Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 155 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

I have noticed lately since I have been reviewing more regularly on Stackoverflow, that there are a lot of people who don't properly review posts. A lot of people simply click "Approve" just to move along when the edit may be false.

Recently, I answered a question which was edited by an anonymous user (which I think should not be allowed). He made an addition and basically said my answer was crap. I don't mind if someone thinks my answer isn't correct or could be improved, but I don't see how anonymous user can even be allowed to edit, never mind write something like that. I looked at the review stats and was glad to find the majority of people declined it, however 1 users for some odd reason approved it.

So I have 2 suggestions:

  1. Anonymous users should not be allowed to edit a post.
  2. Either increase the rep needed to review suggested edits or set a small time limit before any actions can be take on the edit, so people actually read the changes that have been made, rather than taking the first action that they see.


If removing anonymous edits is a bit too much, then why not add recaptcha to them? It might prevent some of the spam edits.

share|improve this question

marked as duplicate by ChrisF, Bo Persson, Toon Krijthe, michaelb958, Martijn Pieters Feb 28 '14 at 0:32

This question was marked as an exact duplicate of an existing question.

No, anonymous suggested edits are not going to go away. – Martijn Pieters Nov 15 '12 at 13:57
well if suggested edits won't be removed, what about adding a recatpcha for them. cause a lot of posts are being spammed with pointless edits – Lodder Nov 15 '12 at 13:58
It's not the anonymous edit suggestions that are the problem here. The problem lies with the robo-approvers. – Martijn Pieters Nov 15 '12 at 14:01
Regarding captcha I think the system has other means of protection against spam bots. I am pretty sure that if bots could spam the edit suggestions we would have seen thousands of spam edits each day but as it stands, there are just few true spam edits which means the protection works and those are real people who post the spam. – Shadow Wizard Nov 15 '12 at 14:06
Sorry, I wasn't referring to bots. I was referring to normal people who suggest edits such as the one made to my answer on Stackoverflow. – Lodder Nov 15 '12 at 14:23
@Lodder: Yet the system worked, the edit was rejected. Yes, there was one auto-approver there, but in the end the system (which requires multiple reviewers) did it's job and the edit was rejected. – Martijn Pieters Nov 15 '12 at 14:32
true but like I said, there was someone who approved this edit. What is there were 3 people? The edit would be completely approved. – Lodder Nov 15 '12 at 14:38
@Lodder Then you roll back and curse the new review queues, like the rest of us. – Daniel Fischer Nov 15 '12 at 22:10