1

Possible Duplicate:
Why multiple approvers for proposed edits
Instant edit approval for high-rep users

On SO, if I edit a question my edit is immediately in effect. But if I approve an edit by another user, it says that one more approval is needed before changes are in effect. Isn't this inconsistent? I mean I have full permission to make modifications on a question but I cannot simply approve an edit?

For example assume that there is a typo in title, and someone fixed it. If I approve it, there is still need for 1 more approval. If I fix it myself it will be fixed immediately.

Improve this question
1
  • If you ask Jeff, he'll tell you that it's because we were "seeing a lot of 'turd polishing.'". (Well, either that, or "stop bothering me, I'm retired now.")
    – Pops
    Commented Jul 17, 2012 at 14:20

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
2

I've been fighting for this too. In some cases the answer is to improve the edit, if you see something else that can be improved, this allows the suggester to still get credit if you deemed their suggestion helpful, but allows you to "approve" the edit and implement it immediately instead of waiting for another approval. This is usually my reason for wanting to push a suggested edit through faster; I want to make further edits and don't want to wait for others' approval of the original edit. Except sometimes this yields wacky behavior.

That said, the powers that be will argue that the extra set of eyes is there for a reason, e.g. to prevent edit list plowing. So I strongly recommend that if you use this method you only do so when you actually have at least one other improvement to make. Otherwise you should let the review process take its normal course.

Improve this answer

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