Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 153 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

After going through posts in the /review page, one of the trends that I noticed was that very few non-answers were upvoted at all. Now that results are presented in random groupings if a query has more than a certain number of results, there isn't a way to sort these results by votes or by those which perform worst on the review algorithm.

A lot of short but good answers are now popping up in the low quality posts tab's random groupings, which is making it harder to find true non-answers. Almost all of the upvoted answers that appear here are actual answers and should be left alone. Very few of the non-answers get voted up by anyone, because of their lack of content.

If we had an option on the /review page to filter the low quality posts to only those at 0 votes or lower, I think it would make the random groupings more effective in showing potential answers to be removed, as well as questions that may need help.

share|improve this question
up vote 1 down vote accepted

This is now the default.

It's possible that we'll some day improve the heuristics enough to be confident that some subset of up-voted posts have sufficiently serious quality issues to warrant review (or just redirect "low-quality" moderator flags) but until then we're focusing on those that haven't attracted votes (or have attracted down-votes).

share|improve this answer

I think that would be a mistake:

  • Some (new?) users upvote any and all answers to their questions.

  • Just because something is popular, it does not mean that it's helpful, on-topic or not offensive.

  • If such an option was available, many (most?) reviewers would enable it and lots of posts would slip through the cracks.

I would prefer, instead, a "mark as OK" flag which would allow a post to be removed from the review system if e.g. 5 reviewers with a reputation of, say, over 2000 thought that it was acceptable. I, for one, am getting tired of reviewing the same posts over and over again...

share|improve this answer
    
"Mark as OK" is also available now (in the form of "Looks Good"). – Shog9 Jan 18 '13 at 23:31

You must log in to answer this question.

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