Timeline for How to handle user rollbacks due to stubbornness about formatting / content?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
38 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 29, 2014 at 12:07 | history | edited | Peter Mortensen | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Copy edited.
|
| May 29, 2014 at 0:29 | history | edited | Sam I am says Reinstate Monica | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 90 characters in body
|
| May 28, 2014 at 21:09 | comment | added | Sam I am says Reinstate Monica | @Chuck have you actually looked at the revision history, the OP took his code back out of the code blocks exactly once, in revision 3. The rest of the edit war was about whether the OP's comments about the code were in the code blocks themselves, or outside the blocks. After a second look, The OP probably didn't even know that putting the answer in his question was an issue, until the edit war was already underway, and Cerberus made a comment on his question about it. | |
| May 28, 2014 at 20:43 | comment | added | Chuck | @SamIam: In general, I understand deferring to the author, but only as a rule of thumb, not an absolute. For example, it seems pretty easy to objectively determine that blocks of code go in code blocks, which is the change the OP was making here. That's the purpose of code blocks. I can't think of much that is more cut and dried than "blocks of code belong in code blocks." | |
| May 28, 2014 at 20:25 | comment | added | Sam I am says Reinstate Monica | @Chuck Normally, an editor makes his/her edits, and the OP is fine with it, and life goes on, but in this case there's a content dispute, and there's no way to objectively determine who's right(at least as far as the code formatting goes). We don't want the content of a post to constantly be changing, because it's a nuisance for people who have to read the post. Since the OP is the one who's held responsible for the content in the question, it should be the OP's opinion who takes precedence in content disputes. | |
| May 28, 2014 at 19:40 | comment | added | Chuck | To elaborate a bit further: Are you really saying that if the OP doesn't want his code to be in code blocks, no editor can ever have the right to put it in code blocks? I see no benefit to accommodating that. Can you explain what the benefit is? | |
| May 28, 2014 at 19:37 | comment | added | Servy | @NeilSlater Even in those cases you still shouldn't get into an edit war. Fix it once, if it's reverted, flag for a mod and move on. | |
| May 28, 2014 at 19:36 | comment | added | Servy | @mydogisbox Technically the author does still own the post. They are licencing the community to publish and edit it, but they do still own it, and it does represent their views. Site guidelines also make it clear that for subjective decisions, such as the voice of the text, are decisions to be made by the post author. If the author is vandalizing their own post or otherwise making edits that are in violation of policy (editing an answer into the post qualified, editing the code formatting would not) is something to flag for mod attention, not get into an edit war over. | |
| May 28, 2014 at 19:36 | comment | added | Chuck | "Let the op have the (frankly, not even bad) formatting that he wants. It is him who gets the reputation modifications when his question is voted on, and it's him who needs an answer to it." This seems to me to miss the purpose of Stack Overflow. It's not about reputation; it's meant to be a good resource for the world. If other people have the same question, theirs will be closed as duplicates of the first one — because the resource as a whole is what matters. This is why users are empowered to edit everything: so they can make the resource the best it can be. | |
| May 28, 2014 at 19:20 | comment | added | nikib3ro | Speaking of wars, I love the +/- war on this answer :D | |
| May 28, 2014 at 19:09 | comment | added | Neil Slater | +1, it is the task of the site to make good question/answer combinations. If when you try to help with a question, your help is negated then just move on and improve some other question instead. I would only make exceptions in case of site-banning behaviour such as defacing posts, swearing etc. | |
| May 28, 2014 at 18:59 | comment | added | N_A | "You've decided that the OP really doesn't own the post" Isn't that the case though? stackoverflow.com/help/editing "If you are not comfortable with the idea of your contributions being collaboratively edited by other trusted users, this may not be the site for you." | |
| May 28, 2014 at 16:56 | comment | added | Servy | @Cerbrus Sam's answer is a great answer, that covers that particular point. I'm not going to post a second, and worse, answer, just because you have a personal problem with Sam for correctly stating that you acted in error. If you don't want to accept his answer, despite it being the correct one, well that's on you; I can't make you. | |
| May 28, 2014 at 16:52 | comment | added | Cerbrus | @Servy, could you add the "You flag the post,..." as an answer? Sam is getting too focused on the fact that I reverted the OP's edits once or twice too much (I can understand that), and frankly, after him resorting to name-calling, I'm not very inclined to accept the answer that's going in depth telling me I did the wrong thing... | |
| May 28, 2014 at 16:37 | comment | added | Servy | I just wanted to express my regret that the use of questionable language in an earlier revision of this answer didn't result in an edit war. I would have appreciated the irony. Missed opportunities... | |
| May 28, 2014 at 16:35 | comment | added | Servy | @Cerbrus You flag the post, because only a moderator can deal with such a user. You continually re-applying the edits is only making things worse, not better. Flag the posts, stop editing, and let the mod handle it. | |
| May 28, 2014 at 16:28 | history | edited | Sam I am says Reinstate Monica | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 870 characters in body
|
| May 28, 2014 at 16:17 | comment | added | Sam I am says Reinstate Monica | @Cerbrus yes it does answers his question. The answer is stop editing his post | |
| May 28, 2014 at 15:44 | comment | added | Cerbrus | Okay, reasonable point about not engaging in an edit war, however, that doesn't answer the question on what to do if a user just reverts any edit anyone makes, even after being told not to add the answer to the question / not to revert those changes. It's not an edit war until someone starts reverting edits. (Ugh, that sounds a lot like "He started it") | |
| May 28, 2014 at 15:24 | comment | added | Servy | @Cerbrus Because answering and flagging are productive. Making edits that are just going to be rolled back are not productive; it's just wasting everyone's time to participate in one. | |
| May 28, 2014 at 15:22 | comment | added | Sam I am says Reinstate Monica | @Cerbrus I've edited the answer to clear up your confusion | |
| May 28, 2014 at 15:22 | history | edited | Sam I am says Reinstate Monica | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 2 characters in body
|
| May 28, 2014 at 15:19 | comment | added | Cerbrus | Stop making edits? Why don't we stop answering and flagging while we're at it. | |
| May 28, 2014 at 15:14 | comment | added | user703016 | IOW, "the OP can't make their question crappier if you don't improve it in the first place". Not sure if good advice. | |
| May 28, 2014 at 15:13 | history | edited | user703016 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Than -> then
|
| May 28, 2014 at 15:11 | history | undeleted | BoltClock | ||
| May 28, 2014 at 15:07 | history | edited | Sam I am says Reinstate Monica | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 289 characters in body
|
| May 28, 2014 at 14:52 | history | deleted | BoltClock | via Vote | |
| May 28, 2014 at 14:50 | history | edited | Sam I am says Reinstate Monica | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 4 characters in body
|
| May 28, 2014 at 14:42 | comment | added | Cerbrus | @Servy: I'd suggest posting that as an answer. | |
| May 28, 2014 at 14:40 | comment | added | Servy | You forgot to include "flag the post again" in the top half of the answer. If an edit war starts, or starts again after a timed lock ends, a mod is the only one who can resolve the issue. | |
| May 28, 2014 at 14:39 | comment | added | Cerbrus | The horizontal scroll bar is only visible in the revision history. Because in there, there's less horizontal space available. So, the second part of this answer is irrelevant, and offensive to boot. There's no need to resort to name-calling. | |
| May 28, 2014 at 14:38 | history | undeleted | Sam I am says Reinstate Monica | ||
| May 28, 2014 at 14:35 | history | deleted | Sam I am says Reinstate Monica | via Vote | |
| May 28, 2014 at 14:35 | history | edited | Sam I am says Reinstate Monica | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 639 characters in body
|
| May 28, 2014 at 14:23 | history | undeleted | Sam I am says Reinstate Monica | ||
| May 28, 2014 at 14:23 | history | deleted | Sam I am says Reinstate Monica | via Vote | |
| May 28, 2014 at 14:22 | history | answered | Sam I am says Reinstate Monica | CC BY-SA 3.0 |