@XanderHenderson you put your finger exactly on the problem. Because it's pointless. For some reason, people realise it doesn't make sense after posting the answer (like me)
@quid I think it is appropriate to remind users and discourage them from engaging in editing binges. 20/25 or 20/50 posts bumped to the front page due to trivial edits is not desirable. Particularly is such edits are made to enable an answerer to gain a badge in said a tag due to an editing binge. I have seen far more pointless posts on meta, than the one you disparaged.
@amWhy thus the user can/should be reminded, this is content of my comment. A meta post is not a good way to remind one user. It's not a big deal, but the meta post was inappropriate.
@quid Sure, but you could have suggested that, instead of demeaning the poster.
@quid I think other's believe otherwise. And I wish you'd apply the same logic to other meta posts that are truly inappropriate, which you rarely do. So I am a bit surprised that you chose to accost this particular post.
@quid Please don't resort to trying to shame others. A moderator should know better than to respond in such a hostile manner as you did. That alone is enough, at times, to shut a meta post down. I did not bring this up to argue with you; just to suggest that your refusal to be receptive to concerns about overzealous editing by 15K + rep users may be a bit blind-sighted.
@quid I reviewed suggested edits, and voted accordingly. You suggested you had every right to say what you said and it was justified, then you attacked my one and only comment. You suggested that your comment was fine and mine problematic, before I suggested the alternative.
Look in the mirror, @quid, before you point fingers.
@amWhy the situation is at least symmetric. I acknowledged your concern that the comment might not be friendly enough.
While you dismissed my remark.
I also conceded that the comment is not overly welcoming or friendly, but in fact intentionally expresses a certain level of disapproval regarding that particular post.
@amWhy on that point, which I had no knowledge of until you brought it up, so what exactly is the issue with creating that tag wiki? If the tag should not exist in anyone opinion, alright, let us discuss that, but to reject the creation of a tag wiki excerpt, the point of this would need to be explained.
Well, I don't micro-mange such things so you do as you see fit.
But to reject a suggested tag wiki edit because there were too many regular edits would be a strange thing to do. But maybe there was another reason.
@quid And no one else can do the same, about, say, your comment? Or, no one else can intentionally express a certain level of disapproval regarding a particular post or a particular comment?
^^^Or can only moderators express disapproval of posts and/or comments? Practice what you preach.
@quid Sure, here I did. Not on main and not on meta. You say: "It is not very clear what exactly you want now." Sounds like you wrote that in the same tone you wrote your comment first comment on the meta post. ("What exactly is the point of this meta post? What do you want to discuss?") It is not very clear what your problem is.
@quid Me too. Practice what you preach. Don't bully users for disagreeing with you. And allow them to say what they disagree with, and why. And I did both of those: I disagreed with you, and I told you why. So leave me alone, if you have nothing more to say.
@amWhy do you think the meta post was appropriate?
It pointed out, not to say denounced, the actions of one particular user.
This is something which should, if at all, be done via a flag or maybe in our chat.
Not via a meta post.
On top of it, it was vague in that it did not spell out what the specific issue is. It seemed at first it was about the tag, but then maybe it was more broadly about too many edits.
Here, you formulated an even more specific concern.
It does not seem to me that of the first tagged ones overly many involve the tag creator directly.
@amWhy it is no doubt true that there is some variance. I was not in the best of moods to begin with when I saw that post, which may have played a role, too.
