I was just informed that I got a "Revival" bag. I didn't notice that I answered a question that was asked 11 months ago.

This question went on top again because somebody edited some trivial typos. After 11 months, the OP no longer care. In fact, (s)he has not logged in from last year.

I have no interest in earning some upvotes, and I feel I'm wasting my time because of some grammar nazis.

Can we have a strict rule for editing questions that are older than, say, 3 months?


No, we can't, because this is a feature, not a bug, of the Stack Exchange system. If you disallow edits for minor typos, then you also eliminate edits for major issues. Part of the Stack Exchange philosophy is curation of the site over time. Remember that we’re not just helping the original poster. The point of this site is to provide resources for future visitors who may have similar questions!

If you are concerned about the age of the question, you can look it up. It’s posted along with the original poster’s ID. If you don’t want to answer older questions, then that’s your right. But it’s not a reason to impose a sitewide rule.

You must log in to answer this question.

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