whether articles that contain polls are allowed to be edited after they are published (probably not, right?)
Edited article is a different problem on its own, IMO. Whether or not they contain polls, allowing users to edit articles is tricky. I saw your example with kittens poll down below, but IMO that could be applied to any articles, say, well-received article with dozens of likes about users' pets then the author edited the article's title and description to, "List of animals that poop too much". I'm not saying anyone did/would do this, but it is possible.
If I may, dev.to shouldn't disallow users to edit articles with polls as much as dev.to always allowing users to edit articles on any circumstances. That would make it consistent. What could be improved, though, is telling users that an article has been edited.
Discourse has the entire history of the post changes recorded for the readers to compare versions, which IMO what is lacking in most of the content creating platform. Probably it's there because us devs (at least me) love this style of version comparison. (example, click the pencil icon next to the date Nov '18). And I think we all know other platforms that did this as well: Wikipedia, Google Docs, to name a few.
Sorry for going on a tangent like this, it's always something that bugs me too much, even giants like Medium isn't doing it well IMO. I'm not sure if it's already in the roadmap or if it's going to be implemented, just my two cents. I can also foresee that some people would see this as a nice-to-have, which I'm fine with that.
As for the polls, yes, it looks great. But it's true what others mentioned that polls could 'kill' the conversation, because typically polls can simply stand on its own. People might be discussing more on the results rather than the poll itself. But, as an add-on to what is already a great content creating platform, why not?
This is all really valuable feedback. We've had the idea of displaying past changes to a post as something we'd want to add in general. This could let us implement that feature with polls in mind as a use-case.
Definitely will add a feature to prompt conversation post-vote. I think this can be dealt with through design choices and we'll see if we can split test to make sure we're having a good impact here.
You can do what Stackoverflow does: They have a grace period of 5 minutes where you can edit your post and it will not show in revision history (which is great for fixing typos and stuff like that), but any edit after that period is visible to anyone that clicks the "edited" link.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Edited article is a different problem on its own, IMO. Whether or not they contain polls, allowing users to edit articles is tricky. I saw your example with kittens poll down below, but IMO that could be applied to any articles, say, well-received article with dozens of likes about users' pets then the author edited the article's title and description to, "List of animals that poop too much". I'm not saying anyone did/would do this, but it is possible.
If I may, dev.to shouldn't disallow users to edit articles with polls as much as dev.to always allowing users to edit articles on any circumstances. That would make it consistent. What could be improved, though, is telling users that an article has been edited.
Discourse has the entire history of the post changes recorded for the readers to compare versions, which IMO what is lacking in most of the content creating platform. Probably it's there because us devs (at least me) love this style of version comparison. (example, click the pencil icon next to the date Nov '18). And I think we all know other platforms that did this as well: Wikipedia, Google Docs, to name a few.
Sorry for going on a tangent like this, it's always something that bugs me too much, even giants like Medium isn't doing it well IMO. I'm not sure if it's already in the roadmap or if it's going to be implemented, just my two cents. I can also foresee that some people would see this as a nice-to-have, which I'm fine with that.
As for the polls, yes, it looks great. But it's true what others mentioned that polls could 'kill' the conversation, because typically polls can simply stand on its own. People might be discussing more on the results rather than the poll itself. But, as an add-on to what is already a great content creating platform, why not?
This is all really valuable feedback. We've had the idea of displaying past changes to a post as something we'd want to add in general. This could let us implement that feature with polls in mind as a use-case.
Definitely will add a feature to prompt conversation post-vote. I think this can be dealt with through design choices and we'll see if we can split test to make sure we're having a good impact here.
You can do what Stackoverflow does: They have a grace period of 5 minutes where you can edit your post and it will not show in revision history (which is great for fixing typos and stuff like that), but any edit after that period is visible to anyone that clicks the "edited" link.