Timeline for Should trusted close/reopen voters and reviewers have their votes weighted more than others'?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 1, 2022 at 19:53 | comment | added | Tinkeringbell Mod | Oh, I'm a fan of including flags/first close votes (the stuff that puts stuff in a queue in the first place) too, instead of just using the queues as a way to achieve this/use this in. You'd still end up with less users seeing a post (though bigger numbers isn't necessarily more diversity on such small scales, that's certainly less peer control). | |
| Feb 1, 2022 at 19:50 | comment | added | AncientSwordRage | @tinkeringbell or maybe if it's done on stats from outside reviews it will pull more people in? Hard to tell. | |
| Feb 1, 2022 at 19:49 | history | edited | AncientSwordRage | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 121 characters in body
|
| Feb 1, 2022 at 19:41 | comment | added | Tinkeringbell Mod | The post says this will be a per-site setting too :) Sounds like you're on one/a few sites where opting in may not be necessary. I think for sites where even three vote closure doesn't make much of a dent in the queues, this may be an extra help. That said, yes the proposal does mean less users will see a post in the queue, which may need monitoring to see how that works out.. | |
| Feb 1, 2022 at 19:35 | history | answered | AncientSwordRage | CC BY-SA 4.0 |