This morning I did what I usually do, which is to go through and do some reviews (close votes, mostly). I was reviewing a post in the Low Quality queue that was questionable, but I let it pass (I've seen a lot worse, but this one seemed, to me at least, to be a valid answer to the question). Immediately, I got the screen that told me that I'd failed an audit. That I'm okay with, and I fully understand.

Right after it, though, it's now giving me everyone's favorite message:

You have failed too many recent review audits – looks like you might need a break. Come back in 2 days to continue reviewing.

I swear I haven't failed a single review audit in at least a month, maybe even longer. Why is it locking me out after failing only 1 audit?!? Is there a counter that just never resets no matter how long it is in between failing audits? That seems a little unfair...

  • 1
    Link to audit, please? – hjpotter92 Apr 18 '13 at 13:58
  • 1
  • Looks like audits are not saved in the public profile so we really can't know if you are telling the truth... can you review other queues? – Shadow9 Apr 18 '13 at 14:05
  • Just to understand, did you read "answer not found" instead of the answer? – kiamlaluno Apr 18 '13 at 14:06
  • @ShaWizDowArd: No, it won't let me into reviews at all. – Corey Adler Apr 18 '13 at 14:08
  • @ShaWizDowArd I read, "Review audit failed 27 mins ago: IronMan84 reviewed this 27 mins ago: Looks Good." That means he at least failed the audit. – kiamlaluno Apr 18 '13 at 14:08
  • @kiamlaluno: No, that's the screen that it gave me when I tried to go back and find the answer that I had apparently failed on. – Corey Adler Apr 18 '13 at 14:08
  • @kiamlaluno that's a direct link to the item, it doesn't appear on his profile. Maybe moderator can see audit items in user profiles, but I doubt it. :/ – Shadow9 Apr 18 '13 at 14:09
  • 1
    That means the answer was deleted, and you failed the audit because you didn't take any action close to what other users has taken. That doesn't explain why you are not allowed to make any further reviews, though. – kiamlaluno Apr 18 '13 at 14:10
  • Any chance you failed other audits and didn't notice? – Shadow9 Apr 18 '13 at 14:14
  • Failing an audit is not something that I forget about. While it's entirely not impossible, I would say that it is very highly unlikely. – Corey Adler Apr 18 '13 at 14:16
  • 1
    Another option is that the review ban, like post ban, is IP-based so if some other user share your exact IP (e.g. office) and he got banned, you are affected as well. Can you browse from different IP to verify this? – Shadow9 Apr 18 '13 at 14:25
  • @ShaWizDowArd: Only passed audits appear in their profile. Failed audits don't appear because they don't get counted as a review action. – animuson Apr 18 '13 at 14:27
  • 1
    @animuson but we need a way to see failed audits per user, maybe only moderators. Don't you think? – Shadow9 Apr 18 '13 at 14:32
  • 1
    @ShaWizDowArd: Well, I'm not sure how helpful that would be. You'd still have to click through everything one by one to even see if it was a review audit and if they failed. It doesn't seem worthwhile to list them there to accommodate for such an inconvenience. Maybe if review audits were clearly marked as such in the list... – animuson Apr 18 '13 at 14:38

You failed 3 audits in the past month (and a few more before that, but those are irrelevant for the moment). That, combined with the fact that you're spending very little time on each review, was enough to trigger the 2-day ban.

That said, I can't entirely fault you for not spending more time on each review - the posts are pretty short. With that in mind, I'm lifting your ban. Overall, your review track record is pretty good, so don't sweat the occasional auto-block.

  • 4
    You mean you're tracking the length of time people take, OoOoOo? – ben is uǝq backwards Apr 18 '13 at 15:00
  • 1
    @benisuǝqbackwards Yep. It helps with identifying folks who do nothing but blow through reviews without taking the time to read the posts or make informed decisions. – Adam Lear Apr 18 '13 at 15:00
  • 4
    Yes, more importantly it means you've defined what "too quick" is :-). – ben is uǝq backwards Apr 18 '13 at 15:02
  • Thank you so much, @AnnaLear! – Corey Adler Apr 18 '13 at 15:06
  • 4
    @AnnaLear if I see the post "Me write (link) not work", how much time I'm expected to spend on it determining it's a crap? On the other hand, if I see a code with explanation, am I supported to check if the answer is correct or let voting decide? Recommend delection is not for incorrect answer, as I understand it? – Danubian Sailor Mar 20 '14 at 9:35
  • @Łukasz웃Lツ If you can't tell if the answer is correct/good/etc, you should not be reviewing it. Skip and leave it for someone else to look at. – Adam Lear Mar 20 '14 at 15:46
  • 3
    @AnnaLear so could you tell me, why moderators are notoriously rejecting my flags on improper answers with message "declined - flags should not be used to indicate technical inaccuracies, or an altogether wrong answer " – Danubian Sailor Mar 20 '14 at 15:50
  • @Łukasz웃Lツ Define "improper". Also, this is a discussion best not done in comments on a random post. You can find me in the Tavern or make a new meta post. – Adam Lear Mar 20 '14 at 15:51

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .