1

Ref- Scan Barcode and QR code from the mobile screen itself

Edit history for this question shows that a moderator rejected the edit four months ago (for reasons I also agree with), but this edit is approved few minutes ago by OP so it stands approved (See How do suggested edits work?).

The approved edit brings about a fundamental change to the question, making the existing answers only partly correct and relevant. Someone visiting the question today (it is on the home page) may actually down vote the answers as they don't match the question body. It's another matter that the approved edit made changes to the body but not to the title of question.

I doubt if 7 years back when the question was posted, QR codes were a thing. Bringing that in the scope of question now, is meaningless.

To give another example, USB Type C charging wasn't around about four years ago. If OP of a question approves an edit that brings Type-C charging into the ambit, we would have a similar problem (if the question was posted pre Type-C days)

IMO, moderators should rollback the edit approval in this instant case. That's the easy part (hopefully moderators can do that based on this meta post, a cursory check threw up Rolling back a completely changed question)

How to ensure it doesn't happen in future is the difficult part since OP exercises similar power to that of moderator, in edit approval / rejection.

| |
  • 1
    Slightly related remark: due to how the layout appears, some users may not realize that the "Approve" button shown on the rejected suggested edit actually overrules the community's decision, instead of "I approve this review decision", so it might be an honest mistake. – Andrew T. Mar 11 at 12:50
2

For the moment, I have edited the question to separate the new objective of OP (QR codes part) and mentioned it as a new paragraph along with the date on which the objective was introduced. I know that mentioning date was a redundant step as a reader can easily see the dates from edit history. However, given the problem at hand of invalidation and effectiveness/comprehensiveness (E/C) of the existing answers, I went ahead with redundancy.

Usually, whenever my answer was invalidated or its E/Cs reduced by an edit from OP I used to comment to OP that they should consider my work and efforts into consideration first since their edit is in gross disrespect of my efforts. That said, if OP reverted the edit than the problem was disposed of. But if OP persisted with the edit, I either marked my answer with the heading that it was answered with respect to original question (with hyperlink to corresponding edit) or I deleted my answer (in cases when the whole answer was invalidated).

These cases had happened mostly when I was not a moderator, and since I used to be the only answer contributor I used to choose deletion or edit of my own posts instead of moderator attention.

In your case though, I do not want to revert the edit because QR codes now are widespread in use and potential solutions to barcode question might have support for QR codes as well. Given the question quality issues, I wager we might (if we haven't already) end up with a duplicate of that same question (with "QR code" as the changed terms) and answers common to both.

For containing duplicate or common answers in this case alone I chose not to revert the edit.

That said, I share your concern. Had one or more answers been fully invalidated, I in all likelihood could have taken your suggested route.

How to ensure it doesn't happen in future is the difficult part since OP exercises similar power to that of moderator, in edit approval / rejection.

We can't unless we on technical level prevent OP from approving a rejected edit. But this change would have to be discussed on the network meta.

Personally, I'm not in support of preventing OP from approving a rejected edit. Often times, an OP approves a rejected edit when OP alone is able to make sense that the edit is aligned with their question's intent. The edit you mentioned is once in a while misuse of edit privileges by an OP. Unless statistics dictate that this problem affects a lot of our answer contributors or site's quality control, I suggest we put this proposal for rest until it gathers traction on network meta.

| |
  • 1
    1. I thought of this solution of editing it myself to mention the date but didn't do that precisely for the reason of duplicates (I didn't check). 2. I too faced this "changing goalposts" problem and my solution was to edit and say "in response to edit made to question or comment" 3. I agree that this is not a blatant misuse as my last link showed but shared it to show a precedence 4. I know and agree OP knows best if edit is right or not but bringing up the "hard part" was to subtly encourage greater scrutiny 5. You did right by commenting to OP (so did I) +1 – beeshyams Mar 10 at 11:19
  • 1
    Additional remark on "misuse of edit privileges by an OP": due to how the layout appears, some users may not realize that the "Approve" button shown on the rejected suggested edit actually overrules the community's decision, instead of "I approve this review decision", so it might be an honest mistake. /cc: @beeshyams – Andrew T. Mar 11 at 12:51
  • @AndrewT - if that is the case OP may revert to comments under question – beeshyams Mar 11 at 13:11

You must log in to answer this question.

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