Vanilla 1.1.9 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
In short, no. We've discussed this before on meta; it's a quirk in the software, we don't necessarily agree with it, but we can't change it, and it's not a very big deal for an answer to be community-wiki.
As a side remark I should say that in SE2.0 moderators can revert auto-CW.
I think that this feature is less-useful here since people care less if their answer is CW or not.
If I remember rightly from the early StackExchange days this quirk was quite intentional, and designed to discourage too many edits. I think that's a little unfortunate, but only because it seems to imply there's something bad about CW, an idea we ought to resist.
That said, the ability of 2.0 moderators tI undo auto-CWseems more trouble than it could possibly be worth.
Anixx has since deleted his original answer and reposted it. This seems somewhat rude, as Noah had written various comments on the original.
I'm puzzled by what's wrong with having an answer end up as CW. Is it the loss of reputation? The possibility that lower-reputation users could edit it?
@Henry: I am pretty sure reputation loss shouldn't be an issue. I am pretty sure that in both SE and SE2.0 the reputation gained/lost before a post turned CW is kept by the poster. Only votes cast after the transition will result in 0 reputation change.
since we don't care about reputation
I mean, not to sound like a baby, but I care about the ability to use those perks obtained by attaining a particular score. For instance, if I had time to seriously participate on this site again, I would definitely care about reputation up to 10,000, because the ability to read deleted posts and vote for deletion are both pretty useful, especially since deleted questions are basically deleted off the face of the earth from the POV of a <10,000-rep user. When I did participate a lot, I was extremely pleased when I gained the ability to edit other people's posts and also vote to close. The sense in which reputation is meaningless is that it doesn't really reflect the amount of respect you deserve/receive
It is really a pity if a user is more concerned about garnering reputation points than about improving an answer.
@Anixx and others (it took me a few reads to figure out why David White said he agreed with me): my comment was purely in the confine of the word "loss". That is, no reputation that has been already awarded will be taken away. That's how I interpret "loss".
The comment does not concern hypothetical reputation which may have been gained on a website of different design where no CW limit is in place.
Anixx, I made assumptions because you didn't bother explaining which answer you were concerned about, and I have limited time for moderation.
1 to 20 of 20