Possible Duplicate:
Why multiple approvers for proposed edits

Cron job scheduling

The original poster didn't code-format his crontab. (Oh the pain!)

Another user edited. Very helpful. But he didn't have the reputation to make the edit complete on his own. I tried to confirm his edit. I do have the reputation to make edits on my own. But at least two votes are required to confirm his edit?

Seems silly. If I have the reputation to make edits all on my own, why does anyone else have to look over my shoulder when I'm given a "confirm edits" or "reject edits" button?



1 Answer 1


Good point but I tend to agree with the current situation.

When you make your own edit you know what you're doing and usually you don't make mistakes.

But when you just look at someone else edit, there is higher chance that you'll miss some mistakes the other person made, and the edit itself will contain mistakes.

So the additional set of eyes looking at the same edit make sure there are no mistakes.

Little cumbersome, little desrespect but hey, it works. :)

  • That's not a very satisfying answer... Do you have sources for any of your claims?
    – xaxxon
    Aug 17, 2017 at 3:05
  • @xaxxon one source, I am afraid: common sense. Aug 17, 2017 at 4:53
  • There's a reason that personal anecdotes aren't useful and are often harmful. "Common sense" is often wrong and suffers from many biases.
    – xaxxon
    Aug 17, 2017 at 4:57
  • @xaxxon usually I'll agree with you, but here on MSE with lack of official response to most questions, that's all we have. In my opinion, it is better than leaving people in the dark. Not everything is set by rules, many things are left for common sense, and that's not coming just from me. Aug 17, 2017 at 5:19

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