Some of us have taken it upon ourselves to seek out the worst of what finds its way to Stack Exchange so that the majority of users don't have to see any of that. That's how the spam and rude flags work, for example: When a post is deleted with even one such helpful flag, the new answer notification is removed, the post vanishes for the majority of users, and the post itself is hidden behind a mask so that privileged users who don't want to see it won't. On top of this, new posts can be monitored programmatically and cleaned up by people who have minimal reputation on the site (that is, association bonus users).
However, this is not how suggested edits work. In fact, the only part of this that works even remotely similarly is the fact that users who aren't signed in will see a 404 error when trying to see an edit rejected with this reason:
Spam or vandalism
This edit defaces the post in order to promote a product or service, or is deliberately destructive.
However, this isn't enough. I have some suggestions:
- Remove the notification about the post having a rejected edit for the author (and maybe followers?) to review. (I think this is the most important thing.)
- Make it possible for suggested edits to be monitored just like active posts, via the API. (Apparently the reason why Smokey doesn't monitor them is because there's no good way to poll new edits, like a websocket.)
- Unfortunately, this won't be enough to allow suggested edits to be handled as efficiently as regular posts are, since reviewing them will require 1000–2000 reputation. It would be nice for that reason to be able to "flag" reviews so that the moderation burden doesn't have to fall on a small group of people on some obscure SE site who might not be around when the suggested edit happens. Think of how red flagging posts across the network is mostly handled by Charcoal users.
- Mask edits rejected with this reason like posts when viewing them.
- Clarify the description of "Spam or vandalism" so that it's more obvious to use it only in extreme cases, and also for offensive edits specifically. (When I hear "vandalism" I think of nonsense, not something that's truly offensive.) This would probably be very easy to do (at least once someone writes up a good suggestion), since it just involves updating text.
Note: The most important use case would be for offensive edits. I've seen such edits more than once (albeit not on my own posts), which is already too much.