TL;DR: As of today (September 29, 2015) the maximum reputation for having an author's late answer enqueued has been raised from 10 to 50.
As for further increase to 100:
Review queues lose effectiveness if posts aren't regularly (and accurately) cleared. A queue such as close votes on Stack Overflow that never seems to get to 0 fails to ...
When we first launched the new Late Answers review queue, it would have started with 90k posts had we initialized it with every late answer ever.
So instead, we initialized it with all late answers provided after September 1, 2012. The community cruised through them, so we bumped down the "minimum date" to August 1, thereby adding 7k more posts to the queue....
I think this is a good idea. I spend a lot of time on the New Answers to Questions More Than 30 Days Old list on Stack Overflow (10k link), and I would agree that many of the questions I flag as not an answer are from new users who want to comment, find they don't have the privilege, and leave an answer instead.
The main concern I would have about the ...
The "Late Answers" review page is described with the following phrase.
Review late answers from new users
On Drupal Answers, the Stack Exchange site where I am moderator, many of those late answers are:
Related questions written as answers
Requests for more information necessary to answer the question
Comments from users having the same problem, asking ...
Anyone, not just new users, that answers an old question should be contributing to the existing body of knowledge already present with the other existing answers. Throwing it into the review queue is [in theory] a good way to check that. It also helps tease out gems and weed out poor answers.
This is, while unusual, an expected result of the system.
The way the late answers queue works is by checking two things.
Was the answer posted at least 30 days after the question was asked?
Was the answer posted by a user who has 10 50 or less reputation (disregarding suspension)
If both of these are true, it is entered into the review queue until it ...
There's a very important reason to require more than one "No Action Needed" review to clear items from the First Posts or Late Answers review queue: spam.
Right now, all it takes is a single bad "No Action Needed" review to approve spam in First Posts or Late Answers. It then is allowed to live on the site until someone happens to come across it and takes ...
It could be useful to the original asker, who will be notified that another answer has been posted.
It will also be useful for those who find the post later, like you did, either through Stack Exchange or through Google.
It also can be important if the technologies or standards change, so that newer updated answers can be shown.
There are badges just for ...
This was only a test, designed to make sure you were paying
attention. You passed.
Review audits are made for finding robo-reviewers who are not paying any attention to the review posts by just clicking on the No action needed button to increase their review count/ for gaining badges.
By clicking on the Add/Show comments button, ...
We shouldn't prevent it. If a user is repeating answers that are already there, you can simply vote as you see fit. But just because a question is old and answered, that doesn't mean that a user can't come up with a great new answer to the question. Granted, that particular question will most likely not see that happen, but it should never be prevented.
I find new users who answer questions that already have accepted answers
That's encouraged. New users may very well have newer information and a better answer.
they tend to answer the questions quite poorly
We already have a process for bad answers (as well as a moderation queue for answers from new users). Downvotes and flagging. No need to do more ...
Actually, it's a pretty good point. I think there should be a Looks Good option on review, which indicates that no action should be taken.
The downside of this is that users may abuse it to get badges.
I quietly suspect that the root of the problem is that a large and well-understood part of the purpose of Review is to check for a few fairly objective Bad Things - including, but not limited to, spam, non-questions, and non-answers - but if none of those issues are present, there's no way of simply saying "Nothing is horribly wrong here" except an upvote.
You should answer the question if you can add something useful. Maybe you even want to elaborate on a short but correct answer. Then you could refer to that answer and elaborate, maybe show some proof, other solutions, etc.
It is fine to add new answers to accepted questions. That's why there is still a Post Your Answer button.
You do want to be careful ...
There are two solutions:
Given that people are so desperate to earn the badge, why not simply allow "skip" (renamed "Looks Good" perhaps) to count towards the review total?
Remove the badges. I assume that this isn't going to happen.
The first solution means that the people who really, really wanted the badge could skip their way through to getting it (...
If reviewers are upvoting questions or answers that have serious, visible problems - ones that get closed or deleted (for any reason other than being duplicates or deletion by the original poster) - then they're not doing their job and we should punish them for it.
Misuse - whether deliberate or not - of other features on StackExchange is met with negative ...
Sorry - my bug :) There was a case where multiple browsers could be left open to several different reviews all of which could be completed to exceed the max. It's fixed now.
I blame the hat over my eyes.
I was optimizing the SQL yesterday to lessen the server pain on these reviews and make them run faster...however when you put 2 Ids in the query backwards it doesn't work very well at all.
A fix will be built out in the next few minutes to get this queue going again.
If there's already a comment, upvote it!
That will allow you to complete the review.
Here's the list of actions that you can take - if you can't see the info, hit the (more) button - note, this is on questions but the answer one is the same except that "close" isn't an option.:
I'm Done is only available if you've done one of the following:
There's an assumption here that this is primary about gaming. I disagree. I think that it is as much about the psychology of the available buttons.
Clicking 'skip' feels like shirking the job. Thus, it biases people in favor of doing something, and the upvote, as per @Chris Gerken, is sitting right there at hand.
I predict that the simple addition of an '...
I disagree that this example shows an intrinsic problem with the late answers review queue or with the selection of posts to be reviewed. It was in fact a good idea to show this post to reviewers. This post should have been flagged as spam, which is one of the options in the late answers review queue.
The problem here is the “serial reviewers” — the people ...
A little less than a year after this question was asked, a "No Action Needed" button became available, to allow dismissing the review task while explicitly taking no action on it.
In this case, clicking that button is the right thing to do.
(For context to future readers: the "Not Sure" button in the question's screenshot did the same thing as today's "...
Questions can be "protected" to address such concerns. The linked question was actually just marked as protected 10 minutes before you posted this. The text for that notice reads:
This question is protected to prevent "thanks!", "me too!", or spam answers by new users. To answer it, you must have earned at least 10 reputation on this site.
It looks like the post was deleted as a result of 6 "Recommend Deletion" reviews, which dismisses all flags on it and for some reason does not show up in the revision history.
However, if a post gets deleted in such a manner, there is nothing stopping you from simply undeleting it again, which is what that guy did. Since it was no longer in the review queue ...
If an answer is dubious because the question is poor, I'd say that the root of the problem lies in the question rather than the answer.
In this case, the question is old, extremely localized (either PEBKAC or some buggy download or something), and hardly even a question at all. There isn't any point in keeping it around IMHO, and the late answer was posted ...
As far as I can tell, Late Answers queue makes a convenient tool to detect fake reviewers, by giving a sensible way to catch a verifiable abuse that is also free of undesired side effects.
"verifiable abuse" is an upvote given to the post that was soon after that (eg in 24 hours) deleted as not an answer or as spam.
For an example of abuse caught, refer ...