I find that in some cases editing is made where not really needed (will someone edit this one? :) ) Rewarding editing encourages doing it even when not needed - I suggest not to reward editing. I suggest to reward comments.
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
12
-
$\begingroup$ I'm having trouble understanding your question. How exactly is editing rewarded, currently? Do you have any examples of edits being made where they are not really needed? What specific changes do you suggest, and why? $\endgroup$– DoorknobAug 22, 2015 at 4:18
-
$\begingroup$ Edits get points - I assumed that it is credited to the editor. $\endgroup$– MotiAug 22, 2015 at 4:20
-
1$\begingroup$ Points? What points? Do you have a source for this? $\endgroup$– DoorknobAug 22, 2015 at 4:20
-
$\begingroup$ I reviewed some edits and they may be graded. Just review some and you will understand what I am talking about. May be those are not credited to the editor but there are points for edits. $\endgroup$– MotiAug 22, 2015 at 4:23
-
$\begingroup$ Do you mean suggested edits? Yes, users get +2 reputation when a suggested edit is approved. If you think a suggested edit is being made when it is not needed, reject it as "too minor." $\endgroup$– DoorknobAug 22, 2015 at 4:26
-
3$\begingroup$ I couldn't resist the meta urge to edit this one ;-) $\endgroup$– Rand al'ThorAug 22, 2015 at 10:06
-
$\begingroup$ I expected as you may see from my post;-) Should not I be rewarded something for predicting it? $\endgroup$– MotiAug 22, 2015 at 15:44
-
2$\begingroup$ @Doorknob, there are five badges for editing (plus three for editing and answering the same question), and it has been suggested on some other stacks that they give a perverse incentive. $\endgroup$– Peter TaylorAug 23, 2015 at 7:19
-
$\begingroup$ Part of the issue is also that you are penalizing person that posts the puzzle - basically you could get negative reward for a posting if enough readers don't like various parts of your posting! - (-3) now. $\endgroup$– MotiAug 23, 2015 at 15:45
-
$\begingroup$ and (-1) on this one.-) $\endgroup$– MotiAug 23, 2015 at 15:45
-
$\begingroup$ This would be more suitable to meta stack exchange as it is not a problem restricted to Puzzling $\endgroup$– warspykingAug 24, 2015 at 17:47
-
$\begingroup$ meta.stackexchange.com/questions/17204/… see #5 $\endgroup$– d'alar'copAug 26, 2015 at 22:15
Add a comment
|
2 Answers
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
Moti, hi, i do get your question. For me though, to be honest, I am a total slob and my editing skills blow bubbles. If another user actually wants to take the time and is careful to not damage the article being edited, then they absolutely should earn some cred.
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
2
Moti, I suppose you are referring to this edit made by me on your question Another watch puzzle.
You seem to think that my edit did not make the post any better and was only made to gain reputation points. However, in my opinion, the edits made the post better visually and in terms of clarity. Also, as I have already commented on your post, I have no intentions for editing it other than improving it since being a 1k+ member, I no longer gain two points by suggesting edits. However, if you disagree, you are free to roll back.
However, I should remind you that, what may be clear to you as the OP, might not be clear to someone else. This is evidenced by the fact that each of your last three (1,2,3) posts got edited for clarity and formatting reasons by three different users (including me). So, before accusing somebody of editing only for reps, you should see if those edits actually made your post better.
-
$\begingroup$ As I said before - you may improve on posts in many way by adding more information, pictures... and so on. My approach is - if it is obvious what is the goal to you, assume others will understand it as well. I believe that for almost any post I could find some additional details that would make it better. $\endgroup$– MotiAug 23, 2015 at 3:32
-
1$\begingroup$ But given your record (3 consecutive post edited by 3 different users) maybe you should consider thinking into the lines that maybe the goal is obvious to you doesn't necessarily imply that the goal is obvious to everyone. $\endgroup$– RohcanaAug 23, 2015 at 4:05