Timeline for 'Random' sort order on /review pages
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 21, 2011 at 21:48 | comment | added | Brad Larson | I also was progressing through items in order, but that was because they were sorted from "worst" (according to the algorithm) to "best". That meant that I'd find a greater concentration of non-answers at the low end of this sorting, which is where I'd start. The random ordering means that I now see fewer non-answers per page because there is no preference to the ones that perform worse on the review algorithm. | |
| Feb 20, 2011 at 16:27 | comment | added | yhw42 |
Thanks for looking at it. It's not that important, so if it takes effort, don't worry. I'll still dig through the old cruft. :)
|
|
| Feb 18, 2011 at 17:05 | comment | added | Marc Gravell | @yhw42 hmm - not without a change, unless you filter it by tag first. Let me discuss it internally... | |
| Feb 18, 2011 at 14:17 | comment | added | yhw42 |
Is there a way to turn this off for filter=all? Over the last month I've spent all my flags slowly working up to page 55. The randomizing of the 300K results has removed all sense of progress.
|
|
| Feb 17, 2011 at 11:39 | history | answered | Marc Gravell | CC BY-SA 2.5 |