This is not a complain about a single editing of a single post.

As an example: Isn't the privilege to 'Edit Questions And Answers' with immediate results a little too easy to get at 1,000 rep? I believe it to be on par with the 'Protecting questions' privilege in terms of responsibility and impact on both the experience and the outcome of the content that stays on the site.

Suggesting edits works very well in my opinion, this allows the OP to review and decline or accept the edit, probably even opening their eyes to additional pertinent edits that could be in order.

I suspect I'm not the only one who's had trouble with a couple of people making huge disrespectful edits that alter the sense of what the question is about, and then you come back to find your post altered entirely with no previous consideration, by any one who's got 1k rep. And now you have answers that don't answer your question and everyone is confused.

Even at 3,500rep it seems so easy to acquire. At my rate, I'm swiftly approaching the 1k rep required, and I've been here half a week. It won't take me long at all to reach 5k for full privileges. I could stop using the site and the content I already provided would get me to 5k in some months. If I keep participating actively, I'll be at 5k very quickly. The bar should be set a little higher IMHO.

I guess most posts get obscured over time but as past behavior/data predicting future results: a single popular post got people I know to thousands of rep points on other SE sites. So out of 20 posts, 1 got popular and got them very far.
That might be the cause of some reckless moderation I've noticed.
My math may need adjustment for a more accurate prediction, but that's the general idea.

I'm aware The OP has final say if they stick to constantly revisiting the open explorer tab and if they happen to understand the "reverse edits" functionality a'la GIT with "rollback" technical terminology that some might not immediately understand. But if they leave for a few hours, mayhem follows and instead of getting an answer to what they were asking they get different answers while they go about their lives to then comeback and find out their question was edited (again) by someone who might not have enough experience and encounters with mods intents to educate them on how to use the site. As a result, some questions change entirely, confusing the person asking.

I'm a confident person, I'm confident about my intelligence (as most active users seem to be) and I believe we shouldn't be granted some privileges so soon, because overconfidence can become a problem too. Some people don't even engage with the site's leadership before getting those privileges, so they never get educated on how to use those powers, they don't think they are causing problems, they simply earned those privileges by providing content that got many votes.

I brought the issue because reading other posts by moderators and users on meta, it appeared evident to me that many people already consider the mod tasks to be taxing their emotions and energy, for example, I've read people saying things like "I feel like this is an uphill battle" (referring to mod endeavors), that's why I thought it would help to bring the issue with the examples I can provide as local evidence, I can't offer other private data as evidence.

I'm simply trying to put myself in the shoes of mods and I understand this could be one of many problems making the site harder to manage. I don't care about downvotes on this apparently unpopular proposal, it is understandable this proposal is unpopular because whomever navigates meta is prone to be interested in involving and influencing the site and someone proposing their power cravings to be harder to satisfy will be perceived as an "enemy". Whatever, I can deal with controversy, my initial questions were aggressively downvoted and are now both awarded the "Popular question" badge. I care about this site being better.

What I'm saying is that stretching the rep milestones offers a more reasonable release of privileges in congruence with the learning curve of wielding those responsibilities.

Alternatively(or additionally), some privileges could require a quick chat session with someone who's trusted could be in order before releasing some of those privileges, the session could be scheduled once a week for everyone who reached the required rep points, to include more than one person at a time and not make this process overbearing for the person offering guidance to newcomers.

  • 2
    Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. I know this is meta, but if you're spending an hour arguing a point in the comments section, I'd recommend maybe trying to work it into an answer or just walk away. Don't just keep commenting here. I've also deleted some irrelevant comments dealing with a different situation; those have not been moved to chat.
    – HDE 226868
    May 9 '18 at 23:21
  • Regarding the current rep requirement, it's because this site is still in public beta, so the rep requirement is lowered. When the site is graduated, the rep requirement will be adjusted (increased) the same as Stack Overflow.
    – Andrew T.
    May 11 '18 at 4:02
  • Oh. Well that's a consideration no one had provided. It makes sense, you need more activity, higher adoption. The chat session requirement is still a better idea, specially during public beta. But I added that just recently so probably very few people has read that.
    – J A
    May 11 '18 at 4:18

It seems like the question that you are referring to is this one, specifically revision 8. I would like to make 2 observations on this.

  1. The user who edited your question did not have 1000 rep, but the user who approved the edit had over 8,000.
  2. The edit seemed to me (and apparently at least 2 other people) to be pretty in line with the spirit of your question.

On the subject of item 2, just because your case doesn't perfectly exemplify a situation where someone has fundamentally or immediately changed a question without someone else to check it doesn't mean that such cases do not exist. Certainly it is feasible that such things happen from time to time. However it is my experience that such cases are rare. Please keep your eyes open and record instances of this happening. I will try to be more aware of it too.

As for item 1, I think it pretty well belies the claim that increasing the reputation requirement to make instantaneous edits will perfectly fix this issue. Additionally, you proved that you can effectively roll back an edit made by someone else. If you weren't around to see a huge edit in time to prevent answers that are off topic to your intended question, you could just write a new question. The system in place is already working to prevent the problem that you are worried about.

  • Reading and actual attempt to answer my question is refreshing, but it seems biased at assuming the reason of my proposal is restricted by the experience I've found on this site alone. As I said, I have experience moderating other sites and in UX design. The examples given, are just that, examples. My question is not a complain on that particular edit, I can tie my own shoes thank you. I'm trying to help moderation duty.
    – J A
    May 9 '18 at 20:33
  • 3
    @JA You've yet to show that there is a problem that the moderators need help with. Perhaps you should have started with a question asking if this is a problem that the mods experience.
    – sphennings
    May 9 '18 at 20:36
  • @JA Every site has a different culture and different problems that mods must deal with. It is my opinion that this is not a major problem on this particular site, though in the future it may be. I think for the time being, the benefits of having more low rep user moderation, such as editing Q's and A's, is more beneficial than trying to prevent the problems you are talking about. Maybe that will change at some point.
    – BlackThorn
    May 9 '18 at 20:37
  • well, yeah, you have a good point there sphennings, although I did say in the text that is my intention, but some people read whatever they want to read into things, so I modified the title
    – J A
    May 9 '18 at 20:41
  • Thank you for remaining on topic BlackThorn, and I guess I somewhat agree it will be a bigger problem later, I brought the issue because reading other posts by moderators and users on meta it appeared evident to me that many people already consider the mod tasks to be taxing their emotions and energy, for example I've read people saying things like "I feel like is an uphill battle" (referring to mod endeavors), that's why I thought it would help to bring the issue with the examples I can provide as local evidence, I can't offer other private evidence.
    – J A
    May 9 '18 at 20:50

You must log in to answer this question.

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