4
\$\begingroup\$

I review the edit queue. Part of my review procedure is if edit is done by user g or user p tick accept. Although these users do not have the reputation to edit without review they have consistently improved posts with a better use of English, formatting style and attention to detail than I can ever do.

I appreciate that trying to make changes to the SE system is like trying to push water uphill but in this case I think there is room for change. If for instance you make 25 edits in a row all accepted it would streamline things on the site if you were given edit privileges. A reputation bonus would be nice too to compensate for the failure to gain reputation when edits are approved and would encourage editing and good editing behavior.

Reputation higher than 2000 does not particularly make you a good editor. Judgement should be made on success at the specific behavior which is what I am proposing.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ The editing "bonus" is only intended as just one means by which low-rep users to get to the level where they can have edit (and other) privileges. After that, it isn't needed. \$\endgroup\$ – Dave Tweed Jun 24 at 13:45
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ That is an interesting suggestion, but it would be better submitted on the main meta, if you want it to be seen by the people who can do something about it. Now, if you post it there, be prepared to face the responses of the people who think the system is perfect in its current state. \$\endgroup\$ – dim Jun 24 at 15:03
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Dave Tweed I have no argument with that. I am simply trying to push forward and reward the deserving. \$\endgroup\$ – RoyC Jun 24 at 15:52
  • \$\begingroup\$ Downvoter comment please. \$\endgroup\$ – RoyC Jun 24 at 18:29
  • \$\begingroup\$ @dim Yes you are right they really don't like this. \$\endgroup\$ – RoyC Jun 25 at 16:10
  • \$\begingroup\$ For completeness, here is the link to the main meta question: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/330040/…. And yes, it unfortunately was received as I feared: burnt into flames without much debate. You had my upvote, though, if it can somehow comfort you. \$\endgroup\$ – dim Jun 26 at 9:45
  • \$\begingroup\$ @dim I don't need or seek comfort just some thought and maybe debate. \$\endgroup\$ – RoyC Jun 26 at 14:40
  • \$\begingroup\$ I'm the downvoter. You suggested a change - I don't want it. Simple as that. Meta is different. \$\endgroup\$ – pipe Jun 26 at 17:06
2
\$\begingroup\$

The edit privilege is given after you gain a certain amount of trust, because it's a rough measure of how involved in the site you are. SE doesn't want people simply editing, they want people to answer and ask questions. Another reason for this is it takes a certain level of knowledge of the topic of the site to earn 2000 rep. You will also notice that the rep system and badge system are to help you to learn how to contribute in many different ways.

We believe in the power of community editing. That means once you've generated enough reputation, we trust you to edit anything in the system without it going through peer review. Not just your posts—anyone's posts!

https://meta.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/edit

If you're making a change to the system, you also need to consider the negative aspects of the change. Making the edit privilege easier to obtain would make new users, trolls or bots more able to earn the editing privilege and abuse the system, if it were only up to a 25 of edits to earn the privilege, it would also be easy for someone to create an account, roll through 25 edits and use the edit system for evil purposes. The edit rep limit is in place for a reason, the bar is set high, the limit prevents abuse, not only on this site but on all of SE.

Secondly, to get this changed, it would need to be changed not only on this site, but on all sites, and there would have to be very good reasons to make a change like this, and convince SE.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Thank you for at least a thoughtful answer worthy of discussion. I raised the question on the meta meta and have come to the conclusion that the main problem is that the people over there regard getting 2000 rep to be trivial. That may be true on some sites but is not here. OK maybe 25 is too low a number but a measure of successful editing rather than straight reputation would be a better measure of your fitness to edit. Or maybe a combination of both. \$\endgroup\$ – RoyC Jun 25 at 17:16
  • \$\begingroup\$ Good luck... if you don't get instantly down-voted, consider yourself fortunate. Make sure you really think out your question if you post anything on meta, you need to understand SE as a whole before posting there. \$\endgroup\$ – Voltage Spike Jun 25 at 17:24
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Just learnt that. The hard way. \$\endgroup\$ – RoyC Jun 25 at 17:25

You must log in to answer this question.

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