Timeline for See what happens to skipped reviews
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 27, 2018 at 14:24 | history | edited | hat | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Improved reading flow (slightly improved grammar too)
|
| May 23, 2017 at 12:36 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://stackoverflow.com/ with https://stackoverflow.com/
|
|
| Feb 25, 2014 at 2:53 | comment | added | slugster | Heh, I've got lots of character, I'm not sure if it's all good :) But to summarise, I reject or improve a good proportion of the suggested edits I review. Be discerning - the only way for a bad post to get worse is to apply a bad edit. | |
| Feb 25, 2014 at 2:34 | comment | added | Geobits | The only problem I see with this is the possibility of cognitive bias. You see that another (supposedly "better") reviewer approved/rejected, and think "Oh, that's what I would have done," without giving it as much actual thought as you normally would. It's a bit different than looking at it "blind" first, then coming back to see what others said. Not saying it's a bad idea in general, it just might not help for those tricky ones you decided to skip. | |
| Feb 25, 2014 at 2:20 | history | answered | CRABOLO | CC BY-SA 3.0 |