7

I've noticed a lot of trivial edits of old posts - correcting grammar, fixing a missing dot in an obvious IP address (127.0.01 -> 127.0.0.1 was a recent one), that kind of thing.

Sometimes I reject these as they don't materially help the post, sometimes I approve them because they do improve the post. However accepting them I believe brings them to the top of the active posts list, which isn't desirable or useful.

Perhaps there could be a new option "approve trivial edit" that doesn't bring the post to the top of the active posts list, but still allows the edit to be saved?

6

Just approve it. Stack Exchange has made it clear that they think bumps are a good thing, and don't care enough to code in a feature for no-bump edits. If they wanted to have no-bump minor edits, they would, but they don't. The "too minor" edit rejection reason has even been removed, so there's your answer - they want it be improved and bumped.

2

I think the official answer is that if there are more edits needed, you should make them yourself. If the suggested edit fixes one problem, but there are a few other things you can improve, you should do so.

  • That doesn't really answer my question. If someone corrects the word "teh" to "the" in a post from 2010 that is unremarkable, do you allow the edit because it actually does help the post, or do you reject it because it bumps a post for a trivial reason? My suggestion is to allow the edit but not bump the post. – Tim May 28 '16 at 21:16
  • 3
    @tim we understand but you have a bigger chance of going to the pet store and buying a cat with three buttholes than you do of getting Stack Exchange to approve a suggestion that would be helpful on sites that aren't stack overflow itself, where the churn of new posts is so high that they don't see the problem you describe and we've all seen. – Rob Moir May 29 '16 at 11:21

You must log in to answer this question.

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