What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 130 Stack Exchange communities.

While in the review queues of First Post and Late Answer and possibly others, review audits come up every now and then.

When these audits come up you can easily click edit to pass (as a bad post or a good post could need an edit). However, this could lead to an easy way to pass any audit.

Is there any type of audit, such as one that clicking flag is the common sense action to pass, where clicking edit would not pass it? Or could some one potentially click edit every time to rack up a review counter?

Side question as well: If someone could use this to perform the workaround, shouldn't there be some sort of protection other than the review limit? Or is it not much of an issue?

share|improve this question
1  
I just hit a question where this was appropriate. A question had the R tag in it, which does happen from time to time on questions unrelated to R, and that let it through my filter for edit reviews. I went to the actual question, noticed that it was not tagged R and figured that I was supposed to edit the question. Clicked the "Edit" button and indeed it was a review which was passed. Too easy, in that what needed to be fixed was not present in the actual question. Do people not go to the actual question when doing reviews? stackoverflow.com/review/close/4242118 –  Matthew Lundberg Mar 6 at 5:20
    
it is likely not much an issue. Think of it, how would robo-reviewer use this trick? They'd have to click Edit, wait until edit page loads, click Cancel, then click some button to complete "review". This would substantially slow robo-stampers down, which is a great thing –  gnat Mar 7 at 6:36
1  
@LowerClassOverflowian looks like you're right. I just tested - clicking stuff, along with mouse moves to edit/cancel, takes about 3-5 seconds, that's not much indeed (though still better than half-second to to repeatedly click same No action needed over and over again) –  gnat Mar 7 at 17:05
    
I think the 20 cap on reviews, and the lack of available reviews will slow them down more than having to do an edit check, it'll take less than 5 minutes on a very bad day for someone to fulfill that limit with this robo way if the lack of tasks isn't in the way. –  DeadChex Mar 7 at 17:55

1 Answer 1

At this time it does seem like clicking edit is a work around, and will let you pass any audit in those two queues.

UPDATE : CONFIRMED Just robo-reviewing by clicking edit right away on the First Posts Review Queue will let you pass any audit it throws at you. I haven't been able to confirm this for Late Answers Review Queue, but I suspect it's the same.

PROOF :


First test : First posts review queue. Clicked Edit on a post that was an audit that's correct choice was No Action Needed , but I passed the audit.

enter image description here


Second test : Same as first test.

enter image description here


Third test : First posts review queue. Clicked Edit on a post that was an audit that's correct choice was any of the following: downvoting, editing, flagging, or closing. enter image description here


How I suggest that it should work :

  1. If a post should be No Action Needed, it should mean what it says, thus no action should take place by you, the reviewer of the post. Trying to edit the post should be considered attempting an action, so you should fail the audit for trying to edit a post the doesn't need any action. If people really want to edit the high quality post, they should just open the post in a new window and edit from there, instead of the review queue.

  2. Likewise, if a post is bad, acceptable actions by you already seem to include, editing the post, downvoting, flagging, or closing. So any of those actions you attempt will be considered correct, and you will pass the audit. So no changes seem to be needed there.


Since there were no moderator comments or anything on this question, I posted a comment to a moderator on a some-what related thread here.

enter image description here

Side question as well: If someone could use this to perform the workaround, shouldn't there be some sort of protection other than the review limit? Or is it not much of an issue?

So to answer your side-question, it does seem that in general, there are already other protections in place. However, from what I can tell, there wasn't an automatic detection in place for this exact workaround. But there is a way to manually detect someone trying to use this workaround. So now that this workaround is well documented, I would think moderators will check for it every so often hopefully, to catch anyone trying to game the system in this manner. And at least as of now and in the past, this workaround didn't seem to be much of an issue.

Is there any type of audit, such as one that clicking flag is the common sense action to pass, where clicking edit would not pass it?

As of this time, I highly doubt that. However, maybe it's possible that spam audit types would not accept clicking edit as a pass, but again, I doubt it.

share|improve this answer
3  
I've seen people say that they passed with clicking edit, because any post could need update see meta.stackexchange.com/questions/200347/… –  DeadChex Mar 6 at 3:47
1  
Found an interesting tidbit, attempting too edit a post that should be flagged gives you the message (a plain html page) that simply says "This post is deleted and cannot be edited" I'll reproduce and give you a link for a screenshot. –  DeadChex Mar 6 at 5:18
    
The review audit: stackoverflow.com/review/late-answers/4242241 The error message: stackoverflow.com/posts/21618504/edit –  DeadChex Mar 6 at 5:22
1  
Interestingly, I didn't fail the audit, all I had to do was hit back and then click flag. –  DeadChex Mar 6 at 5:28

You must log in to answer this question.

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