It seems odd to me that I have sufficient reputation to directly edit another user's post, but if a low reputation user suggests an edit, it takes several approvals before it goes live. What is the reasoning behind this behavior?

share
    
Increase of the number of approvals was (kind of) announced here: It takes two to tango? One of the answers say that it was a response to problems like this: What can we do to stop bad edits getting accepted? –  Martin Sleziak Nov 9 '12 at 6:02
    
Related, but I am not sure if it is duplicate: meta.math.stackexchange.com/questions/6480/… –  Willie Wong Nov 9 '12 at 9:07
5  
I think it is more likely if you edit yourself, to be more responsible because your name is on the line. If you approve an edit since the original editor is only shown afterwards, some approvers could be more hasty. –  clark Nov 9 '12 at 10:57

1 Answer 1

up vote 2 down vote accepted

I'm transferring my "accepted comment" from clark into an answer:

I think it is more likely if you edit yourself, to be more responsible because your name is on the line. If you approve an edit since the original editor is only shown afterwards, some approvers could be more hasty.

share

You must log in to answer this question.

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