I had a first post audit today, and passed it... it was, well, too obvious. And while I realize that this is in part to catch robo reviewers, there can be some things done to improve it for the near-robob poor human choices too.

The audit itself was this one.

How the audit appeared

Do not select a first post from a deleted user

Flag history

Do not select a post that the reviewer has previously interacted with

How to fix?

  1. Remove candidate posts for ones that have been flagged (close voted? deleted voted?) by the reviewer . If there is a filter for first post reviews to show up to reviewers, at least some of this should apply to the selection of the audits.
  2. If you do pick a deleted user, pseudo-reinstatiate the gravatar (don't have to get the actual email, even '[email protected]' would work).
  • 12
    With all the complaints about and problems with poorly-chosen audits, I think a few that are too easy is a refreshing change of pace. In any case, for any audit that's "too easy," I bet you can find multiple users who failed it Sep 8, 2013 at 20:05
  • 5
    Audits don't need to be perfect or particularly tricky. They're intended to catch people who really aren't paying attention, so if you passed one because you noticed something about a post, great!
    – Adam Lear StaffMod
    Sep 9, 2013 at 3:41
  • 1
    @AnnaLear its not so much a desire to make them particularly tricky, but rather to make them obvious. The combination of interacting with the post before and a deleted user made it very obvious for me. As noted in meta.stackexchange.com/a/196189/213963 there are still too many people doing no action needed or upvotes on obvious spam.
    – user213963
    Sep 9, 2013 at 14:10


You must log in to answer this question.