Let's see now, if I balance out the points you made, then it seems like I should go ahead and put in editing, because the existence of the feature wouldn't be a problem for you or change how you use the board, it'd simply be irrelevant. You'd be inclined to ignore the "delta" icon signifying an edited post, and ignore Tom's advice to use the editing feature yourself [;-)], and treat it like a conventional BBS, right?

I wouldn't expect people to dig into the history unless a dispute arises over what somebody said in an earlier version. Most exchanges are positive and I'd say people are inclined to give the benefit of the doubt and assume that an author edited a post to improve it, and not to deceive. Maybe I'm overly idealistic, but I'd expect the existence of the message history would keep posters from succumbing to the temptation to abuse the power to edit.

--Robert