Timeline for How to handle user rollbacks due to stubbornness about formatting / content?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 31, 2014 at 22:22 | comment | added | halfer | @John, regarding your profile, it would be great if you would remove all those complaints because you became comfortable with your posts being edited, or (even better), your posts no longer need edits. If you ping me with a few examples of edits you disagreed with, I'll give you my view on them if you want. Broadly, I'd say that if an edit is made by a high-rep user, consider leaving it be. If you believe it is wrong, it can help avoid an edit war by starting a conversation under the question addressed to the editor (using the usual at-prefix). | |
| May 31, 2014 at 22:12 | comment | added | halfer | Code added to questions should be in preformatting from the start, and will always be added in by third parties if it is not. | |
| May 30, 2014 at 16:12 | comment | added | nikib3ro | Thanks for sharing your perspective on the whole mess ;) | |
| May 29, 2014 at 21:33 | comment | added | user456814 | Also, as Robert pointed out in his own comment, it's an official Stack Overflow statement that if you're not cool with edits in general, then this isn't the site for you. Though as we've learned from Bruno, some of the edits made by others went too far. | |
| May 29, 2014 at 21:31 | comment | added | user456814 |
@kape123 <sigh> guys, insulting people is not-constructive, and it's not a good way to have a conversation. As I've already stated, Robert's polite comment would have been appropriate given the original story of things given by Cerberus, but now that we know the whole story, the comment doesn't apply so well anymore.
|
|
| May 29, 2014 at 1:13 | history | answered | John | CC BY-SA 3.0 |