Link to the strange behavior: https://stackoverflow.com/review/low-quality-posts/18484797
I identified it's a spam and clicked "Recommend Deletion", then hit "Delete", and there was no doubt I was presented with a "Congratulations" screen. But it looks, um... a bit strange?
I immediately captured the screen for this bug report. Then out of curiosity, I refreshed the browser and was surprised to see the new message:
*Shrug* So he did the audit faster than me??? Then why am I presented with that stub?
Should be a design bug. AFAIK a review is "locked" to the reviewer for 5 minutes after it's presented to them (others won't be reviewing that very item during "lock period"), so why aren't audits "locked" too???
For what it's worth, I swear I was presented with that audit. I wouldn't have been able to capture the first screenshot had I not seen it. Besides, I am completely innocent in Alexa Skills or whatever that question involves, nor is that audit discussed on Meta, so it's plainly impossible for me to find it manually.
Experiment on this
I proposed the experiment. In the process, I found 10 audits and sent to Donald Duck. D completed the audits in the desired way (i.e. passed them) while I keep the browser page open. Then I deliberately fail the audit from the page that I had kept open. After 10 failures, I was still not review-banned.
To prove the "race condition" exists, Donald Duck showed me his visual of zero item in the LA queue, while I had one item open. Then we both completed the same review, and found that we both are on the list of completed reviewers of that review item.
So, since an audit can only be completed once, should the "conflict protection" be implemented on them?