Suggested edits approval or rejection always needed only one reviewer here on Meta.

Today I noticed it requires two. (Example)

Is this change intentional, or some glitch? If on purpose, what is the reason for the change?

Worth to mention that on Stack Overflow it now takes three instead of two. (Example)

  • 25
    I don't object to it requiring two - but an announcement would have been nice.
    – ChrisF Mod
    Commented Oct 16, 2012 at 11:45
  • @Chris I second that, searched high and dry before posting this. Commented Oct 16, 2012 at 11:45
  • 7
    Also I see today, SO requires more than two approval
    – Himanshu
    Commented Oct 16, 2012 at 11:52
  • 8
    @hims056: Oooo, maybe they finally implemented that a reject vote cancels out an approve vote (and vice versa)? I like this, but where's the announcement??
    – animuson StaffMod
    Commented Oct 16, 2012 at 11:59
  • @animuson Yes. At least it will reduce this message
    – Himanshu
    Commented Oct 16, 2012 at 12:04
  • Just realized my answer was about SO and you were asking about MSO... so I am changing it to a comment... On SO, it looks like there was a change to require 3 approvals and not actually have rejects cancel out. Check out this suggestion for an example. There were 2 approvals, 2 rejects, then 1 more approval. Maybe the number of votes required to approve an edit was increased by one StackExchange wide? Commented Oct 16, 2012 at 12:10
  • @animuson nope, that's not the case. Example with three "pure" approve votes required to approve. Commented Oct 16, 2012 at 12:21
  • @psubsee2003 thanks, didn't notice that it affected the main site either. :) Commented Oct 16, 2012 at 12:24
  • 4
    Oh thank goodness it takes more than 2 votes to approve or reject something... if this is permanent, I'm doing my happy dance. Commented Oct 16, 2012 at 12:41
  • @Little this might help reduce the "false positives" coming through in the main site, but not sure it's a good idea to do that network wide.. sites with less traffic should be fine with one or two reviewers. :) Commented Oct 16, 2012 at 12:57

2 Answers 2


In response to this, we've bumped up the number of reviews required to approve or reject a suggested edit:

  • Network-wide: two reviews per edit suggestion.
  • Stack Overflow: three reviews per edit suggestion.

Moderators and the original poster can review suggested edits instantly in cases where an insufficient number of users are available to review them.

Update: The number of reviews per edit suggestion required on Stack Overflow has been dropped from 3 to network-wide 2.

  • 22
    +1 for implementing this, -1 for not telling us before you implement it, +1 because Greece just scored against Slovakia.
    – yannis
    Commented Oct 16, 2012 at 19:57
  • 2
    Hey man, I just got back from a week's vacation - I'm a bit slow! (And I don't mean "sluggish")
    – Shog9
    Commented Oct 16, 2012 at 20:03
  • 10
    I suspect this will have little impact. You've still got badges creating a Cobra Effect. All you've done is increase the number of opportunities for people to cash in on. Commented Oct 16, 2012 at 20:07
  • @Shog9 a whole week? That Denver office opening party must have been some shindig!
    – Pops
    Commented Oct 16, 2012 at 20:17
  • 9
    @SomeHelpfulCommenter First thing I thought, reading your comment: "What's a Cobra Effect?" Second thing: "I'll check Wikipedia." Third thing: "I'm upvoting that." (Fourth thing: "How can I link to the Wikipedia entry for that term without being boring?")
    – Pops
    Commented Oct 16, 2012 at 20:18
  • Thanks, I also got worried about bad edits slipping through more than before with the new system and think this will help, at least until step B is in place. :) Commented Oct 16, 2012 at 20:49
  • @PopularDemand The Cobra Effect was also on reddit earlier today, so suddenly everyone is experiencing the Baader-Meinhof Effect now :) Commented Oct 16, 2012 at 22:09
  • 3
    @yoda I don't use reddit, so I didn't see that initial reference to the cobra effect, but at least I got to look up Baader-Meinhof Effect. Those who are more familiar with recent German history than I am will be unsurprised to learn that my initial search for Baader-Meinhof took me to a page that had nothing to do with the Baader-Meinhof effect; it directed me to Red Army Faction, AKA the Baader-Meinhof Gang. Baader-Meinhof. Baader-Meinhof. Baader-Meinhof.
    – Pops
    Commented Oct 16, 2012 at 22:23
  • Maybe we could go back to one with a certain number of reputation? 30k?
    – mattdm
    Commented Oct 23, 2012 at 10:28
  • 1
    @Shog9 Abuse of /review for badges shouldn't make a mess of the privilege structure - a user who is able to unilaterally edit should be able to unilaterally approve or reject a suggested edit. Wouldn't a better approach be more appropriate to prevent coasting through /review? Commented Oct 28, 2012 at 1:41
  • And what happens when there are an insufficient number of moderators? Commented Oct 28, 2012 at 1:43
  • @Shane: anyone with edit rights can still approve an edit without assistance - as long as they're willing to edit.
    – Shog9
    Commented Oct 28, 2012 at 5:54
  • 1
    @Shog9 I'm not sure what you mean by "as long as they're willing to edit"? See also: meta.serverfault.com/q/3781 Commented Oct 28, 2012 at 6:58
  • @Shane: see my response there.
    – Shog9
    Commented Oct 31, 2012 at 4:37

This may be good for SO, but it's a bogus hoop to jump through on some 2.0 sites.

I suggest that reviews from 20k+ users (and probably 10k+ users also) count as 2 reviews on SE 2.0 sites that are lower traffic. When either of us could make an edit by oursleves with no approval, it seems ridiculous that it takes both me (20k) and another user (10k) to approve an edit. The only reason I didn't make the edit myself is somebody had already gone to the work.

  • 6
    Psst, if you hit "improve", make a further improvement, then mark the suggestion is helpful, everybody wins! A workaround, I admit...
    – Charles
    Commented Dec 6, 2012 at 8:58
  • There are quite a few high-rep robo-reviewers, so I fully support the increase in approvals needed as an experiment on Stack Overflow. However, it's had seemingly little to no effect so far anyway. (Unclear as I am, it means I basically agree. ;)
    – J. Steen
    Commented Dec 6, 2012 at 9:10
  • @Charles: Oh that makes sense. Because every hoop needs a loop-hole.
    – Caleb
    Commented Dec 6, 2012 at 9:10
  • 5
    @J.Steen: It sounds like we need a way to review reviewers, not suggestions.
    – Caleb
    Commented Dec 6, 2012 at 9:11
  • Who reviews the reviewers? ;)
    – J. Steen
    Commented Dec 6, 2012 at 9:12
  • 1
    I agree that it's a good idea but only on low traffic sites. Unix & Linux is hardly low traffic site. Commented Dec 6, 2012 at 9:44
  • Same problem on Photo-SE: meta.photo.stackexchange.com/questions/2565/…
    – mattdm
    Commented Dec 6, 2012 at 17:30

You must log in to answer this question.

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