Does anyone else dislike being told they passed a review audit?

Question

Related: Is there supposed to be feedback on edit-review audits?

I'm not sure if this message (the pass message) always existed, or was implemented recently; I reviewed over 900 suggested edits without seeing this message, then saw 2 in the last 50 reviews. (I feel I've been consistent in my reviewing; does someone or something now disagree? But I've never received, much less failed, an audit. So is it chance?)

In any case, I wondered how others felt about this "You passed a test!" message. Personally, I'd only like to know when I fail. For me, despite that I passed, knowing I was being tested leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Am I alone in feeling a bit unenthused being told I was being tested?

Maybe I'd welcome the message if I actually did something worth being commended for, like catching a really, really sneaky Easter egg in a Late Answers review. But the two Suggested Edits tests I encountered were blatant cases of vandalism—addition of nonsense words—so what am I being congratulated for? Is it an attempt to say without actually saying, "Hey, good job; yep, we're watching you ;)"? But if someone's doing a fine job, do they really need this "encouragement"?

Answer 1

I think the feedback is important, particularly when the last edit was total word salad. At least then there's a bit of validation to clear up the confusion (e.g. "did a human really do that?"). I don't personally mind being told it was a review audit.

One minor annoyance is that the notification is modal even when you pass, requiring that extra step to dismiss. It would probably be better if it just appeared as an overlay or a little box atop the next edit. That would help speed things along, especially for someone used to the queue (and hopefully paying attention...). Maybe it could be modal just the first few times, to make sure the reviewer has read the message.

I also think that the use of real-world data (known-good and known-bad edits, as determined by the reviewers) would help dramatically in reducing the confusion felt after seeing a word-salad edit. The other queues already use such real data, and I still don't have a satisfactory answer as to why the suggested edits queue doesn't also use real data.