So I received the following message today after clicking the 'Skip' button on a close vote review because I guess I took too long to vote on it and it said it was already closed when I tried to vote.

You have failed too many recent review audits – looks like you might need a break. Come back in 7 days to continue reviewing.

While the point might be valid because I do often fail the close vote review audits (though I'd generally argue that my way of voting was correct, though sometimes I take the fail as a correction), I'm unclear why I received this message after doing something other than fail a review audit. I believe at least something is wrong because of when this message popped up for me.

As a secondary note, my record is much better for other types of reviews and so it does feel unfair that I'm blocked from all reviews when close votes are the only thing I'm arguably not very skilled at.


1 Answer 1


I actually banned you manually. Looking through your history a little more thorougly, I suppose you’re not robo-reviewing, but you were on the list for this suggested edit, and then this happened too.

So you’re unbanned now. But keep in mind that suggested edits that format random words as code are not valid. (And way too many of them keep getting approved, too. Grr.)

Also ones to keep in mind (look back at your history from time to time, perhaps?):

  • 9
    Please don't look through my review history. You seem to like review-banning people. You're doing a great job, BTW.
    – Undo
    Commented Jul 15, 2013 at 22:27
  • @Undo Was that sarcasm?
    – ɥʇǝS
    Commented Jul 15, 2013 at 23:07
  • 3
    @Seth Sarcasm is in the eye of the beholder. Also, note the lack of the </sarcasm> tag.
    – Undo
    Commented Jul 15, 2013 at 23:12
  • 3
    Thanks. I will be more careful about those ones and perhaps less willing to let marginally good edits through without improvement. Commented Jul 16, 2013 at 3:22
  • 9
    Please keep up looking through review histories and banning people (especially if they abuse code formatting for non-code entities). You're doing a great job! Commented Jul 16, 2013 at 8:04
  • 3
    I just experienced the same thing. It would be great if you offered a warning (via email) instead of just outrightly blocking people from advancing the community forward. It seems a bit counter-intuitive to block the very people who take the time to review, especially given the massive backlog of unreviewed items. You're basically telling a volunteer their work isn't good enough, but you haven't even given them a chance to improve.
    – sethvargo
    Commented Jul 14, 2014 at 14:43
  • @sethvargo: A review ban is your chance to improve. Don’t worry about it too much.
    – Ry-
    Commented Jul 14, 2014 at 15:04
  • 5
    @minitech how am I supposed to improve with absolutely no information about why I was banned?
    – sethvargo
    Commented Jul 14, 2014 at 15:12
  • 1
    @minitech this is all I see when I try to review something: cl.ly/image/0m3g1T332r3o/…. There is no context. No "here is what you did wrong". No "here is how you can improve". I can't improve when I wasn't even told what I did wrong.
    – sethvargo
    Commented Jul 14, 2014 at 15:12
  • @sethvargo: Didn’t you get a ban message with links to reviews you should consider more carefully? (I don’t know; it’s one of the things moderators can’t read, for some reason.)
    – Ry-
    Commented Jul 14, 2014 at 15:13
  • @minitech I got nothing. I clicked on the review tab this morning and that is what I see. I opened a support ticket too.
    – sethvargo
    Commented Jul 14, 2014 at 15:14
  • The problem of edit suggestions that are nothing but random markups to add inappropriate code spans to non-code as if for emphasis getting robo-approved is so bad that I would like to see more audit-tests specifically designed for this showing up more often.
    – tchrist
    Commented May 3, 2015 at 15:10

You must log in to answer this question.

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