6

We recently had a small edit war on this question.

As far as any of us can tell, we've edited it in a way that mostly preserves the meaning, and I've provided an answer that appears to answer it (whether you look at the original form or the current form). (Since one of the edits went through the review queue, there is reasonable consensus about this.) But the OP says my answer doesn't answer it, and that the question has been messed up.

So: what are we missing? What did the question originally ask that it no longer asks, and what does it ask that my answer doesn't attempt to address?

  • 2
    Thank you for bringing this up. I would also like to hear bonCodigo's side and understand where the problem lies. I put a temporary lock on the question to stop the question from changing all the time, but when we all calm down, we can discuss a good wording here and see how the question can be improved into a form which reflects bonCodigo's intent. – rumtscho Oct 16 '14 at 21:18
  • 1
    Overall, I think the question is broad. OP has been provided good information and resources in the answers that were given, that should address the question regardless of how it is worded or reworded. (Or maybe I'm just missing something.) It appears that OP has an issue with edits and moderator authority and is not very respectful when responding. – Cindy Oct 17 '14 at 10:02
  • @Jolenealaska While I definitely hear you (and would not tolerate this sort of behavior toward other users on the site) the point of this question is to find out if there's anything we really did wrong and try to make peace if possible, not to pile on. – Cascabel Oct 17 '14 at 15:53
  • To that point, my answer below is not intended as piling on. I think it's a reasonable thing to question whether the correct action was taken in this case. But I also strongly believe based on what I'm seeing that the edits were appropriate and introduced no significant changes to the question. – logophobe Oct 17 '14 at 16:01
  • @logophobe Yup, I think you're fine; I just want to focus on the question and the actual actions taken, not get into possibly inflammatory things about behavior (mods can handle that, don't worry). – Cascabel Oct 17 '14 at 16:53
  • I haven't digged too deep, but it seems to me that the question is too broad. On topic, but too broad. Why not create a number of answerable questions based on this one and close it? Excellent approach, @Jefromi – BaffledCook Oct 19 '14 at 10:17
  • 1
    Wow... I'm with you on this one @Jefromi. There was nothing in your edits that I wouldn't have done to correct the grammar. – Sobachatina Oct 21 '14 at 20:20
8

I recall a very similar edit war and inflammatory behavior from the OP in a (apparently now deleted) question regarding "GMO wheat". At this point I believe their behavior is entirely retaliatory and without merit.

The question in both its original and edited forms seems to be asking after a few main points:

  • What alternatives can be used in place of wheat in baking?
  • What are some specific challenges when using these substitutes?
  • What differences can be expected (aroma, taste, texture) in the final product?
  • Do recipes require modification when using such substitutes, and how?

Altogether, these make for a fairly broad question, but on-topic for the community, and reasonable.

Jefromi's edits in version 3 fixed what I would regard as grammatical problems, and made the wording of the question clearer. I do not see any changes to the core of the question in this edit.

The OP then rolled back the question to a prior revision, and made the following statement as a justification for the action:

I want my original question to be as it is. I don't like moderator jefromi keeps destroying my questions! Look at his edit. Totally changing the question.

I would regard this as demonstrably false, and I'm looking at the edit. There simply are not major changes to the question.

After another edit from a different member of the community who made similar grammatical fixes, the OP then stated:

I have checked with multiple users and people for Grammar and clarity of this question. I am not new to SE. So keep my question as it is.

I have several problems with this statement. First, these "multiple users and people" are nowhere to be found. They are more than welcome to contribute to the editing process if they disagree, but all I see is the OP rolling back others' edits to the question. Second, whether or not you're new to SE is completely irrelevant. Even canonical questions can (and are encouraged to be!) continually edited and improved. Third, just because you want your question to remain as-is is not a sufficient rationale. Editing is explicitly, actively encouraged across all SE sites. Someone experienced with the format and actively engaged with the community should know this.

I fully agree with the edits made to the question and don't believe they distort the meaning in any way. They help make the question clearer. The OP seems to have a general problem with the editing process, to which I believe the only reasonable response is: too bad. This is a standard for the entire SE network. Their behavior has been disruptive and if it continues I would fully support actions taken to remove them.

  • 2
    I agree with you 100%. Good answer. – Cindy Oct 17 '14 at 18:05

You must log in to answer this question.

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