<p>A few hours ago a user posted <a href="http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/110682/lets-clean-up-low-quality-posts-with-profanity-on-stack-overflow">Let's clean up low-quality posts with profanity on Stack Overflow</a>. The premise of the discussion was to remove the word <strong>Damn</strong> from posts as it is considered profanity. However, the community, by method of voting, disagreed with the premise of this post.</p> <p>However, in the meantime, I was alerted today to a set of <a href="http://superuser.com/users/2394/lance-roberts?tab=activity">edits</a> on Super User which consisted of removing the word <strong>Damn</strong> from posts referring to a product, funnily enough named <strong>Damn Small Linux</strong>. Considering this is what the product is called, and it is a widely accepted name, editing all these posts is counter productive and also doesn't help with driving Google traffic for the product to Super User.</p> <p>This is not the first time, a change is suggested on Meta, and immediately we have users that start a campaign to implement this as policy, long before it is actually agreed to be implemented by the majority of users.</p> <p>It was suggested by some members of the community that there should be a way to revoke edit rights to prevent abuses like this, however I feel this may be a bit harsh.</p> <p>Is there, if any, a way to prevent these type of policy changes to take effect without agreement? These edits bumped questions to the home page unnecessarily, and therefore detracted attention from new questions?</p> <p>Reversing them is simply a rollback, however this requires time and effort, and again unnecessarily bumps these questions to the home page. </p>