Image

Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Welcome to Codidact Meta!

Codidact Meta is the "town hall" (meta-discussion site) for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.

Don't add comment for minor comment title edit.

+2
−0

I added a comment to a question, then realized I made a minor typo in the comment title (left of "s" at end of word). So I changed the title. However, a second comment appeared pointing out the very minor edit to the title:

Image

That looks stupid and is distracting. Unfortunately, I can't delete the second comment written by "System". If I had known it was going to do that, I would have left the original title alone. The extra comment is a lot worse than the missing "s".

I realize it may be difficult to automatically decide what a "minor" comment is, even though a single letter change is likely minor. However, when only a single user has written anything in a comment thread, there is no need to point out a title change whether minor or not. The system could also possibly look at the comment thread age. If it's only a few minutes old, there is little harm in allowing a title change.

History

0 comment threads

1 answer

+3
−0

When we implemented this, we erred on the side of auditing, because a changed title essentially puts words in the mouth of the first commenter and this can be used in negative ways. I don't want to try to decide what's major or minor and get it wrong. Moderators can delete these auto-comments, so you can flag them.

That said, I think if the person renaming a thread is the author of all comments so far, we should allow silent renames. This handles the case of a new thread with a typo or unexpected formatting, which is probably the most common case for renaming. I'm not sure why I didn't do this when implementing the change, particularly as I had once proposed that approach. (Probably because I was originally thinking of only the narrow case, we expanded to allow others to rename, we decided we needed auditing in that case, and... the original case got forgotten. Oops.)

History

0 comment threads

Sign up to answer this question »