Every time I fix typos and grammar in someone else's post I feel like I'm stealing thunder from this person. He asked the question, I just made few corrections and not only did I get the same attribution (that box with name and picture) but I even get listed in front of him! Wouldn't it be better to just save my edits in history but do not put my name there if the edit is relatively small? Just a simple link instead of that box (as it is in case of multiple edits) would make me feel better.
I think it is important to be very clear and obvious that another user has edited it - they may have done harm.
In the case of a bad edit:
- If it is obvious that it is edited by another user, it is likely to result in an edit rollback.
- If it isn't obvious, it is likely to result in down-vote / closure / flags / deletion etc.
Besides - I want to know you made the good edit, so I can reward it ;-p
I would agree with the "problem" stated for two reasons
- I am dyslexic so tend to notice the picture rather than the word "edited"
- I usually read SO etc on a mobile device so have to scroll and see the name/picture of the editor rather than the poster.
I agree the edits should be attributable. My suggestion would be to diplay the name and not picture for the editor (in the same way as it works for comments).
Are you proposing reversing the order of display? In other words instead of
we would show
I wonder if that might be MORE confusing since it no longer makes "right column under post = owner" true.
Also it does say edited by and answered by right there in the text.. and the owner gets a special color. I dunno, this seems pretty clear to me.
This was suggested once on UserVoice, and declined. IMHO, it would be a great feature to have. This strange mix of wiki and forum, public and private ownership... has tilted too far in the direction of private, and it's hurting both the site and those who would work to improve it. Wikipedia makes you seek out editors and contributors, we could do the same.
The SO model depends on ego, and reducing the visibility of editors would let egos win without crippling editing...
I think making this an opt-in feature would suffice - if you're making a minor edit (fix typos, formatting) check it, if you're adding or changing something more significant then don't. And then add the ability to flag individual edits so as to allow easier identification of abusive editors.