I failed a review audit based on this question
Markdown in other Statistics packages than R
I recommended it for closure (largely opinion based). But this is not what the audit expected.
Can anyone explain the rationale for this?
-
4I'd have to agree. Or perhaps even a recommendation question. It seems very open ended. I would most likely have failed it as well. – Bart Dec 18 '13 at 8:28
-
Review: stackoverflow.com/review/close/3609314 – Johannes Kuhn Dec 18 '13 at 8:31
-
Burn that question with fire. Ehhm... close it. – Johannes Kuhn Dec 18 '13 at 8:31
-
1The review system has these issues sometimes. I close-voted the questin and I agree with you it's opinion based and broad. – Benjamin Gruenbaum Dec 18 '13 at 8:32
-
I have also voted to close. sometimes the automated system for choosing these audits gets it wrong – Richard Tingle Dec 18 '13 at 8:32
-
4Good job bringing it to the notice of the community and as you can see, it has been closed now! :) – SudoRahul Dec 18 '13 at 8:33
-
1<rant> The rationale is that it fits the criteria... people can (and do) complain about individual cases but in the vast majority the audits are fine. Shog asked for help and Robert Harvey even put a bounty on it. Almost no one paid any attention. I'm sure he'd be willing to do so again but until such a time as more than 7 people bother to take an interest in what's happening behind the scenes (i.e. changing the criteria) can everyone please stop complaining about individual cases? </rant> – ben is uǝq backwards Dec 18 '13 at 8:39
-
@benisuÇqbackwards, it's kind of hard to tell the community as a whole to stop complaining about individual cases, because it's individual people who encounter this problem, people who don't necessarily hang around meta all the time, and can't be assumed to have noticed that either that the thread by Shog exists or that there are a lot of individual report cases already. – Ben Lee Dec 18 '13 at 21:21
-
It was less directed at the OP (though they have been around meta before) than everyone in general @Ben... we can all complain about the audits but there really is no point at all. – ben is uǝq backwards Dec 24 '13 at 9:48
AFAIK, the review audits are evaluated autmatically by at least the following criteria:
- Several upvotes. They are hidden in the review (displayed as 0).
- Open for some time.
- No pending close votes.
- Some answers (?).
But we all know that the highest scored questions on SO are not good questions.
See also this feature request.
Again, the only rational explanation is the judgement of the actions taken on the audit question failed to recognize the correct actions. It sometimes happens when a question has been upvoted and has no close votes. This is an example of community failing to close the questions which should have been closed. Don't blame yourself for failing - most of us probably would fail it too. It's closed already so just forget and move on :)
If failing this review gave you a review ban I am sure when a mod sees this topic they will remove it for you.
-
+1 Not sure if I like your answer more than my answer. Regarding the review ban: you don't get banned for 1 audit. – Johannes Kuhn Dec 18 '13 at 8:43
-
@JohannesKuhn thanks +1 to you too. The OP didn't mention a review ban but keep in mind we may have people who DID reading this at some point in time – user221081 Dec 18 '13 at 8:44
-
2In all honesty the audit picker didn't fail. If anything the community did. – Bart Dec 18 '13 at 8:44
-
@Bart technically yes. It chose the good question to be an audit but it did a bad job at failing for selecting the right action. – user221081 Dec 18 '13 at 8:45
-
1I think Bart means by upvoting the question and not closing it @mehow. If the community had dealt with the question correctly then it wouldn't have been seen as a "good" question by the audit system. – ben is uǝq backwards Dec 18 '13 at 8:46
-
@benisuÇqbackwards, bart I agree with you both. I reworded my answer hope this makes sense now along with your great comments – user221081 Dec 18 '13 at 8:48
