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

There's a new system for peer-reviewing edit suggestion which allows sub-2k rep users to edit posts as long as two 1k+ users (or one 20k+ user) approve the edit. Of course the overall goal of all parties involved is to just make the site better, but I propose to add some incentives for the users involved.

The user making the suggestions already gets a rep bonus if it's approved; I propose to also add some sort of reward to the user(s) approving the edit. Not necessarily reputation, this could be something as simple as a new badge or two:

Reviewer - voted on 50 edits

Scrutineer - voted on 500 edits

Notice that it's important the reward will be per vote and not for just approving edits - i.e. consider both approving and rejecting edits, since what we want to reward is users reviewing these edits.

share|improve this question
Good idea about making them agnostic to vote direction. – ChrisF Jan 29 '11 at 22:00
Please note that these edits might be based on the site volume. While SO is at ~1000 edit suggestions, SU only has ~10. – Tom Wijsman Jan 29 '11 at 22:10
@TomWij but on the other hand, smaller sites have a lot less people competing for voting on these suggestions. – Oak Jan 29 '11 at 22:13
(Sorry. Don't get me wrong, I agree with your suggestion; just want to note to SOIS that when they implement it they could adjust the amounts accordingly) – Tom Wijsman Jan 29 '11 at 22:50
up vote 17 down vote accepted

My concern here is that if we introduce a badge people will be more likely to vote and thus make hasty incorrect decisions.

As it stands a suggested edit queue is constantly empty ... on average an item is not even lasting longer than a minute.

Though I agree with the sentiment that a badge would be nice, I am not sure encouraging voting is needed at the moment.

Edit: implemented as the Proofreader badge!

share|improve this answer
But isn't it just the same concern with Electorate and Copy-Editor? Though I agree that if it's not broken, no need to fix it. – Oak Feb 3 '11 at 8:50

I was going to make the same suggestion but saw that this was already made, but I'd definitely shy away from the low counts like 50, and tend towards higher things like 500. Make it something that you'd either have to really really grind for if you were just badge-whoring, but something that's not entirely unlikely to happen if you're approving/rejecting things regularly for a decent length of time.

So, I'd suggest a Bronze badge for 500 approved/rejected edits, and perhaps have it be one that can be earned multiple times (again, to encourage a regular extended period of behavior instead of a grind session to get a check mark on the Badges page)

share|improve this answer

Is this needed? It seems to be that approving/rejecting edits are mostly being done quickly enough by 10K users. Also I don't think a incentive will change what most 10K do.

share|improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

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