Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 158 Stack Exchange communities.

What is meta?
Here's how it works:
  1. Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
  2. The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
  3. Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates

It seems the new review system insights a frenzy of contributors operating simultaneously on the same item in the queue.

With appreciation to community endeavors, there are two things I find suboptimal:

Suggested edit approved while rejecting with 2nd vote

Often upon reviewing a suggested edit, there will be one vote to reject which I agree with; however, before I can cast the second vote to reject the edit is already approved.

This means four people were in an asynchronous review process of the same post with two people casting approve votes in the seconds between my click to reject.

If there's a pending reject vote, maybe the approve button should spawn a confirmation assuring the reviewer is aware a reject vote was cast.

Simultaneous edits

Aware there is discussion here on meta regarding resolving conflicting edits, the new review-beta queue appears to encourage the issue.

Given the stateless nature, it would be nice to throttle the queue a bit if nothing else.

share|improve this question
FIRST UPVOTE!!! edit FIRST COMMENT!!! – BoltClock's a Unicorn Oct 9 '12 at 4:16
Yes, yes, and yes. Thank you for reading my mind. – jonsca Oct 9 '12 at 4:39
What would be the upside/downside to kicking such an edit back into the review process? If someone chooses to reject who happen to also be reviewing, the system could attempt to get another tiebreaker. – jmort253 Oct 9 '12 at 4:42
@jmort253 I'm not sure that I follow your scenario, what do you mean by if someone chooses to reject who happens to also be reviewing? – jonsca Oct 9 '12 at 4:50
(all technicalities aside, though, I think this brings up important issues about the overall level of contention in the SO queues, regardless) – jonsca Oct 9 '12 at 4:51
@jonsca - Sorry, let me clarify: 1 person approves, 1 rejects. A third person is reading and also decides to reject, but before the third person rejects, a fourth person approves. Since person #3 already had the screen up, my question was: Would it help if person #3's reject vote pushed the post back into the queue? Sort of like 2 votes approve and 2 votes reject. Now we need a 5th. Quite frankly, I don't think it's a good idea, but I thought I'd throw it out there. :) The solution is to teach people to be better reviewers, IMHO. – jmort253 Oct 9 '12 at 6:08
@jmort253 Okay, I see now. I think the problem with pushing something back in is that it creates more opportunity for logjams and more opportunities for improved edits to collide. In other words, this isn't just a problem with FGITW reviewing, it's also responsible reviewers being at odds with each other in improving posts. – jonsca Oct 9 '12 at 6:12
+1 This happens now frequently. I am really irritated. – hims056 Oct 9 '12 at 6:31

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .