Meta Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for meta-discussion of the Stack Exchange family of Q&A websites. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
A user suggested an edit to my answer on this question of theirs.
They removed relevant, useful information from my answer because (presumably) it incriminates them of spamming. Fortunately, because they didn't have the privilege, the edit was rejected by two established users.
Is this behavior acceptable?
If not... What, if anything, could be done to help discourage malicious edits such as these?
If the user doesn't have the privilege to edit, you or two users who do have editing privileges will reject the edit.
If the user has the privilege to edit, it will go through and you (or anyone else watching, actually) can roll it back if you feel that it's necessary. ( though I find it rare that users with 2K rep will edit maliciously like that; by the time they get the privilege, they're usually deserving of it, in my experience )
Why isn't the regular editing system enough?
I think putting the edits in the triage queue is overkill. We have a edit queue already.
Let the community reject that edit or do it yourself. If it was approved already: just roll it back. If you come in an edit war: flag it for moderator attention.
I propose that substantial/suspicious edits by users over 2k be added to the triage queue. To be considered suspicious, the edit would have to either
Because of the way the triage queue works, no useful action may be blocked (Especially important for the removal of offensive content), but malicious actions will be peer-reviewed.
