I completely understand. In fact we expected to hear this from a lot more users. But if the feedback we see is representative, people care a lot more about not having duplicates.<p>I should add, for anyone who hasn&#x27;t read the post I linked to above, that the original timestamp is always available from the user&#x27;s &#x2F;submitted list (linked to from their profile) and the &#x2F;from list for the site (linked to from the domain name in the title line for a story). The relative (re-upped) timestamp is only shown on the front page and the &#x2F;item page. Over time, the two converge, since the re-upped submissions to date have all been recent, i.e. less than a day or two old.<p>The intention is definitely not to make the original timestamp (or any other information) unavailable, and we&#x27;d be happy to hear suggestions for how to handle it differently.<p>Showing the history of comment edits is another matter. Sometimes people post things that they shouldn&#x27;t post, and it seems decent to give them a way out by deleting the comment or editing out the sensitive or egregious bit. I think that&#x27;s a fair privilege to trust users with—it&#x27;s part of having a real community and good conversation, and although a few do abuse it, it really is surprisingly few. Except for a few perfect souls, we all blurt out things we shouldn&#x27;t, so we all benefit from this. And we&#x27;d hate for bad real-life things to happen to people over what they post here.