I have searched high and low but have been unable to find an explanation of why the timeout period for audit failures gets longer and longer.

I fully understand and support the use of the audits and, as a new reviewer, use them to learn from my mistakes but making a timeout period last more than a month seems a bit excessive.

I believe that I have made a good faith effort to be very careful and thoughtful when reviewing things but the process is really very subjective in spite of the efforts to make it more objective.

I have read discussions that indicate that the length of time taken on a review is tracked which leads me to ask whether or not that time period is also considered when assigning a reviewing ban.

  • More than a month doesn't happen (except for severe abuse, but those are handled by moderators and not by audits); 30 days is the maximum. (Yes, that's more days than February.) – Glorfindel Jan 31 '18 at 14:09
  • Related - meta.stackexchange.com/questions/275736/… – Taryn Jan 31 '18 at 14:11
  • Thank you @bluefeet ... very discouraging to say the least. – Dave Jan 31 '18 at 14:14

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .