I would like to know how the review algorithm 'decides' that a late post need to be reviewed.

When a user fails a review audit, he gets this:


If the same user failed too many review audits, he gets this:


I would like to know the part of the algorithm that 'decides' the duration of the review suspension.

How does the algorithm decide that a user needs to be banned (definitively) from the review queues?

  • 1
    The duration part of your question is answered here: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/174118/… – TsSkTo Nov 25 '13 at 14:41
  • @TsSkTo : So, What about the actual duration of the 4rd and next suspensions? – user2284570 Nov 25 '13 at 14:47
  • The window used is thirty days. Meaning that if you get banned for thirty days(3rd ban) you will move into the next thirty day window. And start all over. So a fourth ban is impossible These bans are only in place to stop robo viewers and the like. If youre not trying to game the site to get the badges, you shouldnt worry too much about these audits – TsSkTo Nov 25 '13 at 14:52
  • @TsSkTo : So, It mean if someone make two many mistake a 4rd time, he/she'll get suspended for 30 days again? – user2284570 Nov 25 '13 at 15:02
  • 3
    Just an odd question; Would it not be better to concern yourself with how to avoid being banned in the first place, instead of wondering how long each ban would be? – Andrew Barber Nov 25 '13 at 15:05
  • 1
    As I understand it, no. The bans are only counted in the thirty day window. So new window means a fresh set of bans. Meaning that your fourth ban should only be 2 days as it is considered a fisrst ban for the new period. Heres some more stuff on audits meta.stackexchange.com/questions/157121/… – TsSkTo Nov 25 '13 at 15:06
  • @AndrewBarber : Well, this is the difference between wanted vandalism and involuntary made mistakes... Please also note I took a picture from an another user ban. – user2284570 Nov 26 '13 at 22:56
  • Is there some reason you just deleted and reposted that comment? – Andrew Barber Nov 26 '13 at 23:13
  • @AndrewBarber : I've done some spell-checks – user2284570 Nov 26 '13 at 23:45

This answer does cover the duration aspect of your question. It's a rolling 30 day window - a fourth within 30 days is not possible:

3rd ban within the window -> duration: 30 days

As you're automatically in a new window when a 30 day ban has concluded, it rolled over again, and back to the beginning you go.

While this does include 30 day bans that moderators impose, they can in very rare circumstances impose longer periods back-to-back. Possible reasons for this might include:

  • A history of rubber-stamping spam posts, or suggested edits that introduce spam
  • A long history of failed audits with no demonstrated improvement and no decline in activity (usually accompanied with a "reviews don't seem to be your thing, please stop" message)

To your first question, the late answers queue picks up on any new user that posts an answer to an old question. What we're trying to catch here is:

  • Thanks, this helped me!
  • Buy discount Gucci socks on my sports blog
  • I tried the above, but I still get this error...
  • hakdjhsdlkjahadklfjhdlksjafhsldkjfhlsdkajfhlsdkfh
  • A copy and paste of an existing answer in a bungled attempt to lift new user restrictions

We're not just looking at the answers here, folks also look at the question to see if there might be a reason why an old question continues to attract new answers (is it open-ended? does it need protecting? is it still on-topic by our standards today?)

This used to be accomplished just through the automatic 'churn' of old posts being bumped to the front page as a result of new activity, but our sheer volume these days demands something more comprehensive.

The algorithm itself is pretty simple, one in n items you review is likely to be an audit, but there's a random seed at play too - you could go n(2) iterations before seeing one in some circumstance. It's perfectly fine to fail one or two as long as you are paying attention - audits aren't perfect and can sometimes present you with a very subjective call to make; we take this into account.

Like most things designed to be remarkably simple, it's very difficult to game (well, except for some things that can make an audit obvious, but we're not out to catch folks that are actually, you know, paying attention :))

| improve this answer | |
  • I guess I asked the wrong question in that case. I should rephrase: How is it decided the post is old? I've seen post from new user on questions which are dated from several years. They didn't seems to have been reviewed. – user2284570 Nov 26 '13 at 23:03

You must log in to answer this question.

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