Timeline for A Reviewer Rating [duplicate]
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
21 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 26, 2018 at 20:09 | history | edited | GlorfindelMod |
edited tags
|
|
| May 23, 2017 at 12:36 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://stackoverflow.com/ with https://stackoverflow.com/
|
|
| Mar 20, 2017 at 10:31 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.stackexchange.com/ with https://meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Apr 24, 2014 at 13:52 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Migration of MSO links to MSE links
|
|
| Nov 4, 2013 at 18:20 | history | closed |
Servy Manishearth Lance Roberts Martijn Pieters Bart |
Duplicate of The current review system encourages fake reviews; some people upvote everything rather than actually fixing problems, Give moderators the ability to mark reviews as "bad" | |
| Nov 4, 2013 at 18:05 | answer | added | apaul | timeline score: 3 | |
| Nov 4, 2013 at 18:05 | review | Close votes | |||
| Nov 4, 2013 at 18:20 | |||||
| Nov 4, 2013 at 18:03 | history | edited | Lance Roberts | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 34 characters in body
|
| Nov 4, 2013 at 17:59 | comment | added | Lance Roberts | Ok, that's a good one, I'll answer there, then vote to close as a dupe of that. Thanks. | |
| Nov 4, 2013 at 17:57 | comment | added | Servy | Here's another post discussing it: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/196183/… | |
| Nov 4, 2013 at 17:56 | history | edited | Lance Roberts | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 34 characters in body
|
| Nov 4, 2013 at 17:56 | comment | added | Lance Roberts | My question isn't that much about flagging, it just seemed like the mechanism that SO would use to create the rating. I'm thinking of it more like up/dowvoting, but didn't figure they'd want to create the extra interface for that. | |
| Nov 4, 2013 at 17:55 | comment | added | Lance Roberts | @Servy, that is about flagging a review in general, not about flagging a user to create a numerical rating. I looked and couldn't find a dupe, but if you do find the right one, I'll cast my own vote-to-close as dupe. | |
| Nov 4, 2013 at 17:53 | comment | added | Servy | @LanceRoberts That was done several times as well, here's the first one I found: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/148865/… | |
| Nov 4, 2013 at 17:50 | comment | added | Lance Roberts | @Servy, and many many times answers are turned into feature request questions. This is appropriate behavior for Meta, and doesn't create a duplicate. | |
| Nov 4, 2013 at 17:49 | comment | added | Servy | @LanceRoberts The question doesn't, but several of the answers do. | |
| Nov 4, 2013 at 17:49 | comment | added | Servy | @MartijnPieters That's also been suggested quite a lot, although it has major problems. In short, if the majority of reviewers are doing the right thing, there isn't a problem; a few bad apples don't actually result in the wrong action taken. If there are enough bad apples then it's the good reviewers who are punished because they're the ones in the minority. | |
| Nov 4, 2013 at 17:49 | comment | added | Lance Roberts | This is not even a duplicate of that question, read that question it doesn't even bring up this idea. | |
| Nov 4, 2013 at 17:47 | comment | added | Servy | Been suggested many times. (Many of which were in this time last year when the review system went through it's big changes.) | |
| Nov 4, 2013 at 17:45 | comment | added | Martijn Pieters | Why not use data already present; namely what other reviewers thought when reviewing the same post? | |
| Nov 4, 2013 at 17:44 | history | asked | Lance Roberts | CC BY-SA 3.0 |