This question is an exact duplicate of:

I just saw a user who has repeatedly tried to edit a question on Meta. Judging by the edit comments, the user seems to be mistaken about the nature of Meta Stack Overflow.

I would like to point this out to the user, but this user has no posts on any Stack Exchange sites; this user's reputation comes strictly from suggested edits.

Can we @-comment the submitter of a rejected edit? It would be helpful in showing editors how the system works.

marked as duplicate by ShaWiz, S.L. Barth, Stijn, Richard Tingle, Rory Alsop Mar 25 '14 at 13:09

This question was marked as an exact duplicate of an existing question.

  • 3
    That user is probably a bot, currently attempts are being made in chat to reach a CM. – Stijn Mar 25 '14 at 12:56
  • 1
    Sadly only successful editors can be replied to. But there is a proposal requesting that this be added; Allow failed editors be @replied to – Richard Tingle Mar 25 '14 at 12:56
  • 2
    What amuses me the most is how quite a few of the bot's suggested edits are being approved... – J. Steen Mar 25 '14 at 12:58
  • @RichardTingle Ok, that makes my question a duplicate. Voted to close mine as dupe - and upvoted that one. – S.L. Barth Mar 25 '14 at 13:02
  • Not a single post in 50 accounts and only gibberish in the about me section so no, no way to contact. But being a spam bot, no point contacting it anyway. – ShaWiz Mar 25 '14 at 13:02
  • 1
    It's a crap bot... all it's doing is removing tags - though it looks like some have been approved. – ben is uǝq backwards Mar 25 '14 at 13:03
  • @ben in the past it used to deface posts, see this – ShaWiz Mar 25 '14 at 13:03
  • It's really a bizarre thing to do. Even the edit comment doesn't contain any spam – Richard Tingle Mar 25 '14 at 13:05
  • 3
    It might be in training. To see if it works, flies under the radar, before replacing the innocuous content with more offensive and harmful material. – J. Steen Mar 25 '14 at 13:06
  • Usually spammers don't go out of their way to earn rep... so it may be specifically targeting Stack Exchange sites. – S.L. Barth Mar 25 '14 at 13:07