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

I reviewed this post in the First Posts queue.

Which said

i changed it to 'localsystem' and done. thanks much

So it obviously was a potential low quality post. But sometimes such answers can be spot on, so I checked it out, better safe than sorry. I turned out the post had been deleted. Great! So I clicked "No action needed". Then I got this:

enter image description here

You can imagine I felt "wrongfully accused".

I think that deleted posts should not be used for review audits, because the meaning of "No action needed" is not clear in this context.

share|improve this question
up vote 4 down vote accepted

You opened up a review post in order to get better context and make an informed review. That's great, please keep doing so.

The problem was that you took a review action based on the current status of the post, which isn't what you were supposed to review. The review queue asks for judgment on posts as shown on the review screen. Clicking "no action needed" equates to saying "this post is valid". In fact, there's a tooltip to that effect:

enter image description here

If you click "more", you're shown this:

enter image description here

I agree that the "no action needed" language could stand a bit of improvement here. As it is now, it's just a tautology which gives no additional information to the reviewer about the meaning of that action. The tooltip isn't nearly as discoverable as the "more" text, so this is a case where user experience could be improved. Something like the following would be better:

No Action Needed when this post has no issues which need addressing.

However, the existing language doesn't imply that you should click "no action needed" if a post is already deleted, since you're supposed to be reviewing what's shown to you.

Well, it wasn't obvious to me. It's obvious once you know it and then it's easy to hack the audit system.

Audits aren't meant to trick you, and they are intentionally obviously easy. The point of audits is to ding people who just click through reviews as fast as possible, without actually reviewing it, in order to grind badges. That, and educate reviewers who make outrageously bad judgments - which isn't you, since you made the correct decision about the content. Deleted posts are ideal for this purpose.

share|improve this answer
Yes, it could be improved, although I must admit I can't think of an alternative without giving away too much. I think I overlooked the "More" button, but I would probably have done the same thing after reading it. Well, it's not the end of the world, just a bit frustrating. Thanks for your time. – Gert Arnold Jun 4 '13 at 20:04

Great! So I clicked "No action needed". You can imagine I felt "wrongfully accused".

Knowing of the existence of review audits you have made the mistake of telling the system that no action was needed for that very low quality answer. No matter what the actual status of a question/answer is, the review queue is made for you to judge the content of a question/answer, not its current status (opened, closed, deleted, protected etc...).

I think that deleted posts should not be used for review audits, because the meaning of "No action needed" is not clear in this context.

I strongly disagree with this. Deleted posts are the backbone of review audits and deleting them would lead to more subtle review audits (as there's nothing worse than deleting a question, what do we review audit on? closed questions?) or not at all.

The meaning of the "No action needed" is pretty clear in my opinion: This question/answer is fine. That was definitely not the case.

share|improve this answer
I looked a bit further than the post as it was presented in the review queue and concluded that the appropriate action had been taken. So I concluded no further action was required. I can't see that as a mistake. Should I flag a post as low quality post when I know it's been deleted? – Gert Arnold Jun 4 '13 at 11:36
@GertArnold, yes. It asked you to judge the action to take for that post. It's obvious that deleted posts are used as review audits. How would we make review audits work if we allow "No action needed" as possible answer? – Shoe Jun 4 '13 at 12:10
Well, it wasn't obvious to me. It's obvious once you know it and then it's easy to hack the audit system. – Gert Arnold Jun 4 '13 at 12:18
@GertArnold, no it's not. People for which the review audit system was built won't read them anyway, as proven before. – Shoe Jun 4 '13 at 13:16

You must log in to answer this question.

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