After I published an article based on a hoax yesterday, I ran across this poll on the ethics of editing a previously published article to reflect new information, without acknowledging the changes made.

You can vote in the poll, or just look at the results to see how your fellow internet writers voted. You can also look at their comments.

Judging by the comments, other writers are tougher on the issue than I am. I wouldn’t outright ban somebody the first time they they made an unacknowledged mistake. Mainly because I’d see it as a case of: they made two mistakes, and genuine mistakes are inevitable with human beings. The second time…I’m not so sure, it would depend on whether it looked deliberate. But I’d be inclined to ban.

Standards of ethics aren’t always very high in blogs, and that’s to be expected because bloggers don’t have editors, and few are hoping for a Pulitzer prize. If we make mistakes in our blogs, nobody’s reputation is on the line except ours, and we don’t all view our reputations the same way.

My personal opinion is that if *I* goober something, (And I do!) I want my error to live on in its full glory. I don’t respect people who “rewrite history,” and I have no intention of being someone I don’t respect. Obviously, my gigantic ego is bruised by my public mistakes, but that’s the risk I run for shooting my mouth off in public.

Enjoy the poll and the comments. And, please, enjoy your humanity, after all, it’s what makes us capable of compassion for the other goobers’ mistakes…try applying it to yourself too.

Is Revising an Article’s Contents, Then Pretending the Change was in the Original Ethical?