3
$\begingroup$

I've been recently editing a few questions & answers on this StackExchange project again, as per my mantra of there's only one space in SpaceX.

I clearly must have irritated someone with these changes, as I have recently been subject to a few downvotes on some of my answers:

enter image description here

Don't get me wrong—I'm not annoyed by this, people are free to click whatever buttons they like; but I thought I'd just bring to light that this actioning is frowned upon, as per the StackExchange docs: https://stackoverflow.com/help/privileges/vote-down

Use your downvotes whenever you encounter an egregiously sloppy, no-effort-expended post, or an answer that is clearly and perhaps dangerously incorrect.

None of the answers in question match this definition, nor did the downvoter leave any comment explaining their position. Would you mind coming forward and reasoning your position? Thanks.

$\endgroup$
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Wasted effort on their part. Serial voting is caught and reversed by a script $\endgroup$ – Machavity Jul 1 at 22:24
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I've never gotten one of these exactly, but I did get about a half-dozen down votes on a post suggesting a passage in a Scott Manley video was less than articulate once. Keep an eye on those; the serial voting system sometimes reacts quickly and sometimes can reverse weeks later, possibly depending on if it flags for human supervision or not. $\endgroup$ – uhoh Jul 2 at 8:22
3
$\begingroup$

This site is lightly edited site, and posts are bumped in the active cue for editing only infrequently. I've never seen an articulated objection to an edit that fixes something that obviously needed fixing, be it large or small. Probably some trivial noob edits are rejected peacefully and quietly in edit review.

An individual down voting unrelated posts in retaliation (if that is indeed what happened, we don't know) is a bad actor and their behavior is absolutely without defense or excuse.

Don't worry about it; go ahead and keep fixing broke stuff! You are a valued and productive contributor to the site.

$\endgroup$
-1
$\begingroup$

I can see why you got down votes - this sort of thing is so minor I would reject it if it was the only edit someone made. You making a lot of them bumps these posts to the front page thus irritating people.

The good thing for you is the votes will be caught and reversed, but please don't make such minor edits.

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I disagree that the scale of the edit is relevant here. My previous meta discussion on this topic elicited positive responses, nor do the contents of my edits violate SO editing guidelines, in fact SO specifically states "Some common reasons to edit are to fix grammatical or spelling mistakes". Furthermore, your answer feels like a mild implementation of victim blaming. $\endgroup$ – ReactingToAngularVues Jul 3 at 18:11
  • $\begingroup$ It wasn't me who down voted you, my post was entirely to let you know that I understand it because it is incredibly annoying doing that kind of edit. On most of my main sites it would be rejected as too minor. It's not victim blaming - it's letting you know what you did that will annoy people. $\endgroup$ – Rory Alsop Jul 3 at 18:51
  • $\begingroup$ Except as the SO rules indicate, grammatical and spelling changes are precisely what post editing is for :) $\endgroup$ – ReactingToAngularVues Jul 3 at 18:56
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Most sites, including SO, are very against changes this minor. If you are going to edit one space, only do it if you also have a few other edits that will help at the same time. $\endgroup$ – Rory Alsop Jul 3 at 18:59
  • $\begingroup$ This is not a constructive conversation. I've provided multiple links demonstrating my changes are completely valid and welcomed, you're providing opinion. Have a good day. $\endgroup$ – ReactingToAngularVues Jul 3 at 19:28
  • $\begingroup$ I'll suggest, before you go, that you read the extensive meta posts on main meta and sub metas, which point out on no uncertain terms that while we do want edits to sort grammar, we don't is that is the only edit you make. This is not opinion, this is across most SE sites. As I mentioned, most, and definitely the ones I moderate, would reject your efforts as too minor - this is a specific rejection reason, meant to stop people doing this. I am happy for you that most of yours have been accepted, but you are absolutely annoying people. You asked why. This is why. It's up to you. $\endgroup$ – Rory Alsop Jul 3 at 19:33
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ -1 Only a small subset of individual users already predisposed to incredible levels of annoyance actually find "doing that kind of edit" to be "incredibly annoying". Until we have an objective annoyance meter capable of surveying all users (rather than a vocal minority), it could just as easily be 1 part per thousand of users as it could be most of them. Anyone down voting unrelated posts in retaliation is a bad actor and their behavior is absolutely without defense or excuse. The angst level of SO has been pathological and should never be used as a reference for good SE attitudes. $\endgroup$ – uhoh Jul 4 at 4:31
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @uhoh - please read the extensive posts on this on meta. It causes problems when people do this: loads of incredibly minor edits cause extra effort for community and moderators. Which is why most sites follow the guidance I mentioned. The retaliation bit, I agree with you on this, I wouldn't do it, but my whole answer post was to explain why people might do it based on the op's behaviour. $\endgroup$ – Rory Alsop Jul 4 at 13:17
  • $\begingroup$ I know this site has traditionally been light on edit rules, which is nice, but most have to be much stricter, so think about where the community is from. $\endgroup$ – Rory Alsop Jul 4 at 13:24
  • $\begingroup$ And @uhoh - too many minor edits annoy most moderators, because it causes more work. The flag count goes way up, folks leave comments complaining, and we get emails sometimes as folks get so annoyed they spend the effort to go and find them out. $\endgroup$ – Rory Alsop Jul 4 at 13:27

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .