I've heard that you must make at least n (6?) character changes in order to suggest edit, yet here's an edit with 0 changes. You can view sources from edit history: before and after.
Were rules changed recently?

  • 3
    Well, he added six spaces at the end of the post (to force an edit for voting, apparently; you can see it on the suggested edit with the Markdown diff option), but it seems kind of weird that that counts. – Tim Stone Feb 27 '11 at 5:42

The rules did not change, there were 6 spaces added at the end.

If we notice a pattern of abuse we will add more cat-and-mouse "stop adding almost nothing checks". It is painful, cause you add them and then someone adds <!-- ha ha cheated --> or blank unicode chars and so on and so forth.

Note the system, by design, protects itself from this kind of abuse. If people suggest these kind of crap edits, reject them and then the people doing so will be banned from edits.

  • 2
    That edit was approved... – Justin Feb 27 '11 at 8:54
  • 5
    @Kragen, counter point, lots of stupid posts are upvoted :) we can give you guys the tools, but can not force you to use them in ways that are intelligible – waffles Feb 27 '11 at 8:56
  • 1
    In this particular case, I might not have seen it as an abuse. The summary suggests that it might have been a trivial edit to revert a vote. Though on the other hand, the better course of action probably would have been to request that someone with edit privileges (or the owner) to make that trivial edit. – Jeff Mercado May 16 '11 at 18:39
  • 4
    Fixing errors in the site's content is not "abuse". Working around rules in order to make helpful contributions is not "cheating". We're volunteering our free time to improve the site, and this is the attitude we get? – endolith Feb 1 '12 at 15:53

You must log in to answer this question.

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