Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 158 Stack Exchange communities.

What is meta?
Here's how it works:
  1. Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
  2. The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
  3. Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates

We have discussed the problems with the "suggested edits" review queue for a while here.

Some people make extremely minor edits in quick succession.
Often it is people who make the same style of edit to a lot of posts - add or remove one specific tag to a question, only removing "Thank you" from posts, or only removing a specific keyword from the title.
Unfortunately, these extremely minor edits are often approved. The people who make these edit suggestions are then rewarded with +2 rep, and the serial approvers are closer to a badge. And since the edits were approved, the "edit ban" does not kick in.

I suggest that we do not allow people to suggest edits to different posts within 5 minutes.
This should discourage "serial minor edits", while encouraging people to take some time making proper edits.

share|improve this question
My worry would be the "power goes to head" scenario when the user hits 2k. They not only get the ability to edit freely but are no longer rate-limited either. – ben is uǝq backwards Nov 7 '12 at 12:24
@Ben Is this an acutal problem? Do users abuse this behaviour in the way you describe? – user177964 Nov 7 '12 at 12:26
see: An alert to serial minor edits. Also note user can be banned from suggesting edits if responsible reviewers reject a couple of their invalid suggestions – gnat Nov 7 '12 at 12:42
@gnat Regarding the second part, the key word is indeed "responsible". My impression is that there are not enough rejections of extremely minor edits. – S.L. Barth Nov 7 '12 at 12:45
I think the the way to deal with brainless reviewers is to make reviews flaggable – gnat Nov 7 '12 at 12:49
@gnat I like that one! But the comment thread points out some of the practical problems. Also, as pointed out elsewhere on that page: who should review the reviewers? – S.L. Barth Nov 7 '12 at 13:02

add or remove one specific tag to a question, only removing "Thank you" from posts, or only removing a specific keyword from the title.

I don't think that what you mention are minor edits that should be discouraged. One could argue if they are worth reputation and badges. But what are +2 reputation and a bronze badge? Not much.

share|improve this answer
I don't mind a +2 for a single, very minor edit. The problem I want to address is people doing the same extremely minor edit suggestion many times, gaining "+2 times many". While helping the serial approvers to get their Reviewer and Steward badges. – S.L. Barth Nov 7 '12 at 12:22
Getting the silver and gold badges is already limited by the maximum of 20 such review task per day. – user177964 Nov 7 '12 at 12:24
While I think the "20 reviews/day" limit is good, my impression is that it has not discouraged the "serial approvers" enough yet. I still see too many sugggested edits being rubber-stamped. YMMV. – S.L. Barth Nov 7 '12 at 12:32
The 20 reviews/day limit has also made us "serial rejecters" review fewer posts per day. Not sure if that is an overall improvement. – Bo Persson Nov 7 '12 at 16:49

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .