# Issues when using slow mode on a topic forever **URL:** \ **Category:** Feature\ **Tags:** slow-mode\ **Created:** [April 10, 2021, 6:13am UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/issues-when-using-slow-mode-on-a-topic-forever/186607 "2021-04-10T06:13:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 22
**Author:** ![dfabulich](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/meta/user_avatar/meta.discourse.org/dfabulich/32/108716_2.png) [@dfabulich](https://meta.discourse.org/u/dfabulich)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2021, 1:14am UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/issues-when-using-slow-mode-on-a-topic-forever/186607/22 "2021-04-13T01:14:32Z")
Let me begin by making a general remark about the “editing grace period” when slow mode is off, i.e. in the normal case. The editing grace period is a really weird feature, because its normal/official purpose is to prevent the creation of a history entry for “fast” edits. I honestly don’t even know why that would be wanted… don’t we basically _always_ want history entries for edits?? Like, even if somebody just fixes a typo ten seconds later, I don’t understand why we wouldn’t want a history entry for that, or at least a little “edited” indicator. (Even in _chat_ clients that support editing, they normally say “(edited)” on all edits, no matter how fast.) I think it’s especially confusing to have an editing grace period that’s long enough for someone to reply with a correction, and for someone to edit their post in response to the reply. This invalidates the correction, with no evidence of the original comment. Anyway, in the Covid thread, the edits that folks wanted to make were not “oops, typo” edits, but substantial “oops, I got that wrong” edits, which typically arrived in response to corrections or requests for clarification, e.g. - “I see now that this is fake; sorry for posting it. Unfortunately, I can’t now edit my post to remove the link.” - “What I meant by that is \_\_\_\_\_. I wish I could edit my earlier post to clarify.” - “I no longer think this is right; see my post #77 from below. I’ve pinged the moderators to update my earlier post, because I can’t do it myself.” I guess we could crank the editing grace period up to something astronomical, like hours or days, but (since the grace period is a site-level setting) that would completely eliminate _all_ edit history entries on the entire forum. So, I claim, we really don’t want to do that! > [@codinghorror](#): > > > [@dfabulich](#): > > > > I wonder whether the risk of edit abuse is entirely overblown > > It definitely isn’t. People _will_ use it as a live chat system if that’s what it takes. We already have this problem for topics about ongoing sports events, etc. To be clear, when I said “overblown” I don’t mean “less likely than you think,” but rather “less serious than you think.” If/when folks started abusing the “edit loophole” to turn the Covid thread into a chat room, we’d temporarily suspend the people who did so. A firm hand of moderation can easily solve social problems that can only be clumsily solved with technology, IMO. > [@riking](#): > > The feature decision didn’t make much sense to me either, so I understand your confusion here 🤷‍♀️ Which feature decision are you referring to here? Whose confusion? --- _[View the full topic](https://meta.discourse.org/t/issues-when-using-slow-mode-on-a-topic-forever/186607)._