While going through the review queue I spotted something extraordinary.

Can someone trace where this answer has been so that we can find how it got three up votes by the time I saw it? Has it possibly been through multiple review queues?

For those who don't have 10K and won't be able to see it once it gets deleted, this is the answer (on this question):


I know it will be goneburger soon enough, but is it at all possible to give anyone the electronic slapping for their part in this?

  • 28
    Robot reviewers... how I despise them... – J. Steen Nov 21 '12 at 9:12
  • Now at -1 - 20k+ users will be able to vote to delete. – ChrisF Nov 21 '12 at 9:15
  • 3
    We really need a catchy word for those people! What about Roborovers? The main problem is those approving mindlessly and carelessly, but upvoting just for fun is just as bad or maybe even worse as it can't be undone. – Shadow The Vaccinated Wizard Nov 21 '12 at 9:16
  • 3
    @Sha, roborovers is too cute. How about review drones? – Frédéric Hamidi Nov 21 '12 at 9:18
  • 1
    How about Waste of Space. – J. Steen Nov 21 '12 at 9:19
  • 5
    it is maybe even funnier that top-voted, accepted, +500 bountied link-only answer now points to dead site martialjava (dropped more than a year ago, according to tools4domains) – gnat Nov 21 '12 at 9:22
  • 3
  • 1
    @gnat to make it worse, the author (who probably wrote the plugin) is ignoring the comments. – Shadow The Vaccinated Wizard Nov 21 '12 at 9:26
  • 2
    @ShaWizDowArd well, stuff like that has been eloquently covered by Gilles long time ago - "...If a question has an accepted answer which consists solely of a link, this sends the wrong message, especially after the link breaks. Sure, the accepted answer might have helped the asker, but it's not going to help future visitors, and the community should not be penalized for that answerer or asker's failing..." – gnat Nov 21 '12 at 9:31
  • 2
    This happens frequently. There was an example in chat lately of an auto-generated spam answer with absolutely no coherent sentence at all that got three upvotes as well – Pekka Nov 21 '12 at 9:38
  • 1
    That is nothing, at least you can make sense of this post. How about the robot-upvotes for these two gems: stackoverflow.com/a/6483806 and stackoverflow.com/a/6483973. Tell me what the poster there is trying to say. I say it's context-free grammar generated text, meant to _look_ like real text, by a failed spambot. – Martijn Pieters Nov 21 '12 at 9:51
  • 2
    @Pekka: The 3rd upvote is for that bot's other post. – Martijn Pieters Nov 21 '12 at 9:55
  • 11
    ...and before people lynch these reviewers, I should point out that both Artemix and Alexis Pigeon did the right thing and flagged this as not being an answer as soon as they saw it. There might also be other reviewers involved here, if I'm missing a queue somewhere. – Brad Larson Nov 21 '12 at 15:45
  • 1
    @Brad Larson: Thanks. Will lynch them anyway. – BoltClock's a Unicorn Nov 22 '12 at 10:31
  • 4
    I've seen this several times JSF/JSF2 tags as well. Answers from new users were upvoted relatively extremely a lot, usually up to 3 votes. However this is more than often completely contradicting other answers on the same question, which are usually already accepted and usually have only 0 or 1 or maybe 2 votes in those "niche" tags. This is very disturbing and confusing. Answers from new users are voted without viewing them in the full context. Again, the /review is severely broken. There are way too much monkeys in there. – BalusC Nov 22 '12 at 11:24