I disagree with you completely
The rule is fine. We are just not used to it.
This is complete crap. The rule has been in place for over three months. We've had plenty of time to adjust to the rule and to form opinions on its results.
If speed is a problem, then just include as a rule of the battle that the edit period will be 1 hour, or 10 minutes or 5 minutes. That is a possibility within the current rules. It is just not being used.
Valid, but not particularly meaningful. Default times are default because they have been determined to be the standard most applicable to the game and the one expected to be most commonly used. The current standard is excessive and hindering to the game. A free edit period of 1 hour would be much more amenable than an edit period that currently defaults to a full day but, guess what, that's not the case because the standard suggests otherwise.
You should try using the full-extend of the possibilities the rule brings before deeming it as the worst idea ever conceived.
How on earth does a rule being able to be modified to be better mean that the original idea isn't a bad one? If anything that's more supportive that the original idea is flawed if you have to modify the rule to be satisfied. Furthermore, do not misrepresent what I say; I said that the result of the rule has been a lot of negative and little positive.
I voted for the idea, obviously I didn't think it was the worst idea ever conceived, but my opinion has now changed such that I believe
it was a fundamentally flawed idea that should be removed or revised.
In theory the situation we voted on was a good idea to try and give some equality between orders. In practice this has become unnecessarily limiting on the ability of users to post when able by forcing them to wait an entire day in most cases before they can order. I was wrong to support the proposals. Rereading my arguments I see that I even suggested that orders posted should be posted as final. To touch on ooraloo's point, the majority of people have completely ignored this rule as a result of it being so unnecessary and hindering to the flow of the game.
I believe that going forward we should go with one of two paths:
Option A: Remove this rule and return to the previous system wherein actions were locked for Player A once Player B posted and were locked for Player B once the ref began to ref
Option B: Significantly reduce the free-edit period to 1 hour after posting, with edits past the 1 hour mark being disallowed.
Choosing the former option admits that limiting order opportunity like this was a dumb idea and it's better to let the players regulate themselves.
Choosing the latter option suggests that the original idea had merit but was too draconian in implementation, that we should encourage orders at posting to be as good as possible while acknowledging the possibility for noticing unintended errors, and that we should under no circumstances be unreasonably preventing users from making orders or refs from reffing a round outside of a 1 hour grace period.
Whichever we choose the current situation is and will continue to be untenable and a source of frustration with unnecessarily bureaucratic limitations on a game that already fundamentally suffers from taking a long time to participate in.
(P.S. As a sidepoint, when rereading the discussion on this issue I find myself considerably underwhelmed with the quality of discussion and lack of thorough examination of the given ideas. The discussion was literally T: I think this should happen; C: I agree, plus this; Z: Cool, here's some possibilities; no further analysis or discussion on if those are good ideas or potential downsides.
What we implemented was a proposal that had no analysis of negatives done whatsoever and attempting to dismiss this satisfaction as being "unused to it" is disingenuous to the critique of what has lately become a very clear downside to the original idea.)