Skip to main content
(While we are at it.) - yes, I did not bump it (that was by a new answer)! Removed meta information (this belongs in comments).
Source Link

This is an old thread, but I'd like to add another microprivilege to the mix.

Ability to make small edits throughout the network, with community review

Personally, I currently have well over 100k network-wide, over 10k on three different sites, over 3k on another eight sites, and over 2k on another two sites. I currently have diamonds on two sites, and have had one on another where I left in good standing.

And still, there's a gazillion sites where I can't be trusted to fix a simple typo in a post without jumping through hoops.

If a user has earned a large amount of reputation on one or even a few sites, it's a decent bet that they know reasonably well how things work. So if they come across typos or other small errors in posts on sites where they haven't earned enough reputation to be able to make edits without community review, at least waive the six-character minimum for edits, but keep the requirement for community review in place.

If the edits are rejected in community review for being, say, not constructive, then this should trigger the proposed-edit ban already in place. The threshold for triggering the proposed-edit ban could be lowered if the user is exercising this privilege.

Users are allowed to have some number of pending suggested edits at a time; I think half a dozen pending suggested edits is allowed, but I could be wrong about the exact number. There's no reason why a user exercising this privilege couldn't have that threshold lowered, even to just one suggested edit at a time (so the proposed edit must be fully reviewed before they can make another edit proposal to another post).

Both of those (seemingly fairly small) changes would reduce the impact on a site's community of a user making small edits that are somehow out of place, and certainly don't appear unreasonable to me at first glance.

Yes, there are ways to trick the character bean counter. I'm arguing here that at some point, tricking it shouldn't be needed, iff the edits are constructive.

Yes, this means that reputation will carry meaning across sites, which may be a non-trivial change. So there's probably a decent chance that this won't get implemented. Still, it would be a very nice gesture toward people who spend a lot of time contributing on other sites, and just happen to come across somewhere they can make a small adjustment that improves a post.

This is an old thread, but I'd like to add another microprivilege to the mix.

Ability to make small edits throughout the network, with community review

Personally, I currently have well over 100k network-wide, over 10k on three different sites, over 3k on another eight sites, and over 2k on another two sites. I currently have diamonds on two sites, and have had one on another where I left in good standing.

And still, there's a gazillion sites where I can't be trusted to fix a simple typo in a post without jumping through hoops.

If a user has earned a large amount of reputation on one or even a few sites, it's a decent bet that they know reasonably well how things work. So if they come across typos or other small errors in posts on sites where they haven't earned enough reputation to be able to make edits without community review, at least waive the six-character minimum for edits, but keep the requirement for community review in place.

If the edits are rejected in community review for being, say, not constructive, then this should trigger the proposed-edit ban already in place. The threshold for triggering the proposed-edit ban could be lowered if the user is exercising this privilege.

Users are allowed to have some number of pending suggested edits at a time; I think half a dozen pending suggested edits is allowed, but could be wrong about the exact number. There's no reason why a user exercising this privilege couldn't have that threshold lowered, even to just one suggested edit at a time (so the proposed edit must be fully reviewed before they can make another edit proposal to another post).

Both of those (seemingly fairly small) changes would reduce the impact on a site's community of a user making small edits that are somehow out of place, and certainly don't appear unreasonable to me at first glance.

Yes, there are ways to trick the character bean counter. I'm arguing here that at some point, tricking it shouldn't be needed, iff the edits are constructive.

Yes, this means that reputation will carry meaning across sites, which may be a non-trivial change. So there's probably a decent chance that this won't get implemented. Still, it would be a very nice gesture toward people who spend a lot of time contributing on other sites, and just happen to come across somewhere they can make a small adjustment that improves a post.

Ability to make small edits throughout the network, with community review

Personally, I currently have well over 100k network-wide, over 10k on three different sites, over 3k on another eight sites, and over 2k on another two sites. I currently have diamonds on two sites, and have had one on another where I left in good standing.

And still, there's a gazillion sites where I can't be trusted to fix a simple typo in a post without jumping through hoops.

If a user has earned a large amount of reputation on one or even a few sites, it's a decent bet that they know reasonably well how things work. So if they come across typos or other small errors in posts on sites where they haven't earned enough reputation to be able to make edits without community review, at least waive the six-character minimum for edits, but keep the requirement for community review in place.

If the edits are rejected in community review for being, say, not constructive, then this should trigger the proposed-edit ban already in place. The threshold for triggering the proposed-edit ban could be lowered if the user is exercising this privilege.

Users are allowed to have some number of pending suggested edits at a time; I think half a dozen pending suggested edits is allowed, but I could be wrong about the exact number. There's no reason why a user exercising this privilege couldn't have that threshold lowered, even to just one suggested edit at a time (so the proposed edit must be fully reviewed before they can make another edit proposal to another post).

Both of those (seemingly fairly small) changes would reduce the impact on a site's community of a user making small edits that are somehow out of place, and certainly don't appear unreasonable to me at first glance.

Yes, there are ways to trick the character bean counter. I'm arguing here that at some point, tricking it shouldn't be needed, iff the edits are constructive.

Yes, this means that reputation will carry meaning across sites, which may be a non-trivial change. So there's probably a decent chance that this won't get implemented. Still, it would be a very nice gesture toward people who spend a lot of time contributing on other sites, and just happen to come across somewhere they can make a small adjustment that improves a post.

added 834 characters in body
Source Link
user
  • 9k
  • 33
  • 58

This is an old thread, but I'd like to add another microprivilege to the mix.

Ability to make small edits throughout the network, with community review

Personally, I currently have well over 100k network-wide, over 10k on three different sites, over 3k on another eight sites, and over 2k on another two sites. I currently have diamonds on two sites, and have had one on another where I left in good standing.

And still, there's a gazillion sites where I can't be trusted to fix a simple typo in a post without jumping through hoops.

If a user has earned a large amount of reputation on one or even a few sites, it's a decent bet that they know reasonably well how things work. So if they come across typos or other small errors in posts on sites where they haven't earned enough reputation to be able to make edits without community review, at least waive the six-character minimum for edits, but keep the requirement for community review in place.

If the edits are rejected in community review for being, say, not constructive, then this should trigger the proposed-edit ban already in place. The threshold for triggering the proposed-edit ban could be lowered if the user is exercising this privilege.

Users are allowed to have some number of pending suggested edits at a time; I think half a dozen pending suggested edits is allowed, but could be wrong about the exact number. There's no reason why a user exercising this privilege couldn't have that threshold lowered, even to just one suggested edit at a time (so the proposed edit must be fully reviewed before they can make another edit proposal to another post).

Both of those (seemingly fairly small) changes would reduce the impact on a site's community of a user making small edits that are somehow out of place, and certainly don't appear unreasonable to me at first glance.

Yes, there are ways to trick the character bean counter. I'm arguing here that at some point, tricking it shouldn't be needed, if the edit is constructive.iff the edits are constructive.

Yes, this means that reputation will carry meaning across sites, which may be a non-trivial change. So there's probably a decent chance that this won't get implemented. Still, it would be a very nice gesture toward people who spend a lot of time contributing on other sites, and just happen to come across somewhere they can make a small adjustment that improves a post.

This is an old thread, but I'd like to add another microprivilege to the mix.

Ability to make small edits throughout the network, with community review

Personally, I currently have well over 100k network-wide, over 10k on three different sites, over 3k on another eight sites, and over 2k on another two sites. I currently have diamonds on two sites, and have had one on another where I left in good standing.

And still, there's a gazillion sites where I can't be trusted to fix a simple typo in a post without jumping through hoops.

If a user has earned a large amount of reputation on one or even a few sites, it's a decent bet that they know reasonably well how things work. So if they come across typos or other small errors in posts on sites where they haven't earned enough reputation to be able to make edits without community review, at least waive the six-character minimum for edits, but keep the requirement for community review in place.

Yes, there are ways to trick the character bean counter. I'm arguing here that at some point, tricking it shouldn't be needed, if the edit is constructive.

Yes, this means that reputation will carry meaning across sites, which may be a non-trivial change. So there's probably a decent chance that this won't get implemented. Still, it would be a very nice gesture toward people who spend a lot of time contributing.

This is an old thread, but I'd like to add another microprivilege to the mix.

Ability to make small edits throughout the network, with community review

Personally, I currently have well over 100k network-wide, over 10k on three different sites, over 3k on another eight sites, and over 2k on another two sites. I currently have diamonds on two sites, and have had one on another where I left in good standing.

And still, there's a gazillion sites where I can't be trusted to fix a simple typo in a post without jumping through hoops.

If a user has earned a large amount of reputation on one or even a few sites, it's a decent bet that they know reasonably well how things work. So if they come across typos or other small errors in posts on sites where they haven't earned enough reputation to be able to make edits without community review, at least waive the six-character minimum for edits, but keep the requirement for community review in place.

If the edits are rejected in community review for being, say, not constructive, then this should trigger the proposed-edit ban already in place. The threshold for triggering the proposed-edit ban could be lowered if the user is exercising this privilege.

Users are allowed to have some number of pending suggested edits at a time; I think half a dozen pending suggested edits is allowed, but could be wrong about the exact number. There's no reason why a user exercising this privilege couldn't have that threshold lowered, even to just one suggested edit at a time (so the proposed edit must be fully reviewed before they can make another edit proposal to another post).

Both of those (seemingly fairly small) changes would reduce the impact on a site's community of a user making small edits that are somehow out of place, and certainly don't appear unreasonable to me at first glance.

Yes, there are ways to trick the character bean counter. I'm arguing here that at some point, tricking it shouldn't be needed, iff the edits are constructive.

Yes, this means that reputation will carry meaning across sites, which may be a non-trivial change. So there's probably a decent chance that this won't get implemented. Still, it would be a very nice gesture toward people who spend a lot of time contributing on other sites, and just happen to come across somewhere they can make a small adjustment that improves a post.

Source Link
user
  • 9k
  • 33
  • 58

This is an old thread, but I'd like to add another microprivilege to the mix.

Ability to make small edits throughout the network, with community review

Personally, I currently have well over 100k network-wide, over 10k on three different sites, over 3k on another eight sites, and over 2k on another two sites. I currently have diamonds on two sites, and have had one on another where I left in good standing.

And still, there's a gazillion sites where I can't be trusted to fix a simple typo in a post without jumping through hoops.

If a user has earned a large amount of reputation on one or even a few sites, it's a decent bet that they know reasonably well how things work. So if they come across typos or other small errors in posts on sites where they haven't earned enough reputation to be able to make edits without community review, at least waive the six-character minimum for edits, but keep the requirement for community review in place.

Yes, there are ways to trick the character bean counter. I'm arguing here that at some point, tricking it shouldn't be needed, if the edit is constructive.

Yes, this means that reputation will carry meaning across sites, which may be a non-trivial change. So there's probably a decent chance that this won't get implemented. Still, it would be a very nice gesture toward people who spend a lot of time contributing.