2

Occasionally, when I get a known-good audit in the review queue, the system shows me a fake usercard of a new user to not make it obvious that it is an audit; as it was actually posted by a higher-rep user, it lacks the "new contributor" indicator. Also, a spam or non-answer will usually have an indicator, but on known-bad audits, it lacks the indicator since it was actually posted more than a week ago.

In both cases, the lack of a "new contributor" indicator can immediately give away the fact that a review is an audit. In most cases, one has to do additional investigation to see if something's an audit, but since SE decided to show the fake usercards in the first place, I think this is sufficiently obvious enough that a user can determine if something's a review audit by simply checking for the non-presence of the indicator.

Is this a problem, and if so, what can be done about this? Should we show an artificial indicator whenever the system generates a review audit and uses a fake usercard?

  • 3
    Review audits aren't supposed to be hard. I must admit, though, this is a whole new level of easiness. – Supa Mega Ducky Momo da Waffle Jan 28 at 21:46
  • 3
    @pizzastaticvoidmain Yep, it's the same level of easiness as not using a fake usercard at all. – Sonic the Wizard Werehog Jan 28 at 21:49
  • 3
    nah, not a problem. If you're paying close enough attention to catch this detail, the audit system has already done its job. – Kevin B Jan 28 at 21:56
  • 1
    @KevinB all you have to do is quickly glance at the usercard. That's not paying close attention. – Supa Mega Ducky Momo da Waffle Jan 28 at 22:05
  • 1
    @pizzastaticvoidmain it's more than spamming the ok button. – Kevin B Jan 28 at 22:05
  • @KevinB it already takes a few seconds for the buttons to show up. That's plenty of time to look at the usercard – Supa Mega Ducky Momo da Waffle Jan 28 at 22:06

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .