I know audits are supposed to be more of an "are you awake" check than anything, so some things like "the user doesn't have a name, avatar, or rep" aren't too bad. But while looking at this audit, the massive green checkmark of being an accepted answer made it just a little obvious that something was up. (The rollover also said "loading when this answer was accepted...", which given that the supposed posting date would have been before the acceptance date, would need to be fixed anyway.)

The acceptance checkmark should be hidden for first post and low-quality audits.

  • 8
    But hey, if you fail that audit, you really deserve your time out. – LittleBobbyTables - Au Revoir Aug 1 '13 at 19:38
  • 10
    So what? An accepted answer doesn't mean it's magically a good post. I've outright deleted quite a few useless accepted answers... Maybe some of the audits should add the checkmark to throw people off- because clicking that No Action Needed button just because it has the checkmark is very bad for our review system. What if it wasn't an audit and it just happened to be a first post that really got accepted? – animuson Aug 1 '13 at 19:42
  • @animuson: How common is it for a first post to become an accepted answer before anyone sees it in the queue? – Toomai Aug 1 '13 at 19:47
  • 2
    @Toomai: It's very possible, just unlikely. A post has to exist for at least 15 minutes before it's even eligible to go into the queues. A lot can happen in 15 minutes. – animuson Aug 1 '13 at 19:48

A first post from a new user might get accepted - stranger things have happened.

But as a rare occurrence, it is quite right that we don't display whether it was or was not accepted in an audit.

Fixed in the next build (rev 2013.9.27.1040).

| improve this answer | |

You must log in to answer this question.

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