There isn't an individual flag for edits: we can't use a special flag relating to someone who edits a post of another user. Now the only way to draw a moderator's attention about someone's edit is to use that flag which is under the post they edited. Placing the extra flag inside the edit block will increase the number of complaints to moderators about useless and bad edits. This will increase the responsibility of those users who will want to edit others' posts.

I suggest to do a flag button inside an edit block:
flag for an edit block

P.S.: there is my first topic which can be considered as an introductory part for this question.

update (about being a dup):

I have a message:

The answer suggested to me is Is it possible to flag an edit for abuse? which is about asking what to do and my post about suggesting what to do. So they are not duplicates.

There is the answer Add the ability to flag an edit for moderator attention which can be considered the same as mine (although mine raises a global issue about how to increase responsibility of people). You can suggest it as a dup if you think it's necessary.

  • 12
    Does this answer your question? Is it possible to flag an edit for abuse?. Also this being a potential duplicate target. Jan 4 at 0:19
  • @AntonMenshov in my post I don't ask what to do - I myself suggest what to do by the illustrative image I did.
    – Loviii
    Jan 4 at 0:28
  • 2
    That's why in addition to a question with support, I added the second one with feature-request. Both would be valid duplicate targets, with the first one providing more information, and second one — being a feature-request as well. Jan 4 at 0:29
  • @AntonMenshov I agree that that question from your second link can be considered the same as mine. But my post focusing on how to increase responsibility of people seems to me more globally formulated, I mean, showing the problem on the global side .
    – Loviii
    Jan 4 at 0:42
  • 1
    Yep, I noticed that — hence, in addition to providing potential duplicate targets (for you and the community to decide if this feature request is different enough), I added my own answer which attempts to address the aforementioned focus by challenging the premise of the abundance of such issues. Jan 4 at 0:47
  • 2
    The dupe was wrongly closed as dupe, fixed that and added to the list here. Jan 4 at 10:45

1 Answer 1


The scenario when drawing a moderator's attention to a particular edit is needed is extremely rare; hence, in those scenarios, one can use a custom flag for the post itself writing about why the moderator's attention is actually needed. A specialized flag with an uncommon placement seems quite unnecessary.

The users who can edit posts directly have gained this privilege (meaning, they have experience within a particular community and likely know some ropes), so the influx of low-quality edits that don't go through a review queue (aka suggested edits) is quite unlikely (also, see FAQ on editing).

This feature request assumes that it is quite a common situation, which is against my experience as a moderator. Hence, I would consider implementing such functionality detrimental to the user experience.

  • 1
    "rare" and "detrimental" have different meanings. Your final phrase about "detrimental functionality" logically doesn't follow from your answer.
    – Loviii
    Jan 4 at 0:20
  • 6
    @Loviii to me it looks logical from what I wrote. What I mean is: If a scenario is rare, then implementing a specialized feature to handle it by cluttering the interface and moderator workflow is detrimental. Unless the scenario is both rare and critically important (say, a fire alarm), which I highly doubt is relevant to this post. Jan 4 at 0:22
  • 7
    I don't know if it would be a detriment to the interface, but it's another feature that would need developer time to create, test, and maintain, which is currently at a premium and would have to come at the expense of features that are much more sorely needed.
    – Laurel
    Jan 4 at 1:35
  • 3
    @Laurel I don't think development priorities should really factor into a feature request; we don't have any real insight into the resources available or the amount of work required. I think it's more productive to discuss feature requests without worrying about whether it will knock other requests off the development list. As a dev I'd like folks not to worry about the team's workload when asking for things they want.
    – ColleenV
    Jan 4 at 14:31
  • @ColleenV I think it can be useful to have feature requests even about minor issues since it allows workarounds to be shared, but I still think that the cost of implementing the feature has to be considered. Development time is a finite resource; even features that a lot of people think are essential for the site to operate smoothly are not being implemented.
    – Laurel
    Jan 4 at 16:02
  • 2
    @Laurel My point is that we don't know the cost. I guarantee you that even experienced developers are making bad guesses when they don't know the code base, the strengths of the team, and what their internal priorities are. There are things that look hard to us that might be a simple addition to something someone is already working, and things that seem simple that are really complicated because of the interactions with other systems that are... let's say 'quirky'. We should stick to giving our requirements, and let devs worry about implementation.
    – ColleenV
    Jan 4 at 16:12
  • 2
    Also, the answer to getting what you personally feel should be prioritized implemented is not trying to limit the choices of things the team could do; It's persuading them that it should be a priority. Their list is already so long adding more requests doesn't make a difference. You have to advocate for the things you want and keep bringing them up and getting others on-board. Trying to deprioritize some suggestions doesn't up the priority of others. The ones you're thinking of probably aren't even on the TODO list yet.
    – ColleenV
    Jan 4 at 16:20

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