Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/3781
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

When in doubt, ask yourself: "Would my readers care if they didn't know about this change? Would they think I was trying to deceive them by not pointing it out?" If the answer to either of these is _yes_, note the change. If not, and you're simply making the reading experience smoother and better, make the change and leave it be.

I agree with [Monica's answer](https://writers.stackexchange.com/questions/3779/whats-the-proper-etiquette-format-for-updating-a-blog-post/3780#3780): for fixing typos or maybe adding a link, no need to indicate changes. When actually adding anything of substance, it's good form to indicate the changes. This kind of transparency is particularly important for corporate blogs or news blogs, where more people are scrutinizing the posts.

I have noticed that seeing something published can change how writers view their own work, and I've had writers request changes minutes after posting. I generally allow a grace period for that, of a few minutes or so. Past that, I'd want to indicate changes.

If you have significant changes to make of the sort where you've changed your mind on something fundamental, perhaps you should be writing a second post. I've seem people write articles discussing how they've re-thought their position, and explaining _why_. (In that case, you can also add a link to the end of the original post, pointing at the new post.)

In summary, try to be transparent where possible and sensible.

Original score: 12