-18

Guess what... The queue again.

enter image description here

So many good proposals, and these are only the ones in the feed right now.

What are we waiting for?

The real problem here is the close queue. 95K reviews pending and counting, and we still do no get any reputation for helping clear the queue.

Why not rewarding the users that really try to help here?

I make 40+ reputation in less than an hour with a question like this: WinterBash 2013

Why couldn't I make 1 rep for each close vote I review?

But ʞunɥdɐpɐɥd what good would that do?

Yeah, some users don't care about the reputation and would prefer getting StackOverflow coffee mugs, but let's face it, a lot of people here do things in order to get reputation or badges.

Why not encourage the people who are helping with the review queue by giving some reputation to those users?

I'm sure that simply showing that you are rewarded somehow for taking the time to clear the queue would encourage users to make their 20 votes a day.

No reputation is not important here but it's way better than getting nothing at all and I'm sure it would give some user the little extra push we need to clear that queue.

Let's be strategic...

Once we're there, why not throw in a few badges?

  • Reach the close review limit 10 days in a row

We are not strategic right now, it really is an issue but we are not doing anything about it. Push the users just enough and they will clear the queue for you in a month.

I know this could encourage people to go and make random votes for the sake of getting the rep or badges but this is not such a big problem since the fact that people already voted to close a question already points out that the question has something wrong in it.

There are now perfect solutions for this. But let's try it and see what happens!

  • I don't visit the queue much, but I vote to close often while browsing. Are you advocating rewards for voting or reviewing? You're example badge makes it sound like voting, but the rest sounds like reviewing. – Geobits Nov 20 '13 at 21:09
  • @Geobits my bad I meant review. – ʞunɥdɐpɐɥd Nov 20 '13 at 21:10
  • 7
    How do you pronounce your username? – Andrew Cheong Nov 20 '13 at 21:11
  • 3
    In that case, why should voting to close questions from the queue get rewarded, while voting to close those I happen to come across not? Devil's advocate, but why is the queue more valuable? Because it's big? – Geobits Nov 20 '13 at 21:11
  • 2
    @acheong87 You don't... you simply feel it. – ʞunɥdɐpɐɥd Nov 20 '13 at 21:12
  • @Geobits Oh these rewards woudn't be limited to the queue. My exemple was specific for the queue because the queue is the problem at the moment but of course it would be the same if you vote to close from the posts itself. – ʞunɥdɐpɐɥd Nov 20 '13 at 21:13
  • 4
    Robo-reviewers are a problem when there's enough of them. As any undergrad will tell you, the rat will keep pressing that bar as long as food is dispensed. Something less permanent might be better (like hats!). – JDB Nov 20 '13 at 21:13
  • I would support your request under one condition: If we did not have so many problems with false reviews. Throughing in users with the wrong motivation would only make this worse. – juergen d Nov 20 '13 at 21:13
  • @JDB What if we put up some fakes in it. Like the other queues. You put a good question there with a fake close votes. And bam you failed the audit. – ʞunɥdɐpɐɥd Nov 20 '13 at 21:17
  • 3
    @ʞunɥdɐpɐɥd Even better than a review ban, penalize people with rep loss for accruing too many bad ones. If you're going to reward good ones, you should be harsh with bad ones. – Geobits Nov 20 '13 at 21:19
  • 3
    @ʞunɥdɐpɐɥd FYI, there are already audits in the review queue. – Josh Mein Nov 20 '13 at 21:19
  • 1
    What if you've given people who have already gotten the close vote gold badge weightier close votes? – Sam I am says Reinstate Monica Nov 20 '13 at 21:25
  • or maybe if you actually reduced the daily close vote limit, making it easier to reach, you could get more legitimate reviewers in the habit of reaching that limit every day. – Sam I am says Reinstate Monica Nov 20 '13 at 21:36
  • 2
    Seriously, I'm more sick of posts about the queue than I am about the number of questions in the queue. Please, stop. We get it. Review queue is big. OK, we don't need 30 posts a day on the topic. Ironically, I've voted to close this post too. – Johnny Bones Nov 20 '13 at 21:37
  • 1
    I vaguely recall this idea before (can't search for it now as im going on mobile) but that isn't it. Having all ideas to solve the queue problem closed as dulplicates of a generic "O no! Close queue is big!" Is hardly productive (on the other hand there are about 10 which are just "O no!" Which really should be closed – Richard Tingle Nov 20 '13 at 22:43
9

Allowing users to get reputation, or even more badges, for reviewing posts is going to encourage more people to be reviewing for the wrong reasons. We already learned this lesson very well a year ago with every single other queue. Adding incentive increases the number of low quality reviewers significantly, and the number of high quality reviewers very marginally. This results in a much lower quality experience for the good reviewers (their decisions end up being overruled by people who aren't even trying to review) and the site as a whole, as improper actions are taken.

I know this could encourage people to go and make random votes for the sake of getting the rep or badges but this is not such a big problem since the fact that people already voted to close a question already points out that the question has something wrong in it.

If we felt that all of the items in the queue could be closed already, we could just close them. A dev script to close them all would be a heck of a lot faster and easier than your proposal. Of course, we don't want to do that either because not all of the items in the queue should actually be closed, or should be closed for a different reason than is given. If we really did feel confident that all close votes were correct, or that all close flags were correct, we could just make them all binding.

6

Wherever rep is applied it is by people voting that what you've done is good, upvotes on questions and answers and votes to approve your edits. This system is difficult to abuse (not impossible, but difficult)

On the other hand this system would basically be press the button, recieve the reward. As such it wouldn't encourage good reviews, only fast reviews. So we would very quickly empty the queue. But it would be emptied by terrible reviews.

If we wanted the questions in the close queue to be closed/left open at random we could do that now

  • What if the rep only applied if the community eventually agreed with the decision? I guess it would still incentivize quick reviews, but without the immediate payout. Just brainstorming. – Geobits Nov 20 '13 at 21:15
  • I get your point but random is a little different. Let's put some fakes in that, set up some bots with good question that have one close vote and ban from the queue the robo-rewiewers. – ʞunɥdɐpɐɥd Nov 20 '13 at 21:15
  • @ʞunɥdɐpɐɥd In other words, set up an audit system... – Aza Nov 20 '13 at 21:18
  • 2
    @Geobits thats still a 50% on pure random. But most things in the queue probably should be closed, by looking out for the audits and closing everything else you could probably get a 90% hit rate (or if lots of people are doing this; 99%) – Richard Tingle Nov 20 '13 at 21:18
  • 1
    If the penalty for bad reviews was rep instead of a review ban, it would probably work better (assuming we reward good reviews). The current penalty for bad reviews is not a penalty. – Geobits Nov 20 '13 at 21:20

You must log in to answer this question.

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