What to do when people with very high rep are completely changing the meaning of a question?

Question

First this question is not a dupe of:

Mark a user as not being able to edit your question

Though the upvotes show it's an issue: I'm not seeing things.

My question concerns specifically someone with 20K+ rep being eligible for the "moderator" status (you could vote for him on SO as a moderator, which I didn't).

I've seen post where that person changed the entire question so that it fits an answer "because then it adds value". The logic behind the edit being "so it gets referenced in Google (and is searchable directly in SO) and if someone search for the question that fits the answer, then we have an answer".

I don't disagree that from that standpoint it seems to make some sense. But the problem is that it makes the original poster very uncomfortable: why would such a poster come back to SO if it's to see his question completely distorted? Also, why would people answering then getting zero votes or downvoted be motivated to answer more questions when they know the question may get completely modified?

In another case, and this has been the subject of a post here on meta that generated some heat, same 20K+ rep person simply didn't understand the question. So he modified it to a question where he portrayed the user as making something illegal or questionable and the user got downvoted to oblivion. The user left SO and went ballistic on Usenet and on blogs about SO.

This is not good in my opinion because, sure, you completely rewrite questions to make it fit your own view of the world but it's detrimental to existing SO users.

Both to the original poster who asked the question and to people answering the correct question (with the correct meaning, before the crazy edit took place completely changing the question) and to commenters, which often go crazy in comments because they dislike the edit.

That user never edited one of my question, but I was reading a weird series of 20 comments and understood that obviously there was an issue at work and when I saw the name of the editor I thought "oh no, it's him once again".

So my question is simple: what do I do when I think that a user with 20K+ rep is acting in an unacceptable manner, frequently entering into arguments in comments with various SO users and often re-inventing questions?

In other words: what has been put in place in the SO platform to prevent people at the very top (being eligible for meta-moderator status, I don't know how you call this) from subverting the platform?

We could push the logic a bit further: why not write random question, random answers, random upvotes and then after a few days rewrite the question so that it matches the answer with the most vote?

Isn't there really a very serious issue here?

Once again, it's obviously not the first time the subject comes up, the problem is so obvious that it has prompted question here like "mark a user as not being able to edit your question" that I linked to above and it also prompted several blog entries criticizing SO.

I don't dare to flag his comments defending his own crazy edits because I'm thinking "maybe he's meta-moderator now, so he'll see my flag and start editing my own questions to make me look a stupid poster".

It's even worse than that: right now I'm thinking "but why ask question as to how to deal with this and make stackexchange a better platform, because my post may be edited anyway to completely distort my question?".

That is how bad it is. I found it (and it's just an opinion) a bit disgusting.

To make a bad analogy, it's a bit like when you give to much power to someone who turns out to be a bad cop. This is an issue. It has to be dealt with. But it is very difficult to deal with a bad cop once he's near the top of its sphere of influence.

Answer 1

Please provide a link for us to see what you are referencing.
I doubt a moderator would act as you say, you may be misinterpreting his/her actions.

As we (mostly Jeff) always say: If you can't handle other people editing your stuff, this is not the place for you

From the FAQ

Other people can edit my stuff?!

Like Wikipedia, this site is collaboratively edited, and all edits are tracked. If you are not comfortable with the idea of your questions and answers being edited by other trusted users, this may not be the site for you.

Answer 2

If you suspect that a question has been wrongly edited, you may use the "Flag" function, and select "Requires Moderator attention". Then you can write whatever you want about what the issue is. If a user does a lot of wrongful editing, it will be noticed by other moderators, and possible action can be taken against this user.

Answer 3

If the person doesn't have a ♦ next to their name (like mine, but it will be blue on SO) then they can not see who has flagged their posts. They can't even see that they have been flagged unless we tell them. If the person you're talking about doesn't have ♦ moderator status (and I'm pretty confident they don't) then please flag the post so we can take a look at it. There isn't a lot we can do without looking at the specific post.

Answer 4

I've seen post where that person changed the entire question so that it fits an answer "because then it adds value".

I've done that. The key factor is the original question not adding value by being too vague or containing contradictory information. If there are two possible and incompatible interpretations, then either the original author needs to clarify it... or someone else does. Otherwise, it might as well just be deleted: questions without answers aren't useful.

In another case, and this has been the subject of a post here on meta that generated some heat, same 20K+ rep person simply didn't understand the question. So he modified it to a question where he portrayed the user as making something illegal or questionable and the user got downvoted to oblivion. The user left SO and went ballistic on Usenet and on blogs about SO.

Heh... Ok, I think I know what you're talking about. Funny thing about that... This user decided he wanted to drag another user's name through the mud, alleging abuse on SO itself, on Meta, and elsewhere... While the revision history on the question itself tells a much different story.

Which just goes to show how big a fool you can make of yourself if you fly off the handle instead of learning to read.

the problem is so obvious that it has prompted question here like "mark a user as not being able to edit your question" that I linked to above and it also prompted several blog entries criticizing SO.

Plenty of stupid things get suggested here every day, and a good many collect far more up-votes. And ranting on random blog posts is hardly indicative of anything... Blogs are soapboxes for their authors, a place where they can spew whatever idiocy appeals to them without worrying about someone contradicting them with annoying "evidence".

Isn't there really a very serious issue here?

No, it's not. There's always a revision history, if the author has a problem with an edit he's free to quietly and with a single click revert the post to its previous state. If that's not enough, he can flag the post for review by moderators (real moderators, not the normal users you appear to have confused with moderators).

To stretch a bad analogy... It's as though cops have to perform all of their work in front of video cameras. Cameras they can't turn off or otherwise avoid. Cameras that when rewound can revert portions of the world itself to the state it was in when originally filmed.

Yeah. It's that awesome. You're livin' in the future, man...

Answer 5

For what it's worth, I've often considered (but never followed through with, though I'm tempted) the editing titles of questions to more accurately reflect the underlying nature of the question.

While a title like "Why doesn't my variable change?" may be an accurate description of what the OP is really looking for, in the long term it's useless on the site. No one will ever go to that question for an answer, while a title change to "Does C# handle ++ differently than other languages?" might. (This is just a made up example.)

Of course, care must be taken, and doubtless mistakes will be made, but I think a title or content changes to make things clearer often can result in better answers and higher ratings.

Of course, it's enough of a potential flashpoint that I also generally don't do it...I stick to grammar cleanup and the like. But I could understand someone having very good intentions (and results) doing it.

Answer 6

I've seen post where that person changed the entire question so that it fits an answer "because then it adds value".

As downvoter points out, the site is, by design, community collaboratively edited. If you are uncomfortable with people editing your question, this may not be the best site for your contribution.

As awe points out, the flagging system is the most appropriate way to get community elected moderators to look into the issue.

What to do when people with very high rep are completely changing the meaning of a question?

If you are worried about lashback, or don't trust the moderators, then you have two more options:

• Post here on Meta and request broad community consensus on the action (ie, hold the moderators accountable by engaging the community)
• Email team@stackoverflow.com to bring the matter to the attention of the site owners and developers. This isn't the best option, because they do trust their moderators - if they didn't, they would have no time for development, instead spending all their time moderating petty issues.

Note that posting on meta about the specific issue will likely come to the attention of the Team, but they may not intervene until they see the community process has failed.

Generally the community process gets good (if not great) results.

You can safely post a link to the relevant questions. If there's a lashback, the community will see it.

However, be prepared for the community to disagree with your assessment. Come with an open mind.

Either way, you should not be penalized, and if you are, bring that up here.