Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

106

You make a very good point about edits getting not only rampantly suggested, but also rampantly approved but I think that your idea of Mark[ing] the edit as rejected [...] Revok[ing] the +2 rep bonus [...] doesn't address the real problem which is not the low reputation users suggesting bad edits, but the high reputation users ...


86

You're not going to like this answer, but I approved every one of his suggested edits (that were in the queue) except four, where someone got to them first and declined them. On those four, I went ahead and made the requested spelling changes. How is correcting spelling errors not making the internet better? Do you really want to have this discussion the ...


73

people keep approving crap while I'm looking at it. Two or three "the post was already approved; please visit to edit" and I'm just "screw this whole thing". Above is pretty frustrating in my experience. It is especially painful in cases of blatantly obvious crap that takes me just few seconds to reject. It would be interesting to try exclusive review ...


69

I like this idea, but I also agree with Jeff's concerns that this is the wrong way to be using notifications. In particular, if we're notifying you of stuff that doesn't encourage you and that you can't do anything about, it's unlikely to have a positive effect. I think the right way to expose these rejections is to put them where they matter most: on the ...


67

We've rolled out audit tasks for suggested edits in our more recent builds. What we're doing here is actually kind of fun. They're also sometimes hilarious. Since we know suggested edits have really noisy history, the approach we use for other queues (selecting "known good" or "known bad" content to then fake numbers on) won't really work. Instead, we're ...


67

One of the problems with the suggested edit system is that it takes almost zero time or effort to submit accept votes, or for that matter, reject votes. It takes much longer to do the right thing and improve bad suggestions. I often try to improve suggested edits. Sometimes, they're good suggestions where the editor fixed 50 typos and just happened to miss ...


60

I think this is one of the more serious problems with the site right now. There are so many bad edits in the system, but what's worse is that nobody is rejecting them. There are many more bad reviewers than good reviewers. People are able to ride this system to 2k rep by spamming reviews and then they graduate from bad editor to bad reviewer, and the circle ...


60

I don't agree with a banner appearing every time one of your edits is rejected, but I could get behind one of the following alternatives. Update Profile » Activity » Suggestions to show which edits were accepted and which were rejected without forcing the user to manually click on each one. I prefer this solution because it is unobtrusive and makes the ...


57

I think it should be possible to add a suggest as honeypot button to all the items in all the queues. Maybe only to those with a certain rep, or certain number of helpful flags. I have come across any number of egregiously bad edits, which I've linked to before. If you wanted to construct some, may I suggest: add a peripherally related tag while leaving ...


54

The best solution I've found to this problem is to not review posts from a queue. Some of the other ways that I've found to find content to review are: Participating in tag cleanups. It's not just about removing tags from posts; it's about fixing all of the problems with a post. Since there are no queues for this, it's all voluntary, so most of the ...


53

Sure! Instead of tricking the rule, just look for other changes that can be made. Usually, in a post that forgets that kind of formatting, there's often at least one other error to be found. A miscapitalized letter, an extra space, or often just another formatting error of a different sort. Remember, when you suggest an edit, it requires multiple other ...


50

Correct, they should be used for code (and code-like artifacts). If that's the only change, and it's wrongly-applied, reject as trivial–"useless" isn't an option. I don't have a problem with filenames, paths, API methods, commands, etc.–those are computery "artifacts" that should be differentiated from expository text. Products, trademarks, ...


50

Invalid. Adding italics to random words seems to be a new trend (or is it just that one guy?). I've just rejected a bunch of them, though I seem to have been too late for many. This is a variation from the many suggestions that add code markup to random words. Or abuse bold markup. Use that Reject button!


47

Just wanted to add another voice in full support of this idea. I've recently hit 10k on SO, and often spend down time reviewing the edit queue. It's extremely common to see trivial, weak, or terrible edit suggestions, but the post itself does need an edit badly. What are my options? Hit "Reject" and get locked out of editing the post, even though it ...


46

As I wrote in my recently closed duplicate question I think the lack of a Reject and Improve button hinders good edits, while promoting accepting pointless ones (as described by @random people tend to accept edits more often than rejecting them). I don't think the use case is rare, I run into this problem almost daily. There should be a better way around a ...


46

Yes, please. I was about to type up a request for the same. We have a bit of a problem right now on Stack Overflow, as the Winterbash hat for reviews has caused a bunch of new reviewers to all of a sudden jump into the review queue. Many (most?) of them are just in it for the hat, so they approve everything they see. This is leading to a lot of really ...


42

There is no policy change. "Thanks" is still clutter and does not need to be in the post. What you have here are people being dazzled by the formatting of the code block but would rather just hit accept than improve or reject it outright and edit it properly themselves. It's like getting a kiss while being shivved in the groin with a rusty door hinge. ...


41

I changed the workflow for improve. The edit screen now has an option to "deny" crappy editors the rep bounce when they suggest crappy edits and you improve it. The box is selected by default. I do not want to introduce complex UIs on the improve "scenario", so you get no custom message for the decline. Community declines it, and that is it. The end user ...


41

Bad edits aren't limited to suggested edits. We tend not to notice the bad non-suggested edits because they don't get a minimum of two reviewers involved (three on SO). One thing that we're very bad at is teaching what is a good edit and what is a bad edit. I've reviewed a lot of suggested edits in my time. I'm not in people's mind, of course, but I believe ...


40

All you did was remove thanks from posts, leaving other problems in place. Such edits are too minor and clog up the queue. When making an edit suggestion, please improve the whole post, and not only remove the 'thank you'. Generally, count on edit suggestions that only touch one small aspect to be rejected. Note that the too minor rejection reason states ...


38

Edits should be accepted if they are correct or helpful, and rejected if they are incorrect or spam. The length of the edit is irrelevant. Who cares if the edit is tiny or major as long as it's improving the quality of the site's content? The reviewer's time has already been used in checking the edit, so nothing is lost in accepting it. The How to Edit ...


38

Such requests should be done in private with the team, not like this. Such suggestions should be rejected and even edits rolled back unless done by official Stack Exchange employee. (Who will usually erase the original revision itself leaving no trace of the code) If there is really copyright violations, DMCA request should be submitted directly to the ...


37

Am I the only one who sees this undesirable? In fact, the more I think about it the more I think it has the possibility to be a really bad idea. Theoretical problems are fantastic things. I have over 1000 theoretical problems with over 1000 theoretical features. What I can talk about is the actual process we are following, and why I believe ...


37

As a < 2k rep user, you should make reasonably substantive edits. The approval cost for your edit is not free, as it costs the attention of one or more users who have to look at your edit and think about it. This cost is high for extremely trivial edits. This will not be changing. If you want to make single-character trivial edits, earn 2k rep.


37

That user does their review duty on facebook.stackoverflow.com. And the setting on that site for "number of votes required to suggest or reject an edit" wasn't synchronized with Stack Overflow proper, so it fell back to the network-default value of 2, and thus when the user had the second vote, it counted as final. Fixed now, thanks.


36

Urgh. That's just sneaky. It even took me a minute to realize why that edit should've been rejected. I warned the editor to refrain from this behaviour in the future, but I'm not sure what to propose to "fix" this problem in general. Maybe some way to make it more obvious what the URL changes are in the default diff? I don't have anything fleshed out in ...


36

The only thing I can think of would be to allow users to flag a specific revision when they discover a bad edit that has been approved. If enough of these flags against a specific reviewer are found valid, give them a time-out from reviewing. I think the timeout should probably be longer for bad reviewers since it's harder to spot when it happens unless you ...


33

Some caveats and other concerns: As people blindly approve these edits, people may just as blindly roll them back. In a more serious case, one could also use one's edit privileges to serially roll back a user's suggested edits, thereby making it basically a different flavor of revenge downvoting — and one much harder to reverse. I don't like the sound of ...


32

I have a bunch of rep points on SO, waaay more than I have any need of. And I hate answering questions. I have rep points on SO because I wanted to edit. When I first read about SO, six to eight weeks before the site even existed, I thought to myself, "A wiki Q&A site! Brilliant! Finally, a solution to this endless parade of crappy questions with their ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible
{"cc_re__cc_re__cc_by_sa_3_0": ["        <li><a href=\"http://area51.stackexchange.com\" title=\"proposing new sites in the Stack Exchange network\">Area 51</a></li>\r\n                        <li><a href=\"http://careers.stackoverflow.com\">Stack Overflow Careers</a></li>\r\n                    \r\n                </ol>\r\n            </td>\r\n    </tr>\r\n</table>\r\n                </div>\r\n            </div>\r\n\r\n            <div id=\"copyright\">\r\n                site design / logo &#169; 2014 stack exchange inc; user contributions licensed under <a href=\"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/\" rel=\"license\">cc by-sa 3.0</a> \r\n                with <a href=\"http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/06/attribution-required/\" rel=\"license\">attribution required</a>\r\n            </div>\r\n            <div id=\"svnrev\">\r\n                rev 2014.3.10.2028\r\n            </div>\r\n            \r\n        </div>\r\n    </div>\r\n    <noscript>\r\n        <div id=\"noscript-warning\">Meta Stack Overflow works best with JavaScript enabled<img src=\"http://pixel.quantserve.com/pixel/p-c1rF4kxgLUzNc.gif\" alt=\"\" class=\"dno\"></div>\r\n    "], "copyright__copyright__copyright": ["ne much harder to reverse. I don't like the sound of ...\n\n\n32\n\nI have a bunch of rep points on SO, waaay more than I have any need of. And I hate answering questions. I have rep points on SO because I wanted to edit. When I first read about SO, six to eight weeks before the site even existed, I thought to myself, \"A wiki Q&A site! Brilliant! Finally, a solution to this endless parade of crappy questions with their ...\n\n\n\nOnly top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible", "ne much harder to reverse. I don't like the sound of ...\n\n\n32\n\nI have a bunch of rep points on SO, waaay more than I have any need of. And I hate answering questions. I have rep points on SO because I wanted to edit. When I first read about SO, six to eight weeks before the site even existed, I thought to myself, \"A wiki Q&A site! Brilliant! Finally, a solution to this endless parade of crappy questions with their ...\n\n\n\nOnly top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible"]}