-2
$\begingroup$

I attempted to edit the tags for this question. I got the message:

This edit introduces tags that do not help to define the topic of the question. Tags should help to describe what the question is about, not just what it contains.

Can somebody explain in more detail what this means? I believe that mixed Hodge theory is to some extent about resolutions of singularities (that's how Deligne's hypercovers work, I think).

EDIT: I made 5 edit attempts in total, and then was banned from editing for some reason. So this disagreement apparently constitutes 20% of why I was banned. Does the MO community so strongly believe that you do not need to have any form of resolution of singularities to do mixed Hodge theory?

$\endgroup$
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ I know nothing about Hodge theory or resolution of singularities, but one thing is clear: once your suggested edit was rejected, the appropriate raction is not to push it with more edits, but to start a discussion in the comments about the suggestions. $\endgroup$ – Emil Jeřábek May 22 at 6:15
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @EmilJeřábek how do you do that, exactly? If you are not a mod or anything, can you tag people who did not post comments in the comments? $\endgroup$ – user138661 May 22 at 6:32
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Do not make the discussion about people, but about the subject. $\endgroup$ – Emil Jeřábek May 22 at 7:12
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ But the decision to accept or reject the edit is done by the reviewers. They are most probably not going to read it if you do not tag them. I am therefore skeptical that your suggestion is helpful. $\endgroup$ – user138661 May 22 at 7:41
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ It makes no difference if the original reviewers see the discussion or not. Someone will. If the consensus of the discussion will be to make an edit, someone can probably do it directly, but even if not, it is unlikely that the new reviewers would challenge it. $\endgroup$ – Emil Jeřábek May 22 at 14:54
5
$\begingroup$

Pick your battles.

Sometimes things don't work out the way I want - maybe an answer is upvoted which I feel doesn't do a great job of answering the question, or one I really like gets a downvote for what I consider a silly reason. Having an edit turned down is no different. A certain amount of response is appropriate - e.g. I think it's fine to add a comment asking for a reason for a downvote (although I'd consider asking for a reason for an upvote to be rude, since it implicitly says the answer doesn't deserve upvotes), or why an edit was rejected - and a certain amount of discussion with respondents, in the comments or in chat, may also be - but I think anything more than that is inappropriate.

Basically, there's an implicit social agreement that sometimes I'll lose, and that's fine. I might not like it, but except in very rare circumstances - where I think something really egregious is going on - anything more than a response of intensity comparable to the above isn't called for.


I'm not saying I've always adhered to the advice above - it's much easier to give advice than to take it - but I do think that this is the right approach.

$\endgroup$
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ I consider this to be excellent advice, not only for this site but also usually for life in general. $\endgroup$ – John Omielan May 23 at 6:40

You must log in to answer this question.