In a similar vein to this question I think there needs to be some modification to the review queue limits during the beta phases of a new site.
I have read the other questions related to review queue limits, but they seem to be related mostly to full fledged sites with a large user base.
Over on the open source SE site we are in public beta, with currently only 5 users over 2K rep. They also tend to be the ones most active in the review queues.
The limit on reviews causes problems when some of the most active people are 'limited out' early in the day. For example, we are trying to clean up our tag wiki after the initial burst of questions (filling in definitions and refining excerpts etc). Fairly soon we will be generating a backlog of suggested edits. We have a larger pool (10 people) who can approve tag wiki edits but needing 2 people to approve each edit, and with a change to a tag wiki being two separate suggestions, that means if one person makes the edits and everyone else reviews, we can only update a few wikis each day.
Privilege levels are dropped during the beta phases, and I think that review queue limits should correspondingly be eased. Perhaps the formula could include factors like
- How many users have sufficient rep to review the queue, or edit type. (Low number increases limit)
- Typical daily number of reviews in each queue (high number increases limit)
- Average number of unique reviewers per day per queue (low number increases limit)
That would probably enable a smaller group of 'founders' to manage the admin side of getting a site up cleanly.