2 like 0 dislike
in Meta by (2.8k points)
When editing posts, one can tick a box "Save silently to hide that this was edited", which will thus not trigger an entry in the public version history. Should we disable that feature in the interest of a complete record?

2 Answers

2 like 0 dislike
by (783 points)
I agree that we should be transparent about edits. Otherwise a version history would be rather useless.

Looking through the admin settings, I just discovered that the "save silently" feature was enabled for moderators and administrators only. There does not seem to be an option to switch this feature off completely, but I was able to make it available for administrators only. As long as we cannot switch off this feature completely, I would encourage administrator to refrain from using it voluntarily. Is everybody happy with this?
by (174 points)
0 0
Fine by me. There are occasions when it's necessary to edit silently (removing private information comes to mind), when doing it from a database would be more effort than is required. For any other edit, it's unnecessary.
1 like 0 dislike
by (295 points)
I think it is better to disable it, as the feature could be misused to smuggle in unwanted content (spam, nonsense, etc) without anybody taking note of it.

Disabling it would also have the effect that each edit triggers a new entry in the list of activity, which does not hurt either as the site is running rather calmly at present ...

Ask Open Science used to be called Open Science Q&A but we changed the name when we registered the domain ask-open-science.org. Everything else stays the same: We are still hosted by Bielefeld University.

If you participated in the Open Science beta at StackExchange, please reclaim your user account now – it's already here!

E-mail the webmaster

Legal notice

Privacy statement