To follow on from such lovely posts as The robo-approvers are killing my will to review edits.

Twice in a row I have had suggested edits approved whilst I am reviewing the question. After deciding that the correct action is to reject the edit as it is invalid I get slapped in the face with this has already been approved.

I came across one user with 200+ approved edits and 0 rejected. That just cannot be possible?!

The system should have a grace period, 5 mins, that if there is a reject in that time then a new round of approvals should be needed?

As a side note at what point do we remove the rights of users that are not rejecting any edits?

  • 4
    Diamond mods can manually give a review ban. But "not rejecting" should not be a reason for a ban. "Approving what shouldn't be approved" should be the reason. – S.L. Barth - Reinstate Monica Apr 23 '14 at 8:08
  • I don't disagree but shouldn't they raise some kind of flag that says to a diamond mod "This reviewer needs reviewing" :) – Ashley Medway Apr 23 '14 at 8:12
  • 3
    If a person never rejects, (s)he will eventually fail too many audits. A bigger problem is reviewers who accept everything except audits.... – S.L. Barth - Reinstate Monica Apr 23 '14 at 8:22
  • 1
    Perhaps these reviewers are way too shy to say no. Instead, they skip the edits they disagree with. – Deer Hunter Apr 23 '14 at 8:25
  • 3
    Sorry but not rejecting is NOT a sign of robo reviewes. Approving crap is. – Shadow Wizard is Ear For You Apr 23 '14 at 8:41
  • @ShadowWizard In my case they are approving crap – Ashley Medway Apr 23 '14 at 8:44
  • 3
    @AshleyMedway but you also wrote "I came across one user with 200+ approved edits and 0 rejected. That just cannot be possible?!" to which I disagree. It is possible, and totally legit. (as long as the approved edits are not crap) – Shadow Wizard is Ear For You Apr 23 '14 at 8:47
  • 1
    @ShadowWizard It is extremely unlikely that someone could come across 200 edit and not have had one that was a pile of poo, unless as suggested that they skip edits that are bad. – Ashley Medway Apr 23 '14 at 11:18
  • 3
    @AshleyMedway and what's wrong in skipping bad edits? It's not great, true, but their full right. Kind of "not sure what to do, I prefer to let others handle this". – Shadow Wizard is Ear For You Apr 23 '14 at 13:22
  • 1
    I agree with Ashley … 200:0 ratio of accepting is not review in any sense of the word, it’s blindly accepting changes. It doesn’t matter that the person may choose to skip edits instead of rejecting them: that, too, is failing to perform proper review. It’s okay now and then, but not constantly. – Konrad Rudolph Apr 23 '14 at 20:55

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .