As discussion Owners and Admins, Kialo users are free to set editing norms that suit them for their own discussions. Depending on the context, different norms may be appropriate – the editing norms you use for a public discussion may well be different from the ones you follow when using Kialo in the classroom, or at work. In general, however, there are a few norms that are worth taking into account:
While Kialo claims have original authors, they don’t have owners – Kialo discussions are collaborative, and are designed to encourage users to improve existing claims, rather than adding duplicates to express the same ideas marginally more clearly. Discussion editors working together well will often make changes to each others’ claims – or move each others’ claims to different locations.
However, while it is not bad form to edit another’s claim per se, it is bad form to make substantive edits – edits that change the meaning, structure or expression of a claim – without discussing them with the original author and any other users who have contributed to the claim first. Just because a claim appears unclear, or inelegantly expressed, to you doesn’t mean that others find it so. If nothing else, you may have just missed, or misinterpreted, something! In general, if you think such a change should be made to a claim, you should comment mentioning relevant people (see: Mentioning Other Users), and/or mark the claim for review (see: Marking a Claim for Review), and give them a few days to chime in. (On the other hand, it’s in everyone’s interest for typos and minor grammar errors to be fixed with minimal fuss and bother. Spellcheck away!)
