Exclude certain posts with a high score from "low quality posts" in the review page

Question

This should be obvious. If a post is helpful to others, it receives many upvotes, raising its score. Such a post is obviously hardly "low quality". Especially if the asker accepted the post. Unfortunately, a substantial amount of "low quality posts" on the review page meet this criterion.

This is an example (using the Reverse Order sort ordering).

To address this, I make the following suggestions:

• Exclude posts with a score of 5 or more from the low quality posts.
• Optional: Accepted answers can have a lower score threshold to be removed.
• Optional: Posts from users with a certain reputation threshold can be removed with a lower score threshold.

These are only initial suggestions which can be modified if needed. Please discuss this idea.

---

After reading another question on meta recently asked today, I will now suggest that the following posts should stay in the "low quality posts" tab, regardless of score:

• Answers to questions that are closed or have one or more close votes
• Answers to questions with a negative score

These should stay in because they tend to point to questions that themselves are low-quality. (Optionally those questions should be mentioned on the page along with their score and, for users with the "view close votes" privilege, the number of close votes.)

Answer 1

I see, you're referring to the algorithmic check, which is largely based on length. Short "answers".

I am not sure I entirely agree; if a question is "answered" with something absurdly short enough to trigger the quality filter like 3 - 5 words, that implies there was a fundamental problem with the question, as in, perhaps the question was too trivial to begin with?

For example

How to find if directory exists in Python

Yes, use os.path.exists().

is a valid "answer", but was algorithmically determined to be possibly low quality. (Note that this is not a flag, just a numeric score attached to the answer.) However, if you check the comments:

A good approach is always to search since that's been asked.

Therefore this flag is symptomatic of a deeper problem. This has always been my position on flagging: where there is smoke, there is generally fire. For some reason people get obsessed with deciding exactly what kind of fire this is, when there's a giant raging fire going on on the background. How 'bout we put out the fire, man?