I have recently received the following message:

Too many edits

You have already edited 5 of your own posts today (not including very recent posts). Further edits are not allowed until tomorrow.

Please contact a moderator if you require assistance.

I was trying to edit my old posts refining them by making some formatting and putting some titles to my references URLs. Suddenly, I've got blocked from doing more editing. Even on my new answers!

Why are you applying such constraint? And what assistance could I require from the moderators in such a case?

  • @Goran - it should give you free reign on new answers... how "new" is "new" here? – Marc Gravell ModStaff May 13 '11 at 10:46
  • did you do your old posts from the same account as you are tyring to do the edits from – Ian Ringrose May 13 '11 at 10:56
  • @Arjan: Marc question is directed to Goran .. – Akram Shahda May 13 '11 at 11:23
  • @Ian: Sure, why then do you think I've got the message ?? – Akram Shahda May 13 '11 at 11:23
  • Then I will ask you: @Akram, how "new" is "new" here? ;-) – Arjan May 13 '11 at 11:24
  • @Arjan: An answer that I posted less than an hour ago for example! What do you think Arjan? My "new" answer is my last posted one which happens to be posted 1 year ago :) – Akram Shahda May 13 '11 at 11:30
  • 1
    @Akrim - yes, that'll be fixed next deploy – Marc Gravell ModStaff May 13 '11 at 12:41

That code was (correctly) not counting recent (today/yesterday) posts in the "how many have you edited", but was not (and incorrectly) applying that to the current post.

This is fixed in the code now, pending deployment.

This sanity check avoids a few scenarios:

  • front-page spamming
  • hijacked account vandalism
  • rage-quit vandalism

We don't have any objection to improving posts, and yes: it is meant to have an amnesty on anything recent (so you can improve your recent answers).

  • So, the 'amnesty' is based the post age and not post type. Sounds ok to me. Incidentally, I think that this also helps with the edit vampires problem. – Goran Jovic May 13 '11 at 11:38
  • @Goran - we don't distinguish between questions/answers, if that is what you mean. At least, not for this. – Marc Gravell ModStaff May 13 '11 at 11:45
  • 3
    do you think we should increase the number to 7 or perhaps 8? 5 is amazingly low, as much as its effective in preventing vandalism, its just as effective in creating annoyance to a good-intended user – Pacerier Jun 11 '11 at 19:32
  • 1
    @Pacerier - we could perhaps raise it a little, but... – Marc Gravell ModStaff Jun 11 '11 at 21:59
  • 2
    Gitolite V3 just got released (sitaramc.github.com/gitolite/g3why.html) and I have 51 of my ansswers to update (stackoverflow.com/search?q=%5Bgitolite%5D+user%3A6309). Are you seriously telling me I won't be able to do so more than 5 questions a day??? Could a 200K+ rep entitle me to bypass that limitation? – VonC Apr 18 '12 at 12:00
  • @MarcGravell how about it adding it to the FAQs? I stumbled upon the same issue, even though I have gone through the entire FAQ. And it so happened that I ended up editing my unaccepted answers, whereas, if I was made aware in advance, I would have edited the accepted ones on priority, as they attract more attention in the long term. – Jugal Thakkar Aug 11 '12 at 8:00

This is probably done so you don't game the system. Every time you edit your own post, it shoots up to the top of the questions list. This is unfair, because it means that newer questions get bumped down the list.

  • That, and I can imagine it's also a measure against compromised accounts? (If true, then maybe the captchas are no longer required...? Ah, apparently the error message does not apply to recent posts.) – Arjan May 13 '11 at 10:15
  • Fair enough. But, does that require blocking me from editting my newly added answers as well ?? – Akram Shahda May 13 '11 at 10:17
  • @Akram: A good point. It should apply only to the questions. – Goran Jovic May 13 '11 at 10:28
  • 1
    @AkramShahda: indeed, maybe it's a bit excessive. – alex May 13 '11 at 10:31

The limit is there to prevent post vandalism where a user systematically edits all their posts in a flurry of destruction. See User wildly erasing all his posts continuously even after we rollback for an example.

There's also a similar restriction on how many old posts you can delete in a day: Slight modification to the "suspected deletion vandalism" algorithm.

  • Hmm, you'd think 10 would be enough for that, and giving warning would surely be wise too? – SamB May 16 '11 at 17:28

You must log in to answer this question.

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