Timeline for Why recommend editing a question if the editing is ignored afterwards?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 13, 2018 at 15:22 | history | edited | TinkeringbellMod | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Added some guessing as to why the original question may still be off-topic, spell-check.
|
| May 13, 2018 at 14:53 | comment | added | Cascabel | Ah, I thought from the "even worse" paragraph that I was the only one who voted after edits. Anyways, didn't take it as an accusation, I know proper close reasons are important, just wanted to explain myself. | |
| May 13, 2018 at 14:51 | comment | added | Tinkeringbell Mod | @Cascabel there were two other votes (like Thorsten said) before yours .. it's not an accusation to you or anyone that voted to close it as off-topic, just meant a general reminder that you don't always have to go with what's there, to avoid confusions like this | |
| May 13, 2018 at 14:40 | comment | added | Cascabel | I knew the original votes were going to override mine anyway, so I was lazy with the vote itself, and put the information in the comment, sorry. | |
| May 13, 2018 at 13:13 | comment | added | Thorsten S. | But anyway, +1 for giving an answer. | |
| May 13, 2018 at 13:12 | comment | added | Thorsten S. | "and the ones that were not even put on-hold at all because they were edited half-way through the close-voting process." Which exactly happened here, but not it was only half-way, but directly at the beginning. Cascabel's close vote and comment was preceded by 3 close votes and there were no further comments, only upvotes of Arwens now superfluous comment. | |
| May 13, 2018 at 11:34 | history | answered | TinkeringbellMod | CC BY-SA 4.0 |