Return to Question

The gamification of the review queues is often fingered as the culprits incentive for hastily completing review tasks.

The Steward badge is not currently used as any kind of metric, and from discussions I have seen would never be a reliable metric of user worth due to robo reviewers.

Lets just give take away the incentive for them to cause harm to the system.

It's been discussed that There is no shame in using "Skip" and I agree, if you are unsure of the correct action to take using skip is the correct action. So I see no harm in rewarding the user for not making a hasty judgement.

This may actually encourage proper reviewing for those who actually do want to help the community while trying to earn their badge.

Ultimately, I see no harm in making the badge easier to achieve if it mitigates the harm caused by poor reviews. The amount required for the badge could always be increased.

I actually much prefer Gnat's idea to my original thought as it achieves a similar goal, while keeping the value of the gold badge - which is what people are objecting to.

The gamification of the review queues is often fingered as the culprits incentive for hastily completing review tasks.

The Steward badge is not currently used as any kind of metric, and from discussions I have seen would never be a reliable metric of user worth due to robo reviewers.

Lets just give take away the incentive for them to cause harm to the system.

It's been discussed that There is no shame in using "Skip" and I agree, if you are unsure of the correct action to take using skip is the correct action. So I see no harm in rewarding the user for not making a hasty judgement.

This may actually encourage proper reviewing for those who actually do want to help the community while trying to earn their badge.

Ultimately, I see no harm in making the badge easier to achieve if it mitigates the harm caused by poor reviews. The amount required for the badge could always be increased.

I actually much prefer Gnat's idea to my original thought as it achieves a similar goal, while keeping the value of the gold badge - which is what people are objecting to.

The gamification of the review queues is often fingered as the culprits incentive for hastily completing review tasks.

The Steward badge is not currently used as any kind of metric, and from discussions I have seen would never be a reliable metric of user worth due to robo reviewers.

Lets just give take away the incentive for them to cause harm to the system.

It's been discussed that There is no shame in using "Skip" and I agree, if you are unsure of the correct action to take using skip is the correct action. So I see no harm in rewarding the user for not making a hasty judgement.

This may actually encourage proper reviewing for those who actually do want to help the community while trying to earn their badge.

Ultimately, I see no harm in making the badge easier to achieve if it mitigates the harm caused by poor reviews. The amount required for the badge could always be increased.

I actually much prefer Gnat's idea to my original thought as it achieves a similar goal, while keeping the value of the gold badge - which is what people are objecting to.

The gamification of the review queues is often fingered as the culprits incentive for hastily completing review tasks.

The Steward badge is not currently used as any kind of metric, and from discussions I have seen would never be a reliable metric of user worth due to robo reviewers.

Lets just give take away the incentive for them to cause harm to the system.

It's been discussed that There is no shame in using "Skip" and I agree, if you are unsure of the correct action to take using skip is the correct action. So I see no harm in rewarding the user for not making a hasty judgement.

This may actually encourage proper reviewing for those who actually do want to help the community while trying to earn their badge.

Ultimately, I see no harm in making the badge easier to achieve if it mitigates the harm caused by poor reviews. The amount required for the badge could always be increased.

I actually much prefer Gnat's idea to my original thought as it achieves a similar goal, while keeping the value of the gold badge - which is what people are objecting to.

The gamification of the review queues is often fingered as the culprits incentive for hastily completing review tasks.

The Steward badge is not currently used as any kind of metric, and from discussions I have seen would never be a reliable metric of user worth due to robo reviewers.

Lets just give take away the incentive for them to cause harm to the system.

It's been discussed that There is no shame in using "Skip" and I agree, if you are unsure of the correct action to take using skip is the correct action. So I see no harm in rewarding the user for not making a hasty judgement.

This may actually encourage proper reviewing for those who actually do want to help the community while trying to earn their badge.

Ultimately, I see no harm in making the badge easier to achieve if it mitigates the harm caused by poor reviews. The amount required for the badge could always be increased.

I actually much prefer Gnat's idea to my original thought as it achieves a similar goal, while keeping the value of the gold badge - which is what people are objecting to.

The gamification of the review queues is often fingered as the culprits incentive for hastily completing review tasks.

The Steward badge is not currently used as any kind of metric, and from discussions I have seen would never be a reliable metric of user worth due to robo reviewers.

Lets just give take away the incentive for them to cause harm to the system.

It's been discussed that There is no shame in using "Skip" and I agree, if you are unsure of the correct action to take using skip is the correct action. So I see no harm in rewarding the user for not making a hasty judgement.

This may actually encourage proper reviewing for those who actually do want to help the community while trying to earn their badge.

Ultimately, I see no harm in making the badge easier to achieve if it mitigates the harm caused by poor reviews. The amount required for the badge could always be increased.

I actually much prefer Gnat's idea to my original thought as it achieves a similar goal, while keeping the value of the gold badge - which is what people are objecting to.