Why isn't the edit queue (/review -> suggested edits) anonymous until after a decision has been made? I think that would help make sure that reviewers are objective.
I'd wondered about it in the past, but hadn't encountered any edits where I think it made a negative difference in the past until today. There are a lot of pending edits in the queue, all from one (well intentioned) user which seem to be misusing the inline code
`` markup to inappropriately add emphasis on "keywords" and acronyms. Some of the edits are appropriate or contain appropriate use of inline code markup too.
The user in question registered today and all of the their reputation so far has come from edits. It's reached a point now though that I've spotted this user and I specifically notice edits from them in the queue. Without reject reasons a large string of rejects will probably destroy their enthusiasm for editing I suspect and possibly the site in general, which would be a shame. I'm aware of the improve button - for some of the edits which were close enough to what I'd normally just accept I've been using improve to fix the bad bits. For the ones which are plain wrong or the negatives of it far outweigh the positives I've been rejecting and then doing an appropriate edit if there were issues worth editing for.
I'm now paranoid I've lost my ability to be objective reviewing these edits when I know they're from this user. I'm worried I'm being too harsh on the user with the rejects and that leads me to worry that I might be over-compensating for that in the opposite direction. Consequently since I know I've lost my objectivity I've stopped taking any actions with edits from that user, which isn't ideal either. With anonymity for all editors, at least until the result is decided this would be a non-issue.