1

I understand what's written in the answer to "Why isn't the Community bot silent when editing posts that have http://* to https://* for stackexchange sites?", i.e.:

edits by the community bot aren't treated differently than edits by a normal user.

However, there is also some rule in place which looks something like so:

votes from at least 5 mins ago can be changed (retracted) only after the post (question or answer) was edited.

Therefor I just did some experiment like so:

  1. Find a post which met all those criteria:

    • includes a http-link to some other post (as of revision 1 of it).
    • which I ever voted on, but before the community-user edited "later on".
    • got edited by the community-user to (only) change http to https.
    • never got edited afterwards anymore.
  2. Try to retract my vote (to check if I'd be allowed or not). And sure enough I was able to retract my vote.

  3. Check the timeline of the post, to see if my step 2 was reflected in it. And sure enough it was.

  4. Wait for about 6 mins (probably not needed to wait that long, but just to avoid any influence from any 5 mins related voting rule) and perform an undo of the vote I retracted (so that my vote was restored to its initial state from before my experiment).

  5. Check the timeline of the post again, to see if my step 4 was reflected in it. And sure enough it was.

So with that, I think it confirms this:

edits by the community bot aren't treated differently than edits by a normal user. Which includes that any votes that existed before the http-to-https edit can be retracted.

My question: is this the intended design of this special http-to-https edit, or is it rather something that still needs to be addressed somehow?

Since voting is assumed to be anonymous, I haven't included a link to the actual post (timeline) which I used for my experiment. Though I'd be happy to (privately) share that link if requested to do so, e.g. by sending it via the contact form to the CM team. Though if you can find a similar post you ever voted on, you should be able to repeat the experiment.

Update: My question is NOT about any other variations of edits by the comunity user, only about this specific change of http to https. Which is also why:

  • I included my 1st phrase in my question.
  • I added "https" in the title as of revision 3 (though my revision 1 contained a typo like "hppts" about that).
11

is this the intended design of this special http-to-https edit, or is it rather something that still needs to be addressed somehow?

There is nothing special about the Community edits for the HTTPS link change. The only thing special about those edits is that they don't bump the post to the front page, that's all.

Besides that, they behave like normal edits, including your ability to retract your vote. Nothing wrong with that and nothing to fix.

You could probably say that an edit by the Community user shouldn't change the meaning of the post, but why make this complicated for an edge case that isn't interesting to abuse at all? (An edit from you as an anonymous user could do the same...)

You must log in to answer this question.

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