Yesterday I got a Stack Overflow notification that someone edited a question of mine that had been idling since April. Looking at the edit (revision 5), it was made by a user with quite a respectable Stack Overflow reputation (11k+), it concerns four inserted back ticks ` and one added word "to".

Not only was this edit wrong (the backticked words were no code and the word "to" grammatically speaking didn't need to be there), but it was a completely useless edit imo, so I rolled it back.

Then I stumbled upon another edit of the same user, equally useless if you ask me. I know SO/SE wants to be factual, concise and canonical where possible, but going around removing "thanks" from posts and performing super minor copy changes clutters the whole question with the "EDITED BY XYZ" badge, meanwhile suggesting that the original poster needed help getting his question across.

I find this kind of editing quite annoying. Is this guy and possibly others with editing-powers using the editing system in ways it was not intended? Is this something of an edit-troll? Or am I just being childish?

  • 21
    Speculation: The user was going for the Archaeologist badge, and will cut the crap now that he got it.
    – yannis
    Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 11:36
  • There are definitely more substantial, useful edits to be made on SO. Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 11:37
  • 11
    Me! I'm an edit troll. If there's something that needs to be fixed I fix it (unless I can't be bothered). It is normally new questions though... and I would have fixed more stuff in those if I came across them. Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 11:37
  • @YannisRizos That edit was made after the badge was received. Ungrounded speculation, I guess.
    – Rob W
    Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 11:38
  • 6
    @YannisRizos User profile -> Activity -> Badges says "Oct 28 awarded Archaeologist"
    – Rob W
    Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 11:42
  • @RobW Oh, had no idea about that tab, good catch.
    – yannis
    Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 11:43
  • 2
    I'm an edit troll too! Though I mostly do this for the new answers that I'm also going to attempt answer. Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 12:13
  • 5
    I love the irony of calling an edit 'useless' but then rolling back the edit. If it is useless, then it is harmless, so why roll it back or care?
    Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 13:25
  • possible duplicate of Are we discouraged from fixing typos and misspellings on Stack Exchange sites?
    Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 13:31
  • 3
    @GEOCHET: Not sure if that's an appropriate dupe target; that one is about minimal standards for suggested edits. Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 13:52
  • 4
    @MartijnPieters I'm sure it's not, to me it looks like he's just frustrated and trying to vent steam in original ways. Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 14:03
  • 2
    Agree with @GEOCHET. The fact we're putting this many people's time into whether or not a harmless edit is trolling or not doesn't seem logical. And again I'm dissapointed that we had to point the finger directly at a user instead of abstracting the situation to where it can be judged on an even level. If you think a user is doing something wrong then report it to a mod - if it's a question of whether or not the behavior is acceptable: abstract the offenses to keep all parties anonymous and post your question. If you can't effectively communicate the latter then it means you're biased.
    – Mike B
    Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 17:46
  • @MikeB this was not about this one edit, but it was my wondering about whether edits like this are frowned upon or not. I have my answer and will act to my best knowledge and conscience in either letting the edits go, flagging the post or rolling them back.
    – epologee
    Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 17:49
  • 3
    @epologee I understand your situation and I'm glad you found your answer. My point still stands that this question could have easily been asked without proper nouns. Granted it wouldn't have been nearly as popular as it's become. People love a show and they need a star but it can only serve to skew judgement. Mods are the only ones with the appropriate power that should consider a specific user's action-history. Non-mods can do nothing positive by looking at a user except exacerbate the slander by coming up with armchar detective theories.
    – Mike B
    Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 17:54
  • 1
    Maybe the popularity also points to the fact that there is something to say about this kind of editing? No one was harmed, really (not taking the downvoted answer below in account).
    – epologee
    Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 18:04

3 Answers 3


I'm not sure whether or not I would describe them as edit-trolls. If the user has the badges and no rep to gain, I can only assume they are trying to address what they see as a "problem". No matter how minor.

Do I agree with the particular edits? No. Too minor and incorrect. But I see no evil motivation either. Editing is a bit of a personal thing anyway. Yesterday I encountered a moderator on one of the sites editing a question into shape, and at the same time highlighting sections in bold. Personally this ticks me off, because I see no need for the bold formatting. But whatever our preferences, we're all trying to improve content where we see a problem.

And exactly for the case where a user wrongly edits a question, we have a rollback. The problem with edits is that there's nobody really teaching us what good edits are and what are bad ones. There are no clear guidelines. There is no document outlining various scenarios and how to act upon them. Where your company might have a strictly adhered to code-style, there is no such thing for SO posts. (Nor do I see how that could be created really, besides some very basic rules. Don't format things as code when they are not, for example) Yes, we initially have the review system for newer users. But to some extent it seems to be flawed as a teaching tool when pretty poor edits are getting through. (Thereby validating the user in their edit).

What can be done? Well, you could always @reply the user telling him that the edit really is too minor and incorrect, so you've rolled it back. Perhaps they'll pick it up. Don't let this spark off a long stream of "how to edit" debate in the comments though. Take it to Meta perhaps, or point to one of the many discussions on appropriate and inappropriate editing already here. Or just undo the edit and let it slide.

I don't think these users are necessary trolls. But editing is a tricky thing. As much as we have users asking good and bad question, we have users making good and bad edits. Or unnecessary ones. Or ones we even on an aesthetic level disagree with.

The only real "solution" I see is to lead by example. Try to make the best posts and best edits we can, hoping that some of the style will rub off on others. But luckily we already have the tools to deal with situations where this is not the case.

  • 4
    +1 for "there's nobody really teaching us what good edits are and what are bad ones" Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 12:23
  • But, but... the bold formatting helps you find important information if you're just skimming, and if I see a wall of text most of the time I'll just skim... Also it can make posts look more organized. If used properly, of course.
    – neeKo
    Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 14:06
  • 3
    Don't just skim. :) And whenever I write what could be a wall of text, I break it up in paragraphs. Though like I said, it's a bit of a personal thing. But too often it ends up being something like this which does not at all improve what I have just said.
    – Bart
    Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 14:10
  • 1
    Breaking up a wall of text? Those are just a few white spaces! Roll back the useless edit!
    Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 14:20
  • @GEOCHET "whenever I write what could be a wall of text, I break it up in paragraphs"..."I write"...."I break it up"....but well, I guess the angle from which you're coming at this is clear to us all.
    – Bart
    Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 14:23
  • Puts things in perspective. Thanks @Bart for the elaborate writing. That answers this question for me.
    – epologee
    Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 15:39

Two things:

  • There are a lot of things to get worked up over on Stack Overflow. This really isn't one of them.
  • If you feel like the user is making inconsequential edits that do not improve the question (even a little bit), then flag the post for moderator review, and explain your reasons. We may agree, or we may disagree.

In this case, the user made an edit, whether it improved the question or not is up to someone who knows iOS development a little better than I do. If a textfield is an actual code-related (or UI related) item, then it could help to have it stand out. If it's named something other than a textfield, then the edit should be to give it the right name.

Don't engage in a Rollback war. They're unproductive, and they almost never make the participants look good.

  • 3
    Let's note though that a textfield might well be a textfield. That is, a field of text. Let's please not edit every use of a word which might be a code/API entity as well, as code.
    – Bart
    Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 13:48
  • 4
    If it were a field of text, it would be called a field of text or a text field.
    Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 13:49

Other people can edit my posts?!

All contributions are licensed under Creative Commons and this site is collaboratively edited, like Wikipedia. If you see something that needs improvement, click edit and help us make it so!

All edits are tracked in a public revision history. To view revisions, click the edit date on the post.

If you are not comfortable with the idea of your contributions being collaboratively edited by other trusted users, this may not be the site for you.


Yes, this is your hang up and you need to get over it.

The edit may have been trivial, but your rollback was an abusive use of the system. If you felt that the edit was somehow abusive and especially if the user had a pattern of abuse, you should just flag the question for moderator's attention.

  • 12
    Respectfully disagree. Rolling back a minor, borderline incorrect edit cannot seriously be considered as an abuse of the system. Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 13:34
  • 1
    That assertion defies logic.
    Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 13:38
  • 7
    You defy logic. Rollbacks are just as valid as other edits. if the edit added nothing to the post (which it didn't) it should be rolled back. Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 13:41
  • 1
    If the edit added nothing to the post, then there is no harm in the edit.
    Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 13:41
  • 12
    The edit marked parts as code which weren't really code and it added a "to" which also should not be there. The rollback therefore is fully justified. Saying "it didn't do much harm, so rolling back is inappropriate" is illogical.
    – Bart
    Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 13:42
  • 5
    I've edited your post. I added nothing to the post therefore "there is no harm in the edit". If you roll back the edit, that's an "abusive use of the system" Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 13:49
  • @TheUnhandledException, random syntax highlighting is less effective when the post's greyed out... Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 13:50
  • I don't rollback abusive edits so you are in luck.
    Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 13:50
  • 5
    @TheUnhandledException Don't make edits on another user's post to make a point, hash it out in the comments or point it out in your own answer if you disagree.
    – casperOne
    Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 13:52
  • 3
    You're right, that was inapprpriate of me. I was just trying to make a point, but it was abusive. My apologies @casperOne and GEOCHET. Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 13:53
  • 6
    It sure was funny though. :) Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 14:10
  • 1
    I guess there's enough downvotes on this answer to just let it be. Thanks for your views on the subject though.
    – epologee
    Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 15:32
  • 10
    Wow. You actually went to my SO-question and rolled back my rollback... Didn't know this was such a heavy loaded topic. Thank goodness the post is closed now.
    – epologee
    Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 15:36
  • 8
    @casperOne I'm enjoying the irony of the fact that you rolled back a trivial,borderline abusive edit on a post asserting that trivial, borderline abusive edits shouldn't be rolled back.
    – Servy
    Commented Nov 8, 2012 at 17:38

You must log in to answer this question.

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