Timeline for Why was my edit rejected?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
23 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 29, 2014 at 14:15 | comment | added | Flimm | This will be my last comment, feel free to have the last word. I'm sorry that this got off to a bad start but I do feel that I understand Iain and others' position better now, so thank you for answering my questions :) | |
| Sep 29, 2014 at 14:10 | comment | added | Flimm | @Michael Hampton: ah, maybe I should let this conversation drop, but I can't help it. You omitted "editing posts", was that deliberate? How can we allow low-rep users to challenge bad reviews, considering that 2000+ rep users are completely blind to bad rejections, they simply don't see them? All I'm trying to do is to make high-rep users aware that there is bad reviewing going on (rejecting a bad edit for the wrong reason is bad reviewing too). I admit that my linked example isn't great. | |
| Sep 29, 2014 at 13:31 | comment | added | Michael Hampton Mod | @Flimm Take the tour, ask and/or answer questions. | |
| Sep 29, 2014 at 10:29 | comment | added | Flimm | @MichaelHampton: What you said is true. I am familiar with the software, and I am not currently a high-quality contributor to Server Fault. What are you suggesting I should do or stop doing based on these facts? | |
| Sep 28, 2014 at 12:29 | comment | added | Michael Hampton Mod | @Flimm You are a completely new user here with no significant participation (questions or answers); your experience on other SE sites only demonstrates conclusively that you're familiar with the software. In particular, it does not suggest that you will be a high-quality contributor. Our more cynical members might even take it as suggesting that you will end up being a low-quality contributor, based on long observation. Remember that Server Fault is unique among SE sites in its professional focus, and therefore operates somewhat differently. | |
| Sep 25, 2014 at 10:35 | comment | added | Flimm | I know how the review system works, I've been a reviewer on other SE sites. What fallacy are you referring to? Did you really just tell me to "quit now whilst you're behind", though? I'm getting the impression that reviewers can't be questioned because they've earned the rep to review, and low-rep users might as well quit now? Fortunately for me, I have enough experience on other SE sites to know that it's worth staying around despite this experience. If you think I'm a troll, please have a look at all my SE profiles and tell me if that's fair. | |
| Sep 24, 2014 at 21:17 | comment | added | user9517 | @Flimm There is no question to answer in your first comment as it is based on a fallacy. To gain the privilege of reviewing edits people have to put some effort into providing content for the site which is approved of by the community. At the rate that you're doing that you'll just about never get that privilege so just quit now whilst you're behind. To be honest I think you're just trolling us now. | |
| Sep 24, 2014 at 21:06 | comment | added | Rob Moir | @Flimm if you invested a quarter of the energy into writing your own content on the main site that you've invested into complaining about one little thing here, you'd probably have made a massive contribution to some people who are desperate for help and (judging by my own experiences and reasons for answering questions) learnt a few new things about the systems you were talking about too. | |
| Sep 24, 2014 at 17:32 | comment | added | Andrew B | @Flimm Suggestions on how to change systems global to all Stack Exchange sites (not just ours) don't accomplish much on a site specific meta site. You can try meta.SE, but search for duplicates as it has almost certainly come up before. | |
| Sep 24, 2014 at 17:25 | comment | added | Flimm | Also, Iain didn't answer my question post in his answer post, with this explanation meta.serverfault.com/questions/6569/… | |
| Sep 24, 2014 at 17:21 | comment | added | Flimm | I would suggest something like peer-review of maybe 1% of the reviews, the system to detect bots is not enough in my opinion. | |
| Sep 24, 2014 at 17:19 | comment | added | Flimm | I'm not suggesting deleting the review system at all! Currently there are no consequences for bad reviews, and only low-rep users bear the brunt of bad reviewing, and they are more likely to just not come back than to complain. (The question referred to by Iain and I is the clarifying question I asked in the first comment of this post.) | |
| Sep 24, 2014 at 16:37 | comment | added | Rob Moir | @Flimm - the only question I see in your question here is the one in the title: "Why was my edit rejected?". Iain answered that, regardless of whether or not you like the answer. As for the "attitude" you talk about here, I'm not sure what else you'd suggest. If there were no reviewers and edits were always approved then the site would very rapidly become vandalised beyond the point it was useful; there are a lot of attempts made to edit questions to introduce nonsense, "me too" responses, requests for further help from a third party who don't know how the site works, and of course, spam. | |
| Sep 24, 2014 at 15:17 | comment | added | Flimm | I asked "should edits that improve answers (but that aren't required) be rejected?", where did you answer that question? | |
| Sep 24, 2014 at 15:08 | comment | added | Flimm | This attitude that the reviewers are always right and define validity is very frustrating. | |
| Sep 24, 2014 at 14:57 | comment | added | user9517 | @Flimm You are focusing too literally on 'invalid'. It is clearly not a valid edit as it has been classed as such by members of the community. I am guessing that the reviewers considered it invalid because it did not enhance the answer sufficiently - note that it currently has 90+ upvotes. It is clearly readable, understandable and has stood the test of time. I did answer you question but you don't like what I said. Your comment is based on your belief that the edit was good when it was deemed not to be by reviewers. Honestly, stop whingeing and move on. | |
| Sep 24, 2014 at 14:28 | comment | added | Flimm | Also, you didn't answer my question in the first comment. | |
| Sep 24, 2014 at 14:25 | comment | added | Flimm | They rejected my review because they said it was invalid, when it isn't! They were free to choose another reason. I completely disagree with your entire post, the reason that would fit best is "custom", not "invalid edit" when it is in fact a valid edit. | |
| Sep 24, 2014 at 11:56 | comment | added | user9517 | @Flimm You'll note that I have not entered into the debate about whether your edit improved the answer or not. It's only your opinion that it was an improvement, clearly 2 reviewers don't agree with you. | |
| Sep 24, 2014 at 11:55 | comment | added | Mark Henderson Mod | @Flimm I like your edit. I don't think I can approve it after the fact though. | |
| Sep 24, 2014 at 11:50 | comment | added | Flimm | So we're saying edits that improve answers should be rejected, because they aren't required? | |
| Sep 24, 2014 at 9:57 | history | edited | user9517 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 5 characters in body
|
| Sep 24, 2014 at 9:51 | history | answered | user9517 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |