What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 134 Stack Exchange communities.

I just looked at this question on the edit review queue and saw that it was a pointless minor edit to a very old question and rejected as too minor. However, in the meantime, the robo-reviewers had approved it.

Ok, I went to the question and rolled back but it seems to me that the original editor was proposing a minor edit solely for the +2 rep. It will take him a long time to progress like that, but what is the correct action when I see this sort of thing happening? How can I comment to the approving reviewers or highlight the bad edit to the editor?

share|improve this question
16  
Agree that it's minor but in my opinion you shouldn't have rolled it back. The "damage" i.e. bump is already done; rolling back won't change this fact. So the reputation: he got the +2 and rolling back didn't take it away. If you see such edit still pending reject it, otherwise no need for any action. Last but not least, you will probably find this request interesting. –  Shadow Wizard Jun 5 '13 at 10:54
    
I have a different question...why is that question still open? –  Time Traveling Bobby Jun 5 '13 at 10:55
1  
@ShaWizDowArd - ok, I rolled back thinking it would have an option like "the original edit was helpful/unhelpful" so I could feedback to the editor. –  Roger Rowland Jun 5 '13 at 10:57
    
Indeed, rejection out of spite is immoral. –  Grant Thomas Jun 5 '13 at 10:58
1  
@Roger fair enough, but until that linked feature is done rolling back has no side effect. –  Shadow Wizard Jun 5 '13 at 11:00
    
@ShaWizDowArd thanks for that linked feature request - it obviously gets my vote. –  Roger Rowland Jun 5 '13 at 11:04
    
@M.NightDemonbobby Look again, it isn't. –  Daniel Fischer Jun 5 '13 at 13:27
    
5 edits to a question consisting of a single line (not counting salutation)? Wow. –  Old Checkmark Jun 14 '13 at 15:30

1 Answer 1

up vote 10 down vote accepted

From my point of view, the edit was completely correct. Please look at the selected answer on a previous related question.

Also, if you look at the reviewers info on review page, you'll notice that they are not "robo-reviewers" as you like to call them.

Baba has approved 1778 edit suggestions and rejected 122 edit suggestions
Aquillo has approved 33 edit suggestions and rejected 4 edit suggestions
undur_gongor has approved 56 edit suggestions and rejected 23 edit suggestions

One of the user (undur_gongor) has rejected nearly half suggestions as approved. Another one (Baba) has nearly 125 rejections (though, compared to 1700+ approvals, it is still quite less).

share|improve this answer
    
PS: I think a look at Jon Skeet's view point wouldn't hurt either. –  hjpotter92 Jun 5 '13 at 11:01
    
Ok, maybe I was harsh with the "robo-reviewers" line - having a bad day and trying to be perfect isn't always compatible with good manners. I will try to improve myself too ... your viewpoint welcome. –  Roger Rowland Jun 5 '13 at 11:03

You must log in to answer this question.

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