This is regarding What foods/spices can be used to make natural food colorings?

This is also covered by Your vote is now locked in unless edited, even though it *was* edited

When I first loaded that question, and started reading it, it was showing the first revision. I went ahead and downvoted it. Later, I come back, and see Aaronut's revision, and try and redact my downvote. The site informs me that my vote is locked unless the question is edited. Which of course, it has been—I voted on the first revision. But I guess Aaronut's edit was actually between when I loaded the page and when I clicked the down arrow. Guess you shouldn't spend much time considering your vote…

I suggest that the revision number I'm looking at should be sent to the server along with my vote, and the server should reject the vote if there is a newer revision. Naturally, a proper error message should be displayed ("this post has been edited since you've started reading it, please refresh the page…").

[Apologies in advance if I was supposed to do something to the other question; not sure how one "re-opens" a bug on meta.SO. But it sounds like Jeff declined it due to it being a lot of work, but the suggestion to just check revision numbers should make reasonably easy to implement, I hope.]

share|improve this question
    
I guess this couldn't hurt, but it does seem like potentially a lot of development work for something that you could easily work around by just editing yourself... –  Cody Gray Mar 21 '12 at 21:19
1  
Besides, I think more generally, you should consider your vote less on the stylistic or grammatical appeal of a question and more on the substantive aspects. I will vote a question up even if I think to myself, "This would be a really good question if it were edited into shape", then I click the "edit" link. Downvotes are probably best used for questions that are not useful or constructive, or those that are completely beyond the help of a few edits. –  Cody Gray Mar 21 '12 at 21:22
    
@CodyGray Well, the edit turns it from a poll to something that maybe isn't. (The later edits do this even better). I suppose of course I could have done that myself (like, e.g., with cooking.stackexchange.com/revisions/17720/3) but… well, time is finite. At least I checked back to make sure my vote was still valid. –  derobert Mar 23 '12 at 2:24
    
We're experimenting with in-place, real-time updates and unobtrusively informing of edits is on the list to try. We'll revisit this issue once it's implemented. –  Jarrod Dixon Mar 23 '12 at 6:07
add comment

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .