Welcome to Codidact Meta!
Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.
Comments on How to edit a post for small modifications without affecting the visibility of other posts?
Parent
How to edit a post for small modifications without affecting the visibility of other posts?
Related: Could we have a way to edit without bumping posts?
Motivation
I usually edit my own posts a lot of times in order to improve them. This put the corresponding post on top of the "main post page list" (for e.g. meta.codidact.com).
However, most of the time I do very little changes to my post (correct a typo, add a link, etc.), so it does not deserve to draw attention to the post in question.
So my post takes the place of other posts that would need more attention...
In this case, a general recommendation could be: "Avoid editing a post for small modifications (e.g. correct a typo) because it affects the visibility of other posts"
Starting from this postulate (which could obviously be discussed ;-), the question is:
How to edit a post for small modifications without affecting the visibility of other posts?
Proposal
A solution could be to allow the author of the edit to choose if they wants to put the post on the top of the list or not (the default behavior could be to move the post on top, as it is currently done).
This could be achieved, for e.g., by adding a check box at the end of the edit view which could look like this:
I like the idea, and I was going to suggest it myself. However, I also understand the concerns of @trichoplax about t …
1y ago
I like this, but... I've often wanted this feature. I feel bad about cluttering the top of the question list when I mak …
1y ago
Maybe when our communities are much larger I share the others' concerns about getting fresh eyes on edits to avoid ab …
1y ago
Post
I like the idea, and I was going to suggest it myself.
However, I also understand the concerns of @trichoplax about the risk of abuse, e.g. "sneaky edits" that could fly under the radar.
I think a nice tradeoff solution would be IMO:
-
Allow minor edit checkbox only for people that have the edit privilege, just to filter out users that haven't shown some pattern of responsible editing behavior. In other words, suggested edits will always be bumped (maybe let the people authorizing the edit to choose whether the edit warrants a bump?).
-
For people doing an edit on their own posts and without the edit privilege, enable the checkbox, but change the behavior: the checkbox doesn't suppress bumping, it delays it until some time has passed from the latest edit (say 1h), so that people that make a flurry of small edits to their own posts can do that without multiple bumps. All the edits are "bumped together" once that time has elapsed from the last edit in the series. Moreover, to avoid people gaming the system by continuously editing the post to postpone a bump forever, bump the post anyway after some other given time (say a day).
-
Provide a new visualization option for posts, e.g.
show minor edits, so that people wanting to check what's happening "down in the noise" can do that. In other words, the "minor edit" checkbox doesn't prevent the edit to be discovered by people wanting to check that out. In this way mods could periodically check the posts with minor edits just to see if something shady is going on. -
To avoid careless bumping by privileged users, check the checkbox by default if the user hasn't changed much of the post, and also remind them they are going to perform a "minor edit" with some visual cue. In this way, a major edit is bumped unless the user wants otherwise, whereas a minor edit is not bumped, unless the user wants otherwise.
Note that in my idea the final choice is always on the (privileged) user (no forced choices). The system just lends a hand and suggests the most logical/common behavior (focus on personal responsibility here).
1 comment thread