8 replaced http://meta.stackexchange.com/ with https://meta.stackexchange.com/
source | link

I have no technical knowledge of the topics... I tried to upvote.

In cases like that, don't upvote. It's

that

simple. Test item taught you just that. "Learn to love that Skip button.""Learn to love that Skip button."


  • As explained in commentsexplained in comments, reviewer should act judiciously in posts out of their area of expertise:

    It's perfectly fine to review out of your area of expertise, but the types of review actions you should perform will be limited in such cases. Flagging a post that's obviously a violation of SO guidelines, editing to fix grammar/formatting, etc. can be done regardless of your understanding of the content. Voting on questions also tends to require much less knowledge of the subject material. Voting on answers however, shouldn't be done without understanding the content of the answer.


This accidentaccident made me wish there was a dedicated kind of , specifically targeted to address "ignorant upvotes" issue: Present a unambigously good answer but one taken from totally different question to verify that user doesn't upvote.

I have no technical knowledge of the topics... I tried to upvote.

In cases like that, don't upvote. It's

that

simple. Test item taught you just that. "Learn to love that Skip button."


  • As explained in comments, reviewer should act judiciously in posts out of their area of expertise:

    It's perfectly fine to review out of your area of expertise, but the types of review actions you should perform will be limited in such cases. Flagging a post that's obviously a violation of SO guidelines, editing to fix grammar/formatting, etc. can be done regardless of your understanding of the content. Voting on questions also tends to require much less knowledge of the subject material. Voting on answers however, shouldn't be done without understanding the content of the answer.


This accident made me wish there was a dedicated kind of , specifically targeted to address "ignorant upvotes" issue: Present a unambigously good answer but one taken from totally different question to verify that user doesn't upvote.

I have no technical knowledge of the topics... I tried to upvote.

In cases like that, don't upvote. It's

that

simple. Test item taught you just that. "Learn to love that Skip button."


  • As explained in comments, reviewer should act judiciously in posts out of their area of expertise:

    It's perfectly fine to review out of your area of expertise, but the types of review actions you should perform will be limited in such cases. Flagging a post that's obviously a violation of SO guidelines, editing to fix grammar/formatting, etc. can be done regardless of your understanding of the content. Voting on questions also tends to require much less knowledge of the subject material. Voting on answers however, shouldn't be done without understanding the content of the answer.


This accident made me wish there was a dedicated kind of , specifically targeted to address "ignorant upvotes" issue: Present a unambigously good answer but one taken from totally different question to verify that user doesn't upvote.

7 replaced http://meta.stackoverflow.com/ with https://meta.stackoverflow.com/
source | link

I have no technical knowledge of the topics... I tried to upvote.

In cases like that, don't upvote. It's

that

simple. Test itemTest item taught you just that. "Learn to love that Skip button."


  • As explained in comments, reviewer should act judiciously in posts out of their area of expertise:

    It's perfectly fine to review out of your area of expertise, but the types of review actions you should perform will be limited in such cases. Flagging a post that's obviously a violation of SO guidelines, editing to fix grammar/formatting, etc. can be done regardless of your understanding of the content. Voting on questions also tends to require much less knowledge of the subject material. Voting on answers however, shouldn't be done without understanding the content of the answer.


This accident made me wish there was a dedicated kind of , specifically targeted to address "ignorant upvotes" issue: Present a unambigously good answer but one taken from totally different question to verify that user doesn't upvote.

I have no technical knowledge of the topics... I tried to upvote.

In cases like that, don't upvote. It's

that

simple. Test item taught you just that. "Learn to love that Skip button."


  • As explained in comments, reviewer should act judiciously in posts out of their area of expertise:

    It's perfectly fine to review out of your area of expertise, but the types of review actions you should perform will be limited in such cases. Flagging a post that's obviously a violation of SO guidelines, editing to fix grammar/formatting, etc. can be done regardless of your understanding of the content. Voting on questions also tends to require much less knowledge of the subject material. Voting on answers however, shouldn't be done without understanding the content of the answer.


This accident made me wish there was a dedicated kind of , specifically targeted to address "ignorant upvotes" issue: Present a unambigously good answer but one taken from totally different question to verify that user doesn't upvote.

I have no technical knowledge of the topics... I tried to upvote.

In cases like that, don't upvote. It's

that

simple. Test item taught you just that. "Learn to love that Skip button."


  • As explained in comments, reviewer should act judiciously in posts out of their area of expertise:

    It's perfectly fine to review out of your area of expertise, but the types of review actions you should perform will be limited in such cases. Flagging a post that's obviously a violation of SO guidelines, editing to fix grammar/formatting, etc. can be done regardless of your understanding of the content. Voting on questions also tends to require much less knowledge of the subject material. Voting on answers however, shouldn't be done without understanding the content of the answer.


This accident made me wish there was a dedicated kind of , specifically targeted to address "ignorant upvotes" issue: Present a unambigously good answer but one taken from totally different question to verify that user doesn't upvote.

6 Migration of MSO links to MSE links
source | link

I have no technical knowledge of the topics... I tried to upvote.

In cases like that, don't upvote. It's

that

simple. Test item taught you just that. "Learn to love that Skip button.""Learn to love that Skip button."


  • As explained in commentsexplained in comments, reviewer should act judiciously in posts out of their area of expertise:

    It's perfectly fine to review out of your area of expertise, but the types of review actions you should perform will be limited in such cases. Flagging a post that's obviously a violation of SO guidelines, editing to fix grammar/formatting, etc. can be done regardless of your understanding of the content. Voting on questions also tends to require much less knowledge of the subject material. Voting on answers however, shouldn't be done without understanding the content of the answer.


This accidentaccident made me wish there was a dedicated kind of , specifically targeted to address "ignorant upvotes" issue: Present a unambigously good answer but one taken from totally different question to verify that user doesn't upvote.

I have no technical knowledge of the topics... I tried to upvote.

In cases like that, don't upvote. It's

that

simple. Test item taught you just that. "Learn to love that Skip button."


  • As explained in comments, reviewer should act judiciously in posts out of their area of expertise:

    It's perfectly fine to review out of your area of expertise, but the types of review actions you should perform will be limited in such cases. Flagging a post that's obviously a violation of SO guidelines, editing to fix grammar/formatting, etc. can be done regardless of your understanding of the content. Voting on questions also tends to require much less knowledge of the subject material. Voting on answers however, shouldn't be done without understanding the content of the answer.


This accident made me wish there was a dedicated kind of , specifically targeted to address "ignorant upvotes" issue: Present a unambigously good answer but one taken from totally different question to verify that user doesn't upvote.

I have no technical knowledge of the topics... I tried to upvote.

In cases like that, don't upvote. It's

that

simple. Test item taught you just that. "Learn to love that Skip button."


  • As explained in comments, reviewer should act judiciously in posts out of their area of expertise:

    It's perfectly fine to review out of your area of expertise, but the types of review actions you should perform will be limited in such cases. Flagging a post that's obviously a violation of SO guidelines, editing to fix grammar/formatting, etc. can be done regardless of your understanding of the content. Voting on questions also tends to require much less knowledge of the subject material. Voting on answers however, shouldn't be done without understanding the content of the answer.


This accident made me wish there was a dedicated kind of , specifically targeted to address "ignorant upvotes" issue: Present a unambigously good answer but one taken from totally different question to verify that user doesn't upvote.

5 wish there was a dedicated kind of review-audits, specifically targeted to address "ignorant upvotes" issue
source | link
4 act judiciously // http://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=31551&seqNum=4
source | link
3 formatting kaizen
source | link
2 reviewer has to exercise caution in review actions in posts that are out of their area of expertise
source | link
1
source | link