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 recently noticed several cases where people edited posts (not mine), by changing some minor 1-2 character spelling issues.

While this in and of itself is probably a good thing (it's well-known that poor wording and spelling errors make stuff much harder to read/comprehend), it is probably at least partially driven by the race for the "Strunk & White" badge. It also strongly points to the editor having OCD (Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder) since they notice the little errors to fix :)

So, I propose a semi-serious "John Emil List" badge (named after a criminal who famously had OCD that contributed to him evading the law for a pretty long while).

The badge would be awarded for extremely high proportion of the edits that amounted to less than 3 character differences, say 50%+ of your edits, for people who have 50+ edits.

share|improve this question
    
Awaiting for someone to notice that I had a parenthesis unclosed and edit to fix that in 1, 2, 3... – DVK Mar 22 '10 at 16:55
    
@Downvoter That was MY edit. MINE! ..... Jerk.. :P – Tyler Carter Mar 22 '10 at 16:56
3  
@dvk, The love character? – juanformoso Mar 22 '10 at 16:57
    
@Chacha, Well I'm gonna to go then. And I don't need any of this. I don't need this stuff, and I don't need you. I don't need anything except this. imdb.com/title/tt0079367/quotes – perbert Mar 22 '10 at 16:58
2  
I have a feeling that this is targeted, at least in part, at me. I already have my S&W badge, thankyouverymuch, but the OCD call is likely on target. Really, those mistakes (it's vs. its, especially) just jump out at me like big blinding red lights. – Michael Petrotta Mar 22 '10 at 16:59
2  
This revision history just keeps getting funnier and funnier – juanformoso Mar 22 '10 at 17:00
    
Not planning to knock over any banks anytime soon, though. – Michael Petrotta Mar 22 '10 at 17:01
1  
I thought it was for SO users who had been arrested for soliciting. – tvanfosson Mar 22 '10 at 17:04
    
@Michael Petrotta - it was not your edits that inspired the idea, sorry... – DVK Mar 22 '10 at 17:04
2  
I don't think lots of micro-edits is something that we should be encouraging. – Zoredache Mar 22 '10 at 17:07
1  
turning CW in ... three, two, one... – quack quixote Mar 22 '10 at 17:09
1  
@DVK: "<3" == ♡. "less than three" == "< 3" – perbert Mar 22 '10 at 17:09
1  
I disagree with the idea; tongue in cheek or not, badges should be positive. – Randolpho Mar 22 '10 at 17:23
1  
If we gave a badge to everyone who had OCD, everyone here would get one. – Ether Mar 22 '10 at 17:26
2  
You people keep talking about OCD when you know it really should be CDO. The letters need to be alphabetical. :-p – tvanfosson Mar 22 '10 at 17:35
share|improve this answer
    
AKA: The quotes answer. – Tyler Carter Mar 22 '10 at 17:16
    
Lol, 9 reviews :D – nicael Jul 11 '14 at 5:59

http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/12/badges-positive-only/

share|improve this answer
    
As I noted in the question, I personally view such edits as a net positive and thus worthy of boosting with a badge. – DVK Mar 22 '10 at 17:20
1  
I don't think everyone sees it that way. Badges should be clearly positive. – mafu Mar 22 '10 at 17:22
    
Then those who don't see it that way should explicitly explain WHY such edits are not positive. I actually substantiated my point of view with a proper explanation :) – DVK Mar 22 '10 at 17:23
1  
@DVK, naming a badge after an OCD criminal doesn't really make it sound very positive to me. – Zoredache Mar 22 '10 at 17:24
2  
@Zoredache - I am perfectly happy if someone comes up with a better pithy name for the badge. I never claimed the name was good. What's in question is the idea of that badge. – DVK Mar 22 '10 at 18:59
    
I still believe that many would be offended, and it does not matter if they are justly offended or not - they're going to be angry. Nobody wants SO visitors to be angry. – mafu Mar 24 '10 at 20:31

You must log in to answer this question.

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