The Math SE post Do most numbers have exactly $3$ prime factors? currently has 2 answers. The top of the timeline for the question is

Primes question timeline

Note the question's user SmallestUncomputableNumber has over 1,000 reputation and this was their 23rd question. Also, why were there 2 first post reviews?

I gave an answer, with the top of its timeline showing

My answer timeline

However, at the time, I already had over 620 answers and a reputation of about 18,000.

Note I checked the links to find all 3 of these reviews seemed to have occurred for those particular posts. Also, for comparison, the timeline of the other answer from Michael Stocker doesn't show any First Post review events. Also, my previous answer & the next answer to this one don't show any First Post reviews being done on either of them.

As for general details of what should be going to a First Posts review queue, a couple of references are this answer to the FAQ [What are the review queues, and how do they work?](What are the review queues, and how do they work?), as well as What are the criteria to be considered a "first answer"?, although the latter is from about 7 1/2 years ago.

  • Gut feeling: any chance two accounts got merged? – Jenayah Feb 17 at 21:47
  • @Jenayah It's an interesting idea. However, having two accounts merged definitely didn't happen to me at least. – John Omielan Feb 17 at 21:48
  • 2
    Well, the "first post" is a link to the reviewand you should check them, those were review audits. The posts got selected as audits and reviewers had to pass them. – Tom Feb 17 at 21:50
  • The review results "Review audit passed [..]" tell us that detail. Regarding "none of them should have been put there", when they were normal reviews, then yes, but the system selected them as positive posts and put them into the "first post" queue to check if the reviewer pays attention. The poster will be anonymized as well, so the reviewer won't see the reputation anyway. – Tom Feb 17 at 21:57
  • 1
    @Tom Thanks for your feedback. I realize now what was going on, but didn't read carefully enough earlier to see that. – John Omielan Feb 17 at 22:02

They were not being reviewed as first posts. They were being reviewed as audits. Certain posts are eligible to be automatically selected as "known good" tests that users in those queues need to pass to prove they are paying attention.

You can tell that a review was an audit by clicking through to it and looking at its completion:

Review audit passed

If it were a normal review, that would say "Completed" rather than "Review audit passed/failed".

| improve this answer | |
  • Thanks for the answer. I didn't realize they were being used for auditing, but on looking at this again now, I should've seen it earlier. – John Omielan Feb 17 at 22:01
  • It is also kinda obvious from the screenshot OP provided. It states "audit" in the orange box. – Luuklag Feb 18 at 8:10
  • @Luuklag When I first read "audit", I just considered it meant that it was part of the checking & review system. For example, at Merriam-Webster's site, the second definition of audit says "a methodical examination and review", which is basically what the review system does. In particular, I didn't originally connect the use of the word term "audit" there with the occasional tests done on reviewers, i.e., the "audit" reviews. However, as I stated in my comment above, it's now quite obvious to me. – John Omielan Feb 18 at 13:45
  • @JohnOmielan I didn't try to set you on record for not understanding what happened. I merely wanted to point out that the way that is demonstrated in this answer is more cumbersome then it should be. – Luuklag Feb 18 at 14:00
  • @Luuklag Thanks for explaining. I'm sorry for misunderstanding you. It's just that I'm somewhat embarrassed, and even a bit ashamed, I didn't understand this earlier. – John Omielan Feb 18 at 14:02

You must log in to answer this question.

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