Timeline for Proper protocol for edit wars
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 19, 2018 at 7:20 | comment | added | Federico Poloni | @tj_ It's not creating attention from nowhere, it's taking it away from other posts. It's the same kind of 'harm' that ads and sponsored content do, in my view. | |
| Oct 19, 2018 at 7:07 | answer | added | none | timeline score: 15 | |
| Oct 19, 2018 at 4:59 | comment | added | tj_ | @Federico Poloni: From what kind of 'harm' are you talking? What's bad if a question gets attention? | |
| Oct 18, 2018 at 17:40 | comment | added | Martin Sleziak | There is a FAQ post on this meta: Editing etiquette. Todd Trimble wrote in his answer: "If simple polite communication doesn't work and you find yourselves at an impasse, you can flag for moderator attention to help resolve the dispute." If there are many edits on a post, mod-attention flag is automatically raised: Put an end to rollback wars and What causes a post to be auto-flagged for many edits more than once? | |
| Oct 18, 2018 at 17:18 | comment | added | Gerhard Paseman | If you will forgive the irony, I applaud the idea of waiting a week, then editing the question to include your meditation that week on the pertinent issues. Most of us will be here to help after a week. Gerhard "Does Gazing At Other Navels" Paseman, 2018.10.18. | |
| Oct 18, 2018 at 17:15 | answer | added | Gerhard Paseman | timeline score: 2 | |
| Oct 18, 2018 at 16:45 | review | Close votes | |||
| Oct 25, 2018 at 3:15 | |||||
| Oct 18, 2018 at 16:39 | comment | added | mme | It was my intuition precisely because of the other thread that the purpose of this was to double down and fan the flames, as posting the other thread already seemed to be "proper protocol" to me. However, I take you at your word that it was not (and apologize for the accusation). I think that a more general question would be of use to this website as a pointer for future conflicts and look forward to it. | |
| Oct 18, 2018 at 16:26 | comment | added | Federico Poloni | I realize that it is difficult (for me in the first place) to keep the discussion on this incident separate from the general "what to do" question. My proposal is that I let it cool off, and one week from now I try to write a completely new meta question that tries to be detached from this issue and describes the problem a more general setting. I have voted to close this question as "unclear what you are asking". (I didn't even know the author of a question could vote to close it!) | |
| Oct 18, 2018 at 15:54 | comment | added | Federico Poloni | @MikeMiller I already opened another meta thread (linked) to discuss the content of the issue. The same thing happened twice already, and I am writing to ask what I should do if it happens a third time. I believe that the timing of the edits and reverts is important here (as argued in the question), so it would be good for me to have a policy on what to do in future. | |
| Oct 18, 2018 at 15:37 | comment | added | mme | Are you actually asking about protocol or writing a callout thread? I think that when users disagree on the way a question is presented a calm discussion in meta is a good place for it, and that this is what has usually happened. In any case, I do not agree that one edit each constitutes an "edit war". | |
| Oct 18, 2018 at 13:30 | history | edited | Federico Poloni | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 2 characters in body
|
| Oct 18, 2018 at 13:05 | history | edited | Federico Poloni | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 75 characters in body
|
| Oct 18, 2018 at 12:58 | history | edited | Federico Poloni | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 34 characters in body
|
| Oct 18, 2018 at 12:52 | history | asked | Federico Poloni | CC BY-SA 4.0 |