I edited this question [Edit: I mean "answer" not "question"] https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/a/73819/58715 about three weeks ago, and the edit is still waiting to be approved. Is it possible that it has been forgotten about, and how do I remind the right person/people about the edit, or am I supposed to do something else, or nothing at all? It's a small edit, and doesn't seem to be a big deal. I think it's a great edit, but, as you can see in the comments, the author of the answer disagrees.
asked Aug 1, 2023 at 23:27
-
The question is quite stale - over 7 years old. It is possible the author is just not around any more or has lost interest in the site.– BumbleCommented Aug 1, 2023 at 23:57
-
1@Bumble "It is possible the author is just not around". The author remains active on the site, and his latest comments on that answer are from early July. In those comments he explains why he disagrees with Matthew.– Iñaki ViggersCommented Aug 2, 2023 at 19:45
-
@IñakiViggers Could you please tell me how you were able to link to the comments of the answer like that?– Matthew Christopher BartshCommented Aug 2, 2023 at 23:09
-
@MatthewChristopherBartsh Sure. Type inside square brackets the text for the link, and right after the closing bracket paste inside parenthesis the link. No spaces in between the closing bracket and the opening parenthesis.– Iñaki ViggersCommented Aug 2, 2023 at 23:15
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
am I supposed to do something else, or nothing at all?
Other than maybe posting your own answer, do nothing at all. The author of the answer evidently assessed your suggestion, whence the possibility that "it has been forgotten about" can be ruled out.
A contributor is under no obligation to follow others' suggestions. When you sought to edit the answer, you should have noticed the guidelines (see upper right on How to Edit) "Clarify meaning without changing it" and "Always respect the author's intent". The latter is especially relevant insofar as you already are aware that "the author of the answer disagrees" with your edit. Given the significant effort many of us spend on drafting our answers, we tend to reject others' attempt to micromanage these, let alone when such attempt entails incorporating points with which we disagree.
Your remark that the suggested edit "doesn't seem to be a big deal" is at odds with your very next remark that "it's a great edit" and with bringing this up on the Meta site. But you can always post your own answer if you believe that the point at issue is material and relevant to the question.
-
Your answer would be better, I think, if you included the entire guidelines, which are, " How to Edit Correct minor typos or mistakes Clarify meaning without changing it Add related resources or links Always respect the author’s intent Don’t use edits to reply to the author" And I think you should comment on how the guidelines are too brief, and conflict with each other. In my case, I believe the author's intent was to be accurate, and yet another intent was to include an incorrect statement that he thought was accurate. Commented Aug 2, 2023 at 23:20
-
I corrected a minor mistake. I clarified the intended primary meaning ie the main point by deleting (proposed to) a minor detail that was intended to support that main point but actually undermined it, because it was false. The author's main intent is to be accurate, and persuasive, I believe, and his statement that I deleted was added as part of that intent. That the author still disagreed is not something I should have said, because he didn't reply to me latest comment, which proved him wrong (IMHO). But even if he does, he is mistaken. If someone insists poison is food, do you respect that? Commented Aug 2, 2023 at 23:34
-
+1 for drawing my attention to the guidelines, which I had forgotten about the details of. Commented Aug 2, 2023 at 23:36
-
@MatthewChristopherBartsh Reproducing the entire guidelines would needlessly lengthen the paragraph. I cited only the two items I consider relevant to this issue. In my opinion the guidelines are clear enough and consistent. A general intent to be accurate is a given; the guideline rather refers to the specific idea(s) that an author seeks to convey. The author's disagreement with some of your points indicates that these depart from what he has in mind. "If someone insists poison is food," one may refute via comments certain point, but an insistence to edit it out amounts to censorship. Commented Aug 2, 2023 at 23:57
-
No one is insisting on editing anything. It's just that my edit was neither accepted nor rejected, and when I proved that something was wrong with my latest comment (IMHO), there was no reply. The guidelines don't say what happens when an edit is neither rejected nor accepted. If the author doesn't attend to it, doesn't it get automatically dumped in some other in-tray? Say X says "Put that food in my mouth, because it is not poisoned." and you have proved that it is poisoned. Do you still put it in his mouth? His main intention is to eat good food. His intentionto eat that "food" is 2ndary. Commented Aug 3, 2023 at 16:33
-
You say, "Your remark that the suggested edit "doesn't seem to be a big deal" is at odds with your very next remark that "it's a great edit" and with bringing this up on the Meta site." Of course it's not, because "great", in this context, means "wonderful". So maybe you should cut that statement. Commented Aug 3, 2023 at 18:04
-
@MatthewChristopherBartsh "No one is insisting on editing anything." You certainly are. A pattern constitutes insistence (not bad per se, though) regardless of whether each and every attempt gets rejected explicitly. "His intentionto eat that "food" is 2ndary." That is only your interpretation of the guideline. To the rest of us our intent of being accurate is too obvious to warrant a guideline. Trivialities require no guidelines. ""great", in this context, means "wonderful"." Again, feel free to post own your answer to that question if you think the distinction truly matters. Commented Aug 3, 2023 at 20:19
-
What pattern? "Trivialities require no guidelines. ""great", in this context, means "wonderful"." Again, feel free to post own your answer to that question if you think the distinction truly matters." Your answer contains an error based on an imperfect grasp of English. I am suggesting an edit, that is all. It may be a small mistake, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be corrected. You think it doesn't matter, perhaps. I think it does. I also think you, especially, should care, as the mistake reflects badly on you. Your refusal to fix it looks even more bad. Commented Aug 3, 2023 at 20:51
-
"Your remark that the suggested edit "doesn't seem to be a big deal" is at odds with your very next remark that "it's a great edit" and with bringing this up on the Meta site." contains another mistake, that I just noticed. It is even more clearly a mistake than your misinterpretation of "great". In English, "A is at odds with B and with C." implies that A is at odds with C. So your statement implies that my remark that the suggested edit "doesn't seem to be a big deal" is at odds with my bringing this up on the Meta site, but it's not. I brought this up on the Meta site because of the delay. Commented Aug 3, 2023 at 21:04
-
@MatthewChristopherBartsh Speaking of "imperfect grasp of English", I gather that by "even more bad" you mean "even worse". "your statement implies that [...] is at odds with [...]". Yes, that's exactly what I meant. It is pointless to post on Meta, and to keep dwelling via comments, on something that you yourself admitted from the start that "doesn't seem to be a big deal". You could have moved on instead of taking issue with several minutiae here in addition to those on the underlying post. Commented Aug 3, 2023 at 21:19
-
Yes, "even worse" would be an even better way of putting it. I knew that you might seize on that, but I wrote it anyway, so it doesn't reflect on my grasp of English, from my perspective. It's interesting that you can nitpick my comment while having not fixed much bigger errors in your answer, even after they are pointed out to you. Your answer's flaws compared to the one in my comment are like planks compared to a mote. And you ignored my question, "What pattern?" I mean, what "pattern" were you referring to when you used the word "pattern"? Commented Aug 3, 2023 at 23:17
-
@MatthewChristopherBartsh "What pattern?" Suggesting an edit; trying to persuade the author that he is wrong about that; bringing this up on the Meta site even if only "because of the delay"; reiterating that you proved him wrong; alleging that other(s) "especially, should care, as the mistake reflects badly on" us who don't subscribe to your position that an edit should be imposed on the author. Lastly, when a contributor stops addressing your comments, it does not necessarily mean that you persuaded him. It's just that only very few people are inclined to entertain endless discussion. Commented Aug 3, 2023 at 23:42