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.

If a question receives n (say, 5) rollbacks within a hour, raise a moderator flag and lock the post.

Alternatively, if an edit by a new user (say, no edit approving privs) drops the post quality score of a post "too much" (say, by more than 100), it must go through the edit approval process.

share|improve this question
    
Should intermediate edits count as rollbacks too then? (Maybe nice but probably not required, as if rollbacks are done using plain edits, that just means that the threshold will be reached a bit later — assuming most others will still use the "rollback" link.) –  Arjan Jan 22 '11 at 10:33
    
I assume post quality score refers to Heuristics for detecting a bad answer?, right? –  Arjan Jan 23 '11 at 15:11
    
@Arjan correct. –  badp Jan 23 '11 at 15:27

2 Answers 2

up vote 14 down vote accepted

This is for the most part completed:

  • Two rollbacks from the same user on a single post will generate a "rollback war" auto-flag for moderator attention.

  • An edit which causes a post to become "low quality" will bump the post into the Low Quality Posts review queue if the edit is live for more than 15 minutes.

The post, however, does not get automatically locked upon generating the flag.

share|improve this answer

Yes please. See current real-world example here. The revision histories are a mess, and a lot of noise (42 questions with 20-30 revisions) was bumped unnecessarily, because no mod was present to stop it. (Which is to be expected on a weekend, that's not the issue. But some automated system should be in place to prevent this from getting out of hand.)

share|improve this answer
    
That's just one of many examples. I'm sure Popular Demand will be able to come up with more. –  badp Jan 22 '11 at 1:05
3  
Wow that's insane. –  John Jan 22 '11 at 1:07
2  
Already posted here. He's mad. –  marcog Jan 22 '11 at 1:09
4  
But how do we 'automatically lock' at the non-vandalized revision? –  Tim Post Jan 22 '11 at 1:52
    
What @Tim said - worst-case, it gets locked in a bad state waiting for a moderator to intervene. Not the end of the world, but... Raising a moderator flag should be the first thing you do when encountering a persistent vandal, not hanging around trying to hit some rollback cap. –  Shogging through the snow Jan 22 '11 at 2:24
    
"What you are doing is illegal!" –  Michael Mrozek Jan 22 '11 at 4:09
    
@Shog just for the record, flagging a mod is what everyone did first yesterday. There just weren't any around for quite some time. Still, I agree that continuous rollbacks aren't the most productive thing to do. –  Pëkka Jan 22 '11 at 10:20
    
@TimPost I proposed to just lock, but one could detect what the "good copy" is by using the post quality metric, or rollbacking to revision 1 :) –  badp Jan 22 '11 at 12:27

You must log in to answer this question.

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