Mine is OOO for Out Of Office. I always misread it in my head like a ghost and it takes me a few seconds to process. It also doesn’t translate to speech—you have to say the whole thing.
Interested to see if others have similar acronyms they beef with.
But if you put edit: followed by text then yeah it does imply you added it.
Supplying additional context can change how people interpret something, but “edit” on its own can mean that you have:
Any of which is adding to the comment. Whether by adding a removal or adding lol.
Edit is synonymous with changed. It isn’t synonymous with… I dunno, remove or add.
That’s what I’m saying: it is a change, but “edit to add” is not inherently redundant.
It is… Any change is adding to something. Whether that be through subtraction or addition. I get where you’re coming from and where the to add people come from… It’s just a silly addendum that was added post hoc because of silly populism. ETA is already established as estimated time of arrival. There’s no reason to also try to rethink a common acronym. Beyond that, there’s also no reason to signify what you added, or where. You can sure just use ETA to add anything directly after while leaving your OG comment the same, but nobody will know what you edited anyway unless it’s an instance that records that stuff.
I think it’s the same argument as debating whether nothing is something at the root.
Even then, it’s a superfluous addition when you have to specify okay I’ve only edited anything after this ETA when the definition means you could’ve added anything anywhere.
Edit in addition, edit after comment, any variation leads to the same issue. It’s just… So… Pointless.
It even takes more keystrokes! Whether you use capslock or shift for Edit: or ETA: l. E: Is just so much better.
Ok - I wasn’t arguing semantics, but you sure are. :)
I mostly agree with your perspective on the broader, philosophical aspects of edits. However, our discussion is specifically about the practical use of ‘ETA’ in online contexts, not the semantics of editing. Introducing a philosophical angle, while interesting, is not particularly useful here.