10

To become a trusted user in Stack Overflow, you need to achieve 20K points, however, if you spend a lot of time closing, editing, reviewing other peoples stuff, you hardly get to the goal of becoming trusted.

It seems to me a weird thing that someone who did edit about 500 posts (and got the badge copy editor) won`t get trusted somehow.

What is your opinion?
Do you think there is a chance for this to change?

1
  • Keep in mind that someone might submit 500 minor edits (e.g. changing "i" to "I" or adding a single tag to 500 posts). Why trust such a user? Same in reviewing: user can make 1000 wrong decisions, e.g. approve bad edits, leave open unfitting questions etc. Jan 30 '14 at 7:53
7

"Trusted" means you're trusted by others. The moderation you're talking about (e.g. editing posts when you're already over the threshold where it would gain 2 rep per edit) isn't reviewed by others (directly), so can't gain you more trust.

I guess there could be a system where people could give some trust (rep) by "upvoting" an edit done by someone, but to my taste this wouldn't be worth the extra complexity to the system.

No need to change anything, IMO.

PS. I personally fall in the category you mention, spending more time reviewing and editing than asking and answering, and I'm fine with not gaining rep for this.

3
  • Isn't the system supposed to be smarter than us humans (and dogs)?
    – bjb568
    Jan 30 '14 at 5:47
  • 7
    If you give people rep for approvivng edits, you'll get people approving edits (even the bad ones) for reputation. Basically, you get robo-reviewers destroying the Suggested Edit queue, for reputation and not just badges. Jan 30 '14 at 5:58
  • Coincidentally, rep from this answer pushed me over the 2k boundary, allowing me to now edit meta-so stuff without being reviewed (preventing me from gaining 2 rep each time) :D
    – Jeroen
    Jan 30 '14 at 7:56
3

When we give people additional moderator capabilities, we do so because the member is in good standing, and has managed to earn a decent amount of reputation by participating meaningfully in the site, which means asking and answering questions.

While, in theory, this doesn't demonstrate that a person can be trusted with moderator actions (because we don't confer rep with moderator actions), in practice, it does seem to work.

There's only one place where we confer rep for moderator actions, and that is in suggested edits. And there are significant problems with suggested edits that you won't find anywhere else in the moderator system.

3

I doubt that reputation will be used as an incentive, and it's probably a good thing that we don't give reputation for it.

For close votes and reviewing, the idea of giving reputation has actually already been brought up:

The main worry with giving reputation points for closing/editing/reviewing is the possibility of gaming the system. Even without the reputation incentive, closing and reviewing already have their own issues:

and as you can see with the previous questions, giving reputation as an incentive is seen as a bad idea that will only add to the problems.

As for editing:

  • If we allow reputation gains and the ability to edit without it being put into the review queue, there's always the worry of people making a ton of inconsequential edits (or worse) just to get the reputation, even if we keep the reputation cap for edits.
  • If we increase the threshold for being able to make edits without review, then we've actually made it harder to get a privilege (which I think is the opposite of what you're going for)
  • Raising the reputation cap for suggested edits is probably the most sane of the three, but I don't really see this as helpful either; there aren't that many people who will hit the cap before they hit 2000 reputation, and this might also have the side effect of flooding the suggested edits review queue (which as @RobertHarvey mentioned, already has it's own special set of issues without the possibility of a mass flood).

You must log in to answer this question.

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