for maintainers and users. Every feature can be used. That doesn't mean every feature should not exist. The fact that the edit history is still visible means it's next to impossible to abuse the feature. It works fine.

the8472 10mo ago

That's a useful feature for long-running issues to include updates in the opening post. Or to improve formatting when a bug reporter isn't familiar with markdown. And that it shows in the edit history should at least discourage abuse.

dannyfritz07 10mo ago
Allowing the maintainer to prepend a comment to the top seems more sensible to me to be honest. Would make API use harder potentially, but it would avoid weird abuse like this.
- the8472 10mo ago
  github is meant for collaboration, designing it around adversarial use would be a loss for everyone. Adding a function to report absusive edits rather than an entire post would be a better choice imo.
  - testaccount28 10mo ago
    reporting abusive edits requires moderation/arbitration. the rules can instead be changed to sidestep the issue, while maintaining the value of the feature.
  - pirates 10mo ago
    Report to whom? Github, who allows the behavior and therefore doesn’t see anything wrong with it, or the repo admins who have proven they they couldn’t give a rat’s ass about the very thing you’re reporting? The well is already poisoned, there is no reason to think that they’d suddenly change their stance and cooperate.
    - freehorse 10mo ago
      In this case at least, github (most probably) banned this account, presumably after reports. There are also other stories for github banning accounts for pr trolling kind of behaviours. So not sure if everything is perfect, but at least there are cases such things work.