-12

I recently found this on Mathematics Meta.
The Reject and Edit can be abused to reject single-handedly.
There are examples of edits being rejected here, here, here and here.
Because when they select Reject and Edit, the Community user rejects the edit as a moderator.
Is this intended?

  • 2
    If you can click a “Reject and Edit” button, you already have editing privileges, or are the owner of the post. Doesn’t seem like abuse. – Sebastian Simon Mar 22 at 23:38
  • FYI there was a provision to prevent this from being abused: all suggested edits rejected by the Community user used to be exempt from causing edit bans. But SE found that the vast majority of said rejections where a reviewer decided to reject and edit the post were valid, and removed this restriction (now only those edits auto-rejected as an edit conflict are exempt). – Sonic the Reinstate Monica-hog Mar 22 at 23:44
  • 5
    If you do notice an edit reviewer that is abusing the "Reject and Edit" button with trivial edits to immediately reject edits while making no other substantive edits, flag one of their posts for mod attention. Mods can issue manual review bans and warnings. – Sonic the Reinstate Monica-hog Mar 22 at 23:46
7

When reviewing Suggested Edits on Stack Overflow, I commonly see edits that either introduce more problems than they fix, or don't even attempt to fix all issues with the post. In both cases, Reject and Edit is a useful option as it allows the reviewer to correctly edit the post while also not approving a bad edit. It can also help the edit suggester learn what makes up a good edit, and thus submit better edits in the future.

If there was only Reject and not Reject and Edit, then the reviewer wouldn't have the chance to correctly fix up a post if they were the first reviewer.

Additionally, even if there wasn't a Reject and Edit button, reviewers would still be able to override a suggested edit by navigating directly to the edit page. For example, if there was an edit pending on this question, I could go directly to https://meta.stackexchange.com/posts/325591/edit and override the suggested edit with my own edit. Getting rid of Reject and Edit wouldn't stop reviewers from replacing bad edits with good edits; it would simply make it a little harder, and probably discourage users from doing it, even if it's the best option.

Finally, Reject and Edit can't really be abused more than editing privileges. Yes, you could prevent editors from gaining 2 reputation per suggestion, but beyond that, you're really just editing the post and overriding a suggested edit while you do that. That's subject to abuse just as much as it would be otherwise.

If a user is frequently rejecting and editing good edits, it can be easily seen by navigating through their profile, and then flag for moderator attention if they have at least 15 rep. Moderators can ban users from review, so they can manually ban the reviewer from further reviewing suggested edits for a chosen period of time.

  • 1
    Very nice answer, and thorough. It can be far more expedient, when a suggested edit to a post (that needs significant editing) amounts to only a trivial edit, that suggested-edit reviewers are able to "reject and edit" the suggested edit, by editing appropriately that post, without rewarding a superficial edit suggested by a novice that never addressed the actual problems with the post. And any abuses suspected among suggested-edit reviewers is best addressed at the level of the site of concern, by flagging the site moderators. What you said! :-) – Namaste Mar 23 at 13:51

You must log in to answer this question.

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