Comment by shkkmo
4 years ago
> As a result, other people don't feel enabled to come along and tweak the answer to improve it.
It's worse than that. Edits have to go through a review process that is much more selective and often arbirarily rejects good edits.
Only if you're a low rep user, though. And no, many more bad edits are accepted, than good edits being rejected. By orders of magnitude.
> Only if you're a low rep user, though.
What qualifies as "low rep"? I'm easily in the too quintile.
> And no, many more bad edits are accepted, than good edits being rejected. By orders of magnitude.
Do you have any data to support this?
The editing and updating process for stackoverflow is broken and as a direct result I've used the site less and less over the years. Denying the problem just hastens the demise of the site.
Editing answers is a complete waste of time. You can post a correction along with a copy and paste of the relevant section from the documentation, yet have your edit disappear without explanation.