So when I'm trying to share posts with other people, they'll know that the post was edited.

...and that's why I brought it back. :)

I vaguely remember the "few minute" rule, too - maybe I'll add that.

No - he's actually referring to a rule we used to have with the 'edit' tag.

After I originally added this years ago, Brett had gone back and added a bit of logic to discard edit notations that were committed within a few minutes of the original post. So long as you did any edits within the first 5 minutes or so of your original posting, the 'Last edited...' notation wouldn't get applied...

It's pretty annoying since I make small edits all the time to adjust wording and not because I constantly stealth edit my content ...

I feel like I'm being singled out by this feature when it's really intrusive since it takes up a notable amount of page space and it's always in bold too ...

If there's no option to keep it anonymous then the edit timestamp should be placed right beside the timestamp of the original post ...

Platina, why did you post this here and not in Website Feedback? You made me look bad

It should be aligned to the right, in italics and small text. Like this:

Last edited by Tito - 1 hour ago

I'm a notorious post editor - sometimes the minor alterations I make will go into double figures. In fact I've been caught out when editing something and someone has quoted me, and so then I edited back to match the quote for it to make sense, and in the meantime someone else quoted my edited post!

So I think the edit tag is good, because it makes it clear that your post has been updated at some point during a discussion, even if it is to adjust wording or correct a typo.

Now, if the edit tag then went on to say that you'd edited the post 37 times, I might just have an issue with that...