A redaction was carried out by another mod to remove an email address, but somehow something has gone awry, and although it shows in my mod review queue, when I try and approve the action, I get a "No changes found to redact" message.
3 Answers
After a fair bit of thinking about this, I've come to the conclusion that the difficulties here arise from the confluence of several issues:
- Folks tend to come in with an unfortunate mental model of how redactions (and by extension, revisions) work here.
- No error or warning when you propose a redaction that will do nothing.
- The automatic redaction suggestion tool that pops up after a different revision has already been redacted (or a redaction proposed for a different revision) would cheerfully let you submit a do-nothing redaction even when it already knew that it hadn't suggested any changes.
So here's what I've done to address them:
Guidance on the redact tool itself.
Block the system from suggesting automatic redactions that will do nothing.
Also made the page responsive while I was mucking about with it. So, lemme know if I broke anything there...
-
... starts wondering what's wrong with this revision– Glorfindel ModCommented Jan 19, 2019 at 11:53
This has happened to me too. It kind of makes sense that you can't approve what's not there -- there's nothing to approve. When I saw this I rejected the redaction (the only way to clear the flag/notification) and talked with the other moderator about what we needed to do.
IMO the bug isn't that you can't click the "approve" button; it's that the system knows it's going to reject the redaction and yet the redaction exists. The best fix for this problem -- best for the approving mod and best for the redacting mod, because redactions are confusing -- would be to reject the redaction attempt. The moderator attempting to make a no-op redaction should get an error message, instead of seeing something "work" that doesn't really, only to learn the truth when a second moderator has tried to act on it. If we have enough information to reject it at approval time, we have enough information to reject it at creation time.
-
1But Rory clearly said "remove an email address" - so why nothing to approve? Commented Dec 20, 2016 at 6:58
-
1@ShadowWizard the redaction comment says "remove email", but it appears that the redaction didn't actually do that. The redaction interface is confusing; several moderators have made the mistake of thinking they're redacting a revision when what they really need to do is "edit in redact mode" (so to speak). I suspect that's what happened here. Commented Dec 20, 2016 at 14:11
-
In this case it is reacting the original rev after I applied an edit to remove the email. The current rev is rev 2. I started a redaction on rev 1. So what you are saying is that it reacts all history prior to a rev instead of just one part of the Rev history? So I'd react rev 2 making it the new rev 1? That is confusing. Commented Dec 20, 2016 at 16:12
-
@AJHenderson it doesn't remove the entire revision; it removes the part you redact (by editing it out) from the revision that's shown in the history. Yeah, confusing. Commented Dec 20, 2016 at 16:16
-
So really it is "redact this change from previous revisions". Got it. Commented Dec 20, 2016 at 16:24
-
Might be worth changing to a change request for better wording atleast. Nothing on either page remotely seems to indicate the actual behavior. Commented Dec 20, 2016 at 16:29
We're seeing this on Ask Different with one moderator two times a couple days apart.
- https://apple.stackexchange.com/admin/dashboard?flagtype=modrevisionredactionapproval
- https://apple.stackexchange.com/revisions/348560/1
- https://apple.stackexchange.com/revisions/348560/2
I'll reject and queue it up for the other mod to approve. The first moderator did not get a message that there was no diff - it went through to the queue, but the second cannot approve it.
So the first redaction I made was approvable with a diff. Now the second change should get re-evaluated to provide a proper "diff" and be approvable. Doing to be a bit of a dance to change once - approve - then change the second - approve.
-
So far, I'm able to queue up changes and have others approve them, what's broken is another moderator can't queue a change that's approvable by the rest of us.– bmikeCommented Jan 14, 2019 at 18:47