# Greater incentive for editing?

As we’ve learned from this post, there are lots of questions and answers out there that could use some editing. Unfortunately, if you have over $$2\text,000$$ rep and the Copy Editor badge (for $$500$$ edits), there’s absolutely nothing to be gained from this.

I don’t know if this is to be proposed here (or in a more general site Meta), nor if this could even be realistically changed, but I believe that the Copy Editor badge should be able to be awarded multiple times, once for each $$500$$ edits. This would give users an incentive to fix posts that wouldn’t fade away after a threshold. Moreover, it would reward those users that have improved the site beyond their duty. Since less than $$250$$ users have the badge anyways, this change would be slight, but I believe it could have big effects.

• Refiner, Illuminator and Archaeologist badges all require editing work, and for the first two answering work as well. I'm not convinced that incentivising edits by badges is a great thing, personally. – postmortes Jan 12 at 7:09
• To be honest, I'd rather people who only edit posts for reputation and badges to not edit posts. – Asaf Karagila Jan 12 at 7:10
• Posts on this meta related to no rep for direct edits (not suggested edits): Why don't I get reputation points for edits anymore? and Editing answers does not give reputation anymore. (I will add that also users who are below 2k can only get at most 1000 reputation points from suggested edits.) – Martin Sleziak Jan 12 at 8:24
• These discussions on Meta Stack Exchange seem to be related: Why is there a limit on edit reputation reward? and No points for editing after gaining edit rights?. – Martin Sleziak Jan 12 at 8:25
• When serving edit badge hunting entered the list of practices that peeved me (behind rep farming, obviously). The worst cases were users who would notice a recurring "error", then use a search engine looking for that particular error, edit posts en masse, without even looking for other shortcomings in those posts. IMHO it should take years to be able to earn a gold badge. – Jyrki Lahtonen Jan 12 at 10:30
• @Asaf, there's a difference between editing just for reputation and badges, and wanting to get some sort of encouragement/recognition for doing some good work on the site. – Gerry Myerson Jan 12 at 14:39
• @Gerry: Yes, there is, and I am grateful for those who do it and get recognised. But as Jyrki said, some people do it because they want recognition and then they just do it badly. – Asaf Karagila Jan 12 at 14:42
• @JyrkiLahtonen I believe mass editing can be done responsibly, as long as you do look for other shortcomings in posts. I've been editing a lot of "dices" myself, trying to improve the questions and answers with this word as much as possible. But hey, perhaps I'm alone in this. – URL Jan 12 at 20:17
• @URL Yes, it can be done responsibly. If you actually go through the posts. That will also slow it down to a sensible pace. Sometimes may be one third of the posts on the front page were about fixing a minor thing on several posts (in my time zone there were occasional "slow" hours). Best of luck in your work. – Jyrki Lahtonen Jan 12 at 21:04
• @AsafKaragila "I'd rather people who only edit posts for reputation and badges to not edit posts." not to edit posts? that wouldn't be in benefit of Math.stack. I think that regardless of people's intentions, if they are (suggesting)-editing post, then it's absolutely fine. They are improving posts – Bellatrix Jan 13 at 22:05
• @Bellatrix You haven't seen the worst of it. Do remember that every edit pushes another post off the front page. The mass editors did a disservice to the askers of the posts who lost their share of prime time. For a very marginal improvement. – Jyrki Lahtonen Jan 17 at 13:39
• @JyrkiLahtonen Lets suppose that's the case. Would there be a problem in telling the editor to do more complete edits? If the editor seems to ignore you and keeps editing repeatedly, then tell mods about it – Bellatrix Jan 18 at 1:18
• @JyrkiLahtonen The problem of excessive bumping has already been argued. The fact that excessive bumping is shunned is already negative incentive for not quickly pushing out thoughtless edits. If people do dedicated , thoughtful edits, those will take a while, and should not flood the page. – URL Jan 18 at 3:30