Timeline for Do we have an unofficial quota on how many old questions one should bump for minor edits in a single day?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
21 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 17, 2017 at 10:13 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.mathoverflow.net/ with https://meta.mathoverflow.net/
|
|
| Sep 12, 2013 at 14:43 | comment | added | user9072 | @FrançoisG.Dorais I do not want to insist too much on this, but I just roughly checked the history, ignoring the last hours, the first time I found a string of 5 was on August 23rd! There was none of size 4 until that time, and a handful of 3-strings. It simply hardly ever happens that anybody would even have the chance to make such a long string as typically there simply is no sizeable batch. | |
| Sep 12, 2013 at 14:27 | comment | added | Karl Schwede | @DanPetersen I understand, I just tend to look only at tags I am interested in, via the "newest" tab. In which case this sort of thing never shows up. I realize that other people display things differently, but I'm not quite sure what the correct thing to do is (see quid's comments). | |
| Sep 12, 2013 at 14:22 | comment | added | Dan Petersen | @KarlSchwede. I think it is a real problem. At the moment the oldest post on the front page is 6 hours old and on a regular day the oldest would be maybe twice that. If you're asking a technical question that only one or two users on the site know how to answer, then the chance that one of these people sees your question drops drastically if posts get bumped off the front page this quickly. | |
| Sep 12, 2013 at 14:19 | comment | added | François G. Dorais Mod | @quid: Indeed, you almost never review more than 2 edits in a row. Other users do long batches of 5 or more in a row. Those are the reviewers that need to be aware of this issue. | |
| Sep 12, 2013 at 14:12 | comment | added | user9072 | @FrançoisG.Dorais not at all sure about this. I am third by number of reviews so can be considered very active there. Hardly ever do I come across there being more than 2 pending suggestions. More generally, most of the time all suggestions are dealt with very or quite close in time they are suggested. Some are more one the site and/or quicker to react than others, but in principle I think not few look at these suggstions, also as the pending suggestions are made so very visible (as opposed to other review types). | |
| Sep 12, 2013 at 14:05 | comment | added | user9072 | @YemonChoi if you think the edit is "POINTLESS" it is of course your right or perhaps even duty to reject it. What I said or at least meant to say is that I do not think it is a good idea to reject an edit you/I/one would otherwise approve only because of timing. | |
| Sep 12, 2013 at 14:02 | comment | added | Karl Schwede | I'm a reviewer who did a bunch of these at once. I wasn't thinking about the problem this was causing in terms of bumping old questions. There is no way to have an option to have an edit that doesn't bump? I'm not really convinced this is a serious problem though. | |
| Sep 12, 2013 at 14:00 | comment | added | Yemon Choi | I should emphasise that my distaste for excessive editing here arises from my past experience doing some freelance copy-editing, which has led me to (a) believe in house style (b) wish sleeping dogs were left to rest unless waking them serves a purpose beyond making the editor feel pleased/busy/smug | |
| Sep 12, 2013 at 13:58 | comment | added | François G. Dorais Mod | @quid: Only a handful of users regularly look at suggested edits and most deal with them in batches. Raising awareness won't eliminate the problem but it will have some effect. | |
| Sep 12, 2013 at 13:57 | comment | added | Yemon Choi | I have just rejected a POINTLESS bit of TeXifying, and think those of us who find such edits should reject, contrary to @quid's remark | |
| Sep 12, 2013 at 13:56 | comment | added | user9072 | This was written before your last comment @FrançoisG.Dorais but I think it is sort of impossible to deal with this in a more reasonable way once the edits are proposed. The only thing I could imagine is that as soon as one notices siomebody proposing too many edits one tells them to stop. This is possible for normal users too as one can comment notify a person havin edited something so one could comment on a just edited post. [To avoid confusion, it was not me who apporved anything here.] | |
| Sep 12, 2013 at 13:54 | comment | added | user9072 | @FrançoisG.Dorais what course of action would you propose for a reviewer in such a situation. I can approve/reject/skip. If I reject the edit, it is "gone" I think (except somebody else approves it of course) which seems highly inefficient. Now, if I skip, somboy else will get it possibly not being aware of the earlier edits or in any case in the same situation. Both to reject an edit because of timing (and thus 'destroying' the work that went into it) as well as some mass-skiping to spread it out seems unreasonable or infeasible. | |
| Sep 12, 2013 at 13:52 | comment | added | François G. Dorais Mod | @EmilJeřábek: Yes, I can't catch it beforehand but I did write to the users who approved the recent batch to make them aware of the issue and to ask their input on ways to deal with it. | |
| Sep 12, 2013 at 13:43 | comment | added | Emil Jeřábek | I thought the system randomly assigns reviews to any currently active users with sufficient reputation (2K?). What I meant is that you can’t notify all of them before they have a chance of approving the edit, short of some kind of a site notice. | |
| Sep 12, 2013 at 13:28 | comment | added | François G. Dorais Mod | @EmilJeřábek: I can (and will) notify the reviewers in question. I don't think it's their fault though since the reviewing system encourages dealing with these in batches. | |
| Sep 12, 2013 at 13:25 | comment | added | Benjamin Steinberg | @FrançoisG.Dorais, it is both but I agree with Emil. I normally reject all minor edits, especially on old questions but I suspect I am in the minority and in any event I almost never review because in the mobile version of the site the Review section is not so accessible. | |
| Sep 12, 2013 at 13:17 | comment | added | Emil Jeřábek | @François G. Dorais: That’s true, but OTOH notifying one editor of the problem is feasible, whereas notifying all potential reviewers is not. | |
| Sep 12, 2013 at 13:14 | comment | added | François G. Dorais Mod | @BenjaminSteinberg: The editor is not the key problem, it's the reviewers who approved the edits who did them all at once. | |
| Sep 12, 2013 at 13:06 | comment | added | Benjamin Steinberg | Maybe ońe should contact the editor. These edits are really minor and the questions old. | |
| Sep 12, 2013 at 12:48 | history | answered | Joseph O'Rourke | CC BY-SA 3.0 |