I'm not against it at all. I like it. I'm just curious what the rationale is/was. Of course I agree that good edits are good and that good things should be incentivized, but why with rep?
Reputation is a rough measurement of how much the community trusts you; it is earned by convincing your peers that you know what you’re talking about.
Privileges control what you can do on Meta Stack Exchange. Gain more privileges by increasing your reputation (points you receive from your fellow users for posting helpful questions and answers).
And the help center page on editing says:
- To fix grammar and spelling mistakes
- To clarify the meaning of the post (without changing that meaning)
- To include additional information only found in comments, so all of the information relevant to the post is contained in one place
- To correct minor mistakes or add updates as the post ages
- To add related resources or hyperlinks
You don't really need to have subject-matter knowledge/expertise to fix spelling/grammar, make certain kinds of clarifications (non-technical wording), or to inline useful info from comments (such as comments that should have been edits by an asker (I'm not saying it's good to do the asker's work for them in editing instead of telling them to do it themselves, but I'm not against it either)).
So why rep?
And why not just badges? Why isn't it just a badge thing? I've been reading some badge-request posts and seeing a lot of "Badges are to encourage good behaviour". We have editing badges. Why not just leave it at editing badges? There are plenty of behaviours that we want and that we incentivize using badges. Why of all those behaviours is editing the only one that is also worth rep (other than asking and answering, which the help center pages I've quoted clearly say are the ways of getting rep)?
The following are not my actual question, but are written to get your gears spinning: why don't we also award up to some lifetime-capped amount of rep for dup-finding or for other helpful post-flags? (Again, this is just to get you thinking about edit rep. Do not try to actually thoroughly answer those specific questions about proposals of rep for other behaviours here unless you think it is necessary to answer the question on edit rep).
The post that confirms the change making suggested edits worth rep explains the mechanics, but not the rationale. The same goes for the MSE FAQ post on edit suggestions. Or maybe I just read too fast and missed it? The confirmation post had an answer linking to a chat message, so maybe the answer can be found there with some digging. I skimmed back through the transcript to Jan 27th and didn't see an explanation.
Why are approved edit suggestions worth reputation? Why not just badges?
I'm looking for an authoritative statement explaining the rationale. If there isn't one, I'd like to know what the community thinks.
Update: Based on @MetaAndrewT's answer, it seems there was no publicly given, authoritative rationale statement (or that more digging is required to find one).