Post History

## By default all edits should show

Every time an edit is made, the post or its parent should move to the top of the question list. This reduces the chance of an edit being missed by the community.

Not every edit is reviewed. Some people have the [Edit Posts ability](https://meta.codidact.com/abilities/edit_posts) and can edit without review, and the post author can always edit without review. A reviewer's decision is also not reviewed. Showing the post at the top of the question list allows the community to provide an element of informal review and raise any problems they see.

## Users can choose their own sorts and filters
If a user does not wish to see the default view of the question list, they are free to change the sort order or apply filters. For example, they may choose to view only unanswered questions, in order of age rather than activity. This way they would not see edits.

Since this option is already available, I see no reason to change the default view of the question list. All users who have not chosen to prevent it will see edited posts, reducing the chance of malicious or accidentally detrimental edits going unnoticed.

## Bad edits can be arbitrarily small
While the idea of treating small edits as insignificant is appealingly convenient, this would allow a variety of problems:
- Deliberately offensive statements
- Dangerously misleading statements or code
- Spam and phishing links

A word or even a single character change can be sufficient to introduce any of these, so there is no lower limit which could be set as a safe threshold.

For example, the idea of introducing a malicious link sounds like it would require at least enough characters for a valid markdown link, but if the malicious editor is also the author of the post, they could post an innocuous link in the original post and later change a single character - malicious links are commonly a single character different from an innocuous link in order to take advantage of people who make typos while entering a URL.

## Neither the editor nor the reviewer is well placed to decide
The editor, the reviewer, or both could be malicious, so allowing either of them to decide which edits should be hidden from the community is not appropriate.

This also applies to a post author editing their own post. A spammer should not be able to decide that an edit to their own post should be hidden.

Long game spammers can work in pairs to build up trust and then approve each other's edits. Getting past a single review is easy if you are in contact with a malicious reviewer. Getting past all of the eyes in the community is more challenging. Every edit needs to be available for the community to inspect.