What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 134 Stack Exchange communities.

Okay, (to be honest) I'm not happy about this but I've been review banned for 2 days (it appears that it's been done by the system). Now 2 days isn't a long time, but I'd just like to understand what I'm doing wrong and what I can do to improve my reviewing in the future - I would have thought that my reviewing was a positive step towards improving the community, but it doesn't seem that much so. Looking back on the failed review audits, (out of a total of 583 reviews, and 40 passed audits) I've failed 3 of them in all the time that I've been reviewing posts:

Could someone check over my other reviews in the past and see whether my overall reviewing has been below the standard that it should be, and if so what can be done about it so that I can avoid doing that in the future? That would be very much appreciated.

share|improve this question
4  
I've not looked at your specific review links above, but the audit system isn't perfect. It expects things from us that we cannot possible have expected it to without decent info to tell us how to handle things as expected, which is lacking. –  James Oct 19 '13 at 12:14

1 Answer 1

up vote 21 down vote accepted

The 2nd one was a borderline unfair audit failure. Trying to add a comment shouldn't trigger a failure, but with the way the auditing mechanism works, trying to comment on bad post will pass the audit and trying to comment on a good post will fail the audit. The reasoning is that you shouldn't need to add a comment on a good post.

And that post isn't bad, so when you tried to leave a comment, it triggered the failure. Questions like that are "better" suited for Programmers.SE since it is more of a design question, but it certainly isn't a bad post or off-topic for SO.

The 3rd audit failure that you mentioned, is what prompted me to respond.

Specifically, why did you click "Recommend Deletion" for that post?

It is possible you are misunderstanding the purpose of the Low Quality Post queue. Generally speaking, it is not for run-of-the-mill poor quality posts. "Recommend Deletion" in that queue is for completely horrible, awful, off-topic and non-conforming posts that cannot be salvaged through editing, and need to cease to exist as quickly as possible.

You are looking for things like

  • Spam
  • Offensive posts
  • "Thanks" or "Me Too" answers
  • Follow-up questions posted as answers
  • People posting joke questions
  • Questions that are so completely off topic that it isn't even funny (like a post asking about Health Care choices or something off the wall).

You are basically looking at stuff that needs to disappear faster than the community can delete it normally (which requires 5 close votes, a 2 day wait for most users, and then 3 delete votes - although a downvoted post can get deleted faster).

That question in the audit seems to be a legit question and has no reason to be deleted, let alone that quickly. You might not have thought it was a suitable question for Stack Overflow (I'd disagree, I think it's an ok question), but even if you thought it was a poor quality question, it is certainly not bad enough to warrant "immediate" deletion. I know it is counter intuitive, but questions that are just off-topic or poor quality that need to be closed or downvoted need to be reviewed as "Looks Good".

This is roughly the same situation as the first audit post you referenced. In fact Robert's answer on your question gives you some pretty good feedback on how to evaluate the Low Quality Posts from an answer perspective. But the general idea is still the same for Low Quality Post questions, deletion is reserved for something that needs to go quickly and can't be addressed via the normal community moderation.

share|improve this answer
    
So to clarify - you should recommend deletion/close only for completely inappropriate things that are not NAA, off-topic, duplicate? Would it be appropriate to recommend deletion if they are spam or offensive, or should they just be flagged instead? –  Qantas 94 Heavy Oct 19 '13 at 13:10
1  
Low Quality posts is roughly related to flagging in the sense that if you would flag something for deletion (like SPAM/Offensive, NAA) then "Recommend Deletion" is appropriate. But if the post can be improved or needs to be closed, then "Looks Good" is appropriate. –  psubsee2003 Oct 19 '13 at 13:31
1  
So anything off-topic or improvable should not be deleted as such - thanks for the confirmation. –  Qantas 94 Heavy Oct 19 '13 at 13:33
3  
Absolutely. If you see something in the LQP queue that needs closed, it is prudent to open that question in a new tab and vote to close (and you can say "Looks Good" in the queue) –  psubsee2003 Oct 19 '13 at 13:34
    
wait, if commenting is always wrong, why is the option even there? –  Jan Dvorak Oct 19 '13 at 20:21
    
@JanDvorak wasn't there an uproar when comments were disabled (by "accident") on all review queues. and they aren't always wrong, if it was a "bad post" audit, an attempt to comment would have passed the audit –  psubsee2003 Oct 19 '13 at 20:34
    
Then I misunderstood "comments are treated as positive actions for bad posts". I suggest rewording as "comments are treated as correct actions for bad posts". –  Jan Dvorak Oct 19 '13 at 20:37
    
@Jan will do, thanks –  psubsee2003 Oct 19 '13 at 20:38
    
Even better wording than my suggestion. Thanks –  Jan Dvorak Oct 19 '13 at 20:43
    
Just one thing - how about my non-audits? Is there anything there that's worthy of particular mention? –  Qantas 94 Heavy Oct 21 '13 at 1:29
    
@Qantas94Heavy I glanced at a couple and did not see anything remarkable or worthy of note, but since it was part of your original question, I'll look at a few more and offer some feedback –  psubsee2003 Oct 21 '13 at 9:01
2  
@psubsee2003, Can this explanation be added to introductory review materials for the first couple low quality reviews a person does. I have done several LQP reviews and have not been applying this standard, which I believe has merit. In the review queue, clicking on more info gives the following guideline: Looks Good if nothing is wrong with this answer. This seems to go against what you've posted. I think most people would find something wrong with the answer and think that Looks Good was not an appropriate choice. I would not think to open the post and vote to close instead. –  KyleMit Feb 12 at 16:20
2  
@KyleMit I'm sure it can be added. AFAIK there isn't specific guidance for any of the review queues. Someone might have suggested it already so be sure to search first, but if you can't find anything, feel free to open a new feature request to ask that better guidance for specific queues be added and feel free to include this info. –  psubsee2003 Feb 12 at 16:37
    
@psubsee2003, Feature Requested! –  KyleMit Feb 12 at 17:35

You must log in to answer this question.

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