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

In the thread How do I track down the cause of a StackOverflowException in .NET?, I find that George Stocker has made several edits to the question, removing hundreds of characters, in addition to editing just about every answer.

Yes, the OP does not have strong English skills and I believe George was just trying to make the question clearer, but this seems excessive to me. Moreover, the OP has complained that items he felt were relevant have been edited out.

I consider this improper use of the edit feature. Yet, I have no way to contact George, or to flag, report or otherwise try and fix this. Yes, I can revert but then I'd lose some more recent edits made by the OP.

Shouldn't there be some way to moderate the way people edit posts?

share|improve this question
Actually, you can respond to any editor of a question using the same @syntax used for replying to comments. Not a full answer, but just a tip for the future. – Grace Note Feb 3 '11 at 20:59
He didn't post any comments--just edited everyone else's, so that wasn't an option. – Jonathan Wood Feb 3 '11 at 21:01
I'm saying editors will receive those even if they haven't commented. – Grace Note Feb 3 '11 at 21:01
Out of curiosity, what did you feel was excessive about the edits? – Tim Stone Feb 3 '11 at 21:43
I agree with Tim, I don't see any relevant information being removed by George in his edits. And the bit about "editing just about every answer" is a non sequitur unless you think those edits were excessive as well. – jball Feb 3 '11 at 21:45
In this case, I think you're overreacting. George's edits salvaged the original question, which led to it being reopened. Looking at what was removed, I feel that he focused the question on the core issue. He then tweaked the answers to improve code formatting, which made them clearer. – Brad Larson Feb 3 '11 at 21:52
@Grace: I see, thanks. – Jonathan Wood Feb 4 '11 at 0:08
@Tim et. al., Removing half of a post, twice caused the OP to remark that parts of his comment that HE felt were relevant had been commented out. This is not respecting the OP, and would be very frustrating for anyone. @Brad: He didn't salvage anything. The problem turned out to be lack of information, not excess information. – Jonathan Wood Feb 4 '11 at 0:11
up vote 3 down vote accepted

I guess I'll answer the base question:

Shouldn't there be some way to moderate the way people edit posts?

There already is, in that other editors can always rollback the edit, and one of the 10k lists shows all recent edits. Requiring that all edits need approval (like the edit suggestion feature) is definitely not a good idea; the whole point of the 2k requirement for editing is that users should know how to edit on their own by then. As Grace Note already pointed out, you can comment reply to an editor if you disagree with their edit (as of May 2010)

share|improve this answer
If someone posts inappropriate questions or answers, I can flag them. I have no way to flag inappropriate editing. – Jonathan Wood Feb 3 '11 at 21:13
@Jonathan But users don't have the ability to take care of bad posts any other way (besides downvoting, but they're still visible; 10k users can delete questions, but only after a couple days). Any 2k user can single-handedly take care of a bad edit – Michael Mrozek Feb 3 '11 at 21:15
Yes, I guess. Note that I was never suggesting all edits should need approval. – Jonathan Wood Feb 3 '11 at 21:19
@Jonathan Yeah, I misunderstood; I reread after your comment and saw the "or to flag, report or otherwise try and fix this" – Michael Mrozek Feb 3 '11 at 21:20

I edited that question because I felt like the Original poster deserved an answer, and I didn't want to see the question closed because of a communication issue.

Good editing improves communication.

Did any of my edits hinder communication? If so, you ought to let me know that (as others have mentioned, the @username syntax will do nicely). If they improve communication, then it doesn't matter whether I make 1 edit or 100.

When I'm in a post, I generally don't just edit one little thing. If there are answers that can be improved, I'll improve them.

Because of my edit, that question went from -7 downvotes to +25 net upvotes. Do you need any more proof than that that I took the right course of action?

share|improve this answer
Taken to the extreme, you could edit it into a different question that is a better one and it might get more up votes. But that wouldn't respect the OP. As I recall the OP was frustrated that elements of the question were getting removed. I know how much that would annoy me. My view that the editing was excessive has not changed. – Jonathan Wood Mar 23 '11 at 2:24
@Jonathan Are you sure you aren't projecting your personal feelings into this? I ask because I see no where where the OP expresses frustration with any edits. – George Stocker Mar 23 '11 at 10:48
I think I'm finished with this particular discussion but here's one of the OP's comments: john rash is not incorrect i had more explanations but some edits removed all – PRASHANT P – Jonathan Wood Mar 23 '11 at 11:31

You must log in to answer this question.

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