-7
$\begingroup$

In A problem of forming equal angles in plane geometry I first added the tags "geometry" and "trigonometry" and received 2 points reputation

Later I realised it was not "trigonometry" but "geometric-construction" so corrected it again , another 2 reputation.

I first thought it was a bug, but then saw that there is no limit to the amount of reputation that you can get this way (except as part of the 1000 a day)

Can we make it standard that for a second revision of a question no reputation is granted (and maybe that a reviewer can override this limit)

PS This question is almost the same as http://meta.math.stackexchange.com/questions/12525/undeserved-reputation but now as a feature request (I wanted to edit that question and add the feature request tag but was not allowed to do so) (why???)

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ The 1000 rep approved suggested-edit cap is total, and not daily. (See MSO suggested edit faq.) $\endgroup$ – user642796 Jan 25 '14 at 15:14
5
$\begingroup$

I don't see this as a big problem at all. First of all, getting the odd +4 rep when +2 may have sufficed is not a very big deal in the grand scheme of reputation (which, against even Asaf's protestations, is not an exact science).

More importantly, if users are attempting to abuse this, then at least one of the following will happen:

  1. users will start to reject these edits as not substantial enough, or some other reason.
  2. the ♦-moderators will be flagged, and we will hunt down politely inform these users of proper editing etiquette, and of the consequences of continued abuse. (At the same time, if we notice users who have been significantly less than thorough in accepting/rejected suggested edits, we may speak with them as well.)

(The users in the suggested-edit review queue tend to notice when too many suggestions are coming from individual users.)

As an aside, in my opinion the system is set up to discourage users from improving suggested edits: by the time an improvement is submitted, the original suggestion has likely already been accepted/rejected. This is but one aspect of the suggested edit system that, again IMHO, needs more attention.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

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