-10

After a few hundred triage reviews, it's clear that I'd like to be voting on the questions as I triage them.

I like that there is no vote arrow on the question in the review control, however, I'd like to have two of the buttons cast automatic votes for me.

enter image description here

The system even reminds me on some small fraction of the reviews to vote for good questions, but that dialog only seems to come up if I'm the final voter on a post - and usually it's when I am voting "Looks OK" in my experience.

This would be similar to the First Post/Late Answer review voting, but automated.

Implementing this would help triage the questions showing on the home page better without cluttering the UI or asking reviewers to take follow on action(s) after already considering the merits of the question in triage.

  • 7
    "looks ok" != "+1" – John Dvorak Dec 22 '14 at 13:32
  • Why would you both be so stingy with upvotes on a question that "looks OK" and stingy with down votes on something you classify as unsalvageable? – bmike Dec 22 '14 at 13:33
  • 3
    @bmike: because on- and off-topic is a different axis from question quality. – Martijn Pieters Dec 22 '14 at 13:35
  • 1
    "Unsalvageable" pretty surely means close-worthy, but not necessarily down-vote worthy. (Think of a well researched, useful question that happens to be just off-topic; I'd VTC, but not down vote it.) As for "Looks OK", if 3 reviewers pick it, we ask the last one if they want to upvote. Making the button do it might skew the bucketing - if you don't love a question, but think it's solid, you may not want to upvote, but would agree that it "looks okay" and shouldn't be further held up. – Jaydles Dec 22 '14 at 17:10
  • I don't think it's a good idea to have automatic votes. It would be better if it's possible to vote directly from the review page, but not be required to. – Donald Duck Feb 4 '17 at 15:28
12

Please, no automatic votes on my behalf.

And just because a question is off-topic doesn't mean it also deserves a down-vote; it is not unheard of that a well-asked question turns out to be a duplicate, or is basically a request to recommend a library, or turns out to be too broad, but that doesn't mean didn't put the right amount of work in the question content.

The same applies to Looks Good. Just because the question is on-topic and doesn't need editing, doesn't mean I think the question is a good fit and well-researched. It'll just be meh.

You can go back in your browser to revisit a review, and then the vote buttons are active. Vote then.

| improve this answer | |
  • Two comments (and thanks for voicing/voting your opinion). I don't go back in my browser to vote since it's far too many clicks. Especially on mobile. What if the buttons read "Looks Good" and "OK or needs improvement". That's how the system is treating our reviews IMO. I also feel strongly that the system is broken now since it doesn't clear votes on migrated questions. Why should someone that's voting on Site A be any sort of judge about what's good on Site B. Reputation is earned on a site by site basis, yet voters from migrating sites are magically enfranchised on any other site. – bmike Dec 22 '14 at 13:37
  • @bmike: clearing votes on migration is an entirely different issue, and has nothing whatsoever to do with your issues with the Triage voting system. – Martijn Pieters Dec 22 '14 at 13:45
  • It has to do with you saying you won't down vote a great network management question if it's asked on SO. That baffled me so I commented on it. – bmike Dec 22 '14 at 13:46
  • @bmike: it was an example; there are others. Just because a question is off-topic does not mean it is a bad question. Usually that means you wouldn't downvote it, just vote to close. Combining a down-vote and a close vote has bigger consequences than a close-vote alone. – Martijn Pieters Dec 22 '14 at 13:47
  • 2
    @bmike: and what about duplicates? A well-researched question, showing proper effort to solve it themselves, but it just turns out to be a undocumented quirk of the system already answered in a different question. The duplicate may have been hard to find. Such a question doesn't deserve a down vote, it just needs to be dupe-voted. – Martijn Pieters Dec 22 '14 at 13:48
  • A well researched question gets triaged as OK and gets a justified upvote. The closure for duplication happens after triage and the voting ensures it gets attention in the correct tags so that it gets closed promptly to help the good asker. Why would my proposal make a good duplicate get a down vote? – bmike Dec 22 '14 at 13:50
  • 2
    @bmike: no, voting for duplication can happen during triage too. I have dupe-hammered posts from the queue. But you are focusing on the wrong things here. Your mistake is conflating closure with bad quality. Voting is a different axis, a different measurement, and you cannot just connect the two. – Martijn Pieters Dec 22 '14 at 13:51
  • I'll leave it for the staff to analyze. My suspicion is the vast majority of reviewers never go back and vote on triaged questions due to the design of the UI. You might be a super deduper at triage time but if this rolls out to all sites, voting at triage will be a good thing IMO. Time will tell and I'm fine with lots of down votes here in the mean time. You could also go back and undo any vote if you clicked unsalvageable or looks OK and didn't want that vote to count/last. – bmike Dec 22 '14 at 13:52

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