I know that requests for a "minor edit" option come up all the time and are routinely rejected, and for good reasons. (Details can be seen, among other places, at Could we have the ability to mark a change as minor in questions or answers?)

On the other hand, we already have a concept of a "non-substantive" change, which does not trigger a notification to the OP when a small edit is made to their post, as described in No notification was received for an edit to a post

Is it possible to also tweak the algorithm that populates the "new activity" page, so that non-substantive edit activity has less weight than other types of activity? This would put such posts on the front page, but also help to alleviate the problem for less active sites, where minor edits can end up pushing newer, or even substantially edited, questions off the front page for a while.

As a recent example, on https://scifi.stackexchange.com/, a friendly and helpful user went through a long list of Lord of the Rings questions fixing the spelling of certain oft-misspelled words. These edits have taken up about 60% of the first page for the past 8 hours, because our activity on SF&F just isn't high enough to push them off. Many of these are questions that were asked/answered/accepted as long as 4 years ago, making it very unlikely any useful new contributions are forthcoming (though we're probably now get a bunch of bad late answers).

enter image description here

I understand the reasons for putting these back on the front page, but it would be nice if they could sort of "decay" off the page after a few hours of non-movement, perhaps moving down the list every few hours until they naturally fall off?

  • 1
    I'd like to see this among other changes to the front page... That said, this fixation on the sanctity of the homepage on quiet sites continues to puzzle me; after the cleanup is over, go to /questions?sort=newest or /unanswered and edit a few overlooked questions - voilà, homepage looks diverse again. – Shog9 Jun 13 '15 at 20:36
  • 1
    we experience users get that, and in fact we tend to coordinate bulk edits in chat to avoid this problem completely. The problem is we often get well-meaning users going on an edit spree at strange times, and since our site is less active, it's rare that the more causal users ever need to go to page 2 for anything, so they won't bother. We have similar issues if a user gets into their head to do a tag cleanup (and I'd hope that tag-only edits would be considered non-substantive!) – KutuluMike Jun 13 '15 at 20:43
  • How about a "recently edited" tab? – Wad Cheber stands with Monica Jun 14 '15 at 1:09
  • 1
    I don't like this idea. It sounds like a recipe for users to make small, but potentially significant changes to people's posts at busy times but to avoid the oversight that usually comes from the post being front page for a while. – Richard Jun 14 '15 at 1:09
  • on a busy site, you can do that now... if you edit a post on SO it'll probably be off the front page in a matter of minutes. I'm talking about letting these falls off over the course of hours. Plus, we still have the edit review queue... – KutuluMike Jun 14 '15 at 1:10
  • @Richard - if we added a "recently edited" tab, and people failed to check it, the blame would be on the community as much as the editor. – Wad Cheber stands with Monica Jun 14 '15 at 1:11
  • 2
    @WadCheber IMO the problem with that is inertia. On slower sites my routine, and I suspect a lot of others, is to log in and scan the front page for interesting questions, and if I don't see any, move to the next site. Anything that requires changing that habit is unlikely to work well, and us not ever seeing recently edited questions will hurt the community as a whole... – KutuluMike Jun 14 '15 at 1:16
  • @MichaelEdenfield - Make it worth people's time to review edits and they will actively seek out opportunities to do so. Confirmed edits = significant rep? Everyone will look for chances to review edits. And what I am suggesting is that the "recently edited" tab would be introduced alongside the "edits fade from the front page more quickly" feature. We'd have the best of both worlds- front pages free of edit clutter, and a way to keep track of edits easily. – Wad Cheber stands with Monica Jun 14 '15 at 1:19
  • 2
    @WadCheber -So now we need a whole 'nother tab in order to fix the problem you just created :-) – Richard Jun 14 '15 at 1:25
  • 1
    @Richard I didn't create anything. I suggested a way to overcome the issue that you raised in objection to Michael's suggestion. – Wad Cheber stands with Monica Jun 14 '15 at 1:39
  • 1
    @Richard - Although the "recently edited" tab seems like a good idea to me, regardless of whether Michael's suggestion is implemented. – Wad Cheber stands with Monica Jun 14 '15 at 1:46

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .