One of my answers showed up at /review/low-quality-posts with a score of 72 (is that good or bad?). I've edited the answer to clarify for the OP, but it made me question the heuristics.

This is the full post of the original:

Click on the boxed "x" to the right of the notification to dismiss it.

According to Jeff's post, there are several heuristics, some of which I've grouped below:

  1. Word checks—currently disabled, but does not trigger even if they were enabled.
  2. Smilies—None in my post
  3. Exclamation/question marks—None in my post
  4. All caps—No
  5. All lowercase—No, the first letter in the sentence is capitalized.
  6. No spaces/ASCII—No, contains spaces and all characters are ASCII
  7. Repeated periods—No
  8. Contains hyperlink—No
  9. Contains email address—No
  10. Ends in question mark—No
  11. Low entropy—(No?)
  12. Length test (assumed)— 70 characters (perhaps a bit on the low side)

Considering that my post fails all but possibly one or two of the low quality post heuristics, is something malfunctioning or is the detector perhaps a little too harsh?


It's just a little short.

The most dangerous form of stupid comment is not the long but mistaken argument, but the dumb joke. Long but mistaken arguments are actually quite rare. There is a strong correlation between comment quality and length; if you wanted to compare the quality of comments on community sites, average length would be a good predictor. Probably the cause is human nature rather than anything specific to comment threads. Probably it's simply that stupidity more often takes the form of having few ideas than wrong ones.

The heuristic doesn't automatically mean your post is wrong, just that the lower the score, the more likely that someone should look at it.

| improve this answer | |

You must log in to answer this question.

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