Gabz
Gabz

Micro and macro blogsters alike! Heed me! I have a question! If you make a blog post and several minutes later, you update such post. Do you just update and let it be or do you delete the original post, add whatever needs to be added and repost with the an update note of sorts.?

|
Embed
poetalegre
poetalegre

@Gabz I vote for update and consider it all poetry in motion.

|
Embed
bennorris
bennorris

@Gabz With m.b, I just edit and let it live. If it cross-posted to Twitter, and I decide it’s worth it, I’ll delete the tweet and write a corrected one. I like that with m.b, if you update fairly quickly, it even reflects in the timeline.

|
Embed
Burk
Burk

@Gabz edit original post and annotate changes.

|
Embed
ChrisJWilson
ChrisJWilson

@Gabz depends on how much is changed. Simple spelling or grammar mistakes I'd update and not make a deal of it. If it's missing information I'd either write an additional note or append with additional information.

|
Embed
thedimpause
thedimpause

@Gabz Ideally edit post, update and let it be. But on some platforms that is obviously not possible - Twitter, Mastodon - so I will delete and repost. In either case I will only note the edit if I think it’s relevant - don’t point out mistypes, corrected spelling mistakes, link addresses and the like.

|
Embed
gordonmclean
gordonmclean

@Gabz depends on the update and the post. If major changes I might delete the original as reposting would trigger it to be republished to twitter, email, etc. Most often though Id update.

|
Embed
blair
blair

@Gabz edit, annotate if important, if the auto-tweet needs to change I’ll do that manually.

I’m incapable of posting something without typos, so this is pretty common

|
Embed
SimonWoods
SimonWoods

@Gabz Never re-post. Ever. The people who care about your update will read it, whether they're double checking a post or if you make a new short post with notice of the update. Re-posting doesn't have an effect on catching the attention of new people or whatever whilst those of us who care have to deal with the janky effects of a re-post (RSS, email subs, etc).

|
Embed
smokey
smokey

@Gabz For “inconsequential” things (typos, grammar, occasional word choice—I remembered the word I wanted to use but couldn’t think of when typing the post 😂), just edit/update.

If it’s a substantive change (and within the first 24 hours or so), I’ll edit and annotate with some sort of “updated” tag. After the first ±24 hours, it depends: I might post a follow-up post with the added info, or update and annotate the original post plus post a “Hey, I updated that post” post.

I can’t think of any circumstances in which I’d delete and re-post a blog post.

|
Embed