Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

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.

Is it OK to edit a post in order to bump it?

+2
−3

I was reviewing some post in SE about bumping post which is related to this question. I got a point of his question. Read the question, the user was doing annoying edits to his post only to bump his post. Here's the revision history link. Most of his edit was pointless. So, I think Codidact community should be strict for the reason. When user does edits like that post, of course the post will be bump. But, if it keep happens than it will become very annoying for answerer. A forum created a poll, Should the edited post to have the option to be bumped?

image

Most of people chose "Edited posts should have the option to be bumped". I am not telling Codidact community to create poll. But, if Codidact does than most of user will choose the same option. I am not agreeing with the post although. That's why I have created the post. I have bold the line which I want to tell the moderator/users/staffs.

An unknown user answered, continuously editing your questions/answers to bump the question is considered abuse of the system

History
Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

0 comment threads

1 answer

+7
−0

No, making useless edits just to bump the post isn't something that we want to encourage on Codidact communities. Edits should be to improve the post and that's it.

Looking at the reasoning for bumping, though, there are two main factors: To earn votes, and to get a response.

While we do currently have a reputation system - earned through votes - we're working on deemphasizing it. Privileges are not tied to reputation; instead, there are Abilities you can earn. The "bump to earn da pointz" is mitigated slightly here over Stack.

As for the other factor - getting a response - that's something we still need to work on. We do need to figure out some way to highlight posts that haven't received a response yet and that may not be immediately visible due to their age.

However... I also want to caution against bringing up too much hypothetical situations. Have you encountered this issue on any Codidact community? Unless you've encountered a problem on Codidact itself, we don't need to address every edge case and scenario that's popped up at Stack over the past eleven years. As our platform and modus operandi are different, the problems we'll run into are going to be different from Stack's. We don't need to make a decision or address everything in anticipation of running into Stack's problems; we can address things as they organically appear.

(That's not to say thinking ahead is a bad thing. It's not. But we don't need to think ahead about every small issue that could come up; let's think ahead about some of the larger things for now.)

History
Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

1 comment thread

General comments (3 comments)

Sign up to answer this question »