I was reviewing "First Posts" queue with "answers" filter, and a wild question appeared:    This way is very easy to detect some audits.
11973
Just recently the . I've got  this morning which seems to be out of scope for my filtered list. I have filtered my list to only review VBA and Excel-VBA tags while the audit is tagged with perl http pipes which have nothing in common with VBA. I see a problem with the way the system currently works  Since I have a filtered list of tags, once I see a differently tagged question I already know it's an audit. Come on, that's too easy!  Can this please be fixed? update I have ran into  which I decided to edit - the question was tagged VBA and I thought it had nothing to do with VBA so I selected Edit which was the correct action. Now, once the first audit was clearly one to close - nothing to do with VBA and really easy to know that it actually was an audit - the second one was a very good audit. I am just thinking now if this is a proper bug or just a matter of malfunction in the system. I think the first one may have been made an audit for the wrong reason. Let's turn this into a discussion as I can't clearly work the system out.
46149
I have found the  has been helpful in prompting me to review queues.  There should be red when there's red dots against review queues:   image stolen from   However, when I have used all my reviews for some queues:    If those queues are large enough to warrant the red alert, it will still show on my review icon, even though none of the queues I am able to review in are not alerting.     It would be better if it is like this:    Can we have the red alert vanish if the alert is for queues we have finished reviewing for the day please? It's honestly annoying and will eventually degrade the UX for avid reviewers. (imo)
88745
When I'm looking down the front page on , I often wish I could tell at a glance what happened to the question to bump it there. Sometimes it is obvious from looking at the number of answers, other times you have to follow a link to find out if it has been edited or if an answer has been added or updated.  I'm guessing this is just as applicable on other SE sites - this is the kind of thing I'm suggesting:    A couple of suggestions from the comments that might be good:   To reduce clutter the word 'ago' could be removed at the same time. The new text could be visible only to established users - ie users who are likely to be reviewing/editing and would benefit from seeing at a glance what kind of change has occurred.
103066
I've thought about proposing this for a while.  It would be very easy to make or curate "too minor" review audits.  Chances are, many of them are approved.  I don't know how big of a problem it is for too many review items to be approved, but , and think this probably happens way to much.  So proposal is to add "too minor" audits in addition to the spammy fake text ones.  Picking audits shouldn't be hard - how about ones that were unanimously rejected as "too minor" and where the diff is fewer than 5 characters (since yes, these exist I think in abundance).  Note another advantage is this gives us genuine reviews in the audit queue at all.  The fake ones have some efficacy but I've seen people complain about them on various meta-threads, to a greater extent than say, audit close questions.  Note: the linked edit actually breaks the code by dropping a {. All the more egregious it went approved; however I imagine the reviewers didn't notice the breaking change since they approved it...  which more or less means they either 1) didn't read at all or 2) saw a tiny formatting diff and approved it instead of rejecting as too minor.  So, more complicated but, still case in point.
23067
On a recent review audit on SU, I clicked "Edit" and was greeted with the plain text "This post was deleted and cannot be edited". It wasn't in a popup box or anything; the actual page consisted of just that text, with no formatting (as though it were the only content of the HTML page). This makes it really obvious I'm dealing with an audit.
1483
We often get questions here on Meta or through other channels about why a particular user was banned from review by the system. Additionally, we frequently want to look into a user's review history when we see approved spam or other bad reviews in order to see if there's a larger problem with this user.  However, it's not all that easy for moderators to get a comprehensive view of a user's review history right now. We can look in their recent review activity within their profile, but that hides reviews on deleted posts (like spam or non-answers) and some types of audits. Failed audits aren't identified or listed anywhere. Moderators do get access to more detailed statistics on review, and can eventually look at each user's reviews within a given queue, but this is a laborious process. I usually have to construct a URL by hand to look at a particular user's reviews.  It would be really helpful for moderators to have quick access from a user's profile to a list of all of their recent reviews (including deleted posts), in the style of what we get from the review statistics view. Additionally, a list of audits with pass / fail status () would save a tremendous amount of time when researching this for a given user, instead of having to click through every single review to see if it was an audit.
45901
Already I have lost all hope of looking at late answers etc. It's just a parade of meh. I can't make any kind of intelligent decision because I can't see the other answers to the question, for instance. There's no Looks Good, only Skip, and those feel different to me. So I've been more interested in .  But people keep approving crap while I'm looking at it. Two or three "the post was already approved; please visit to edit" and I'm just "screw this whole thing".  Can we do something like one reject bounces all existing votes: you need three approves in a row? Because a lot of people are stupidly approving and actually driving me away from the queue.    Note this is less about letting bad edits through and more about keeping reviewers motivated.
28369
It seems the spamfilter on the "Help and Improvement" queue has some problem. From  (from the review of  question).  I think,   Well, "there are" happens quite often in spams, also often in hams :-) Maybe in the case of a 3k+ user it is not really probable he would try to spam.   On my tries it seems, the first word of the edited message is considered always spammy.
21924
Of course spam posts should be flagged, and if they come up in review, rejected.  Over on Mi Yodeya during the past 24 hours I’ve helped delete and reject four spam posts through the review queue, and I can only imagine that others were posted over the course of the night. To clarify, I’m referring to edits and answers that were about 99.274% words that I don’t think any decent person would use in everyday discussions, even if someone got them really angry.   Thing is, if the only thing we can do as a community is delete his posts/reject his edits, and as moderators to ban his account, can’t he just create a new account? Further, some of these posts . Maybe the mods can ban his IP address? I’m not one, so I have no idea what kind of power they wield in that respect. But he can always just get a new computer.   I don’t have the numbers to see what this is like on other sites, but I know this doesn’t happen often on Mi Yodeya. I wonder, then, whether this is the optimal solution, or whether an automatic spam filter be put into place - say, a new review queue that automatically deletes posts or rejects edits that can then be voted on whether to be reposted if it’s a false alarm. Perhaps it can be automatically triggered by certain keywords (like ****, %$#^, or @$+^).   Now, all of these posts that I voted to delete/reject came up in Suggested Edits and First Posts. Maybe such edits would show up in Low Quality in general, and that just wasn’t the case here because of precedence rules. I don’t know. But perhaps the above would be a better solution, if this is even as big of a problem as I’m making it out to be.
117370
On the one hand, I see very few posts in the review queue when I visit.  On the other hand, I see a lot of pretty awful first posts sitting on the front page.  This leads me to suspect that robo-reviewers are blowing through the queue.  Given how empty the queue is, could you please increase the number of people who have to check in before a post leaves the queue?  Of course, some honey-pot solution to detect and disable the auto-clickers would be even better.
70056
I see ads to other SE sites regularly on the sidebar of SO. Are these questions chosen by hand, or algorithmically? The reason I ask is that there was an ad pointing to  on Seasoned Advice. I'm all for a good laugh I suppose, but is this the kind of question that should be highlighted?  It's obviously a thriving community, but if this were my first exposure to that community, and I saw that the highest-rated answer -- from the user with the highest reputation -- was (and I paraphrase only lightly):  &quot;Why yes, there is tool that can cut cherry tomatoes in half.  It's fantastic for the job.  It's called a freakin' KNIFE!&quot;  would I ever want to visit again, let alone ask a question over there? First impressions count for a lot, and that one missed the mark IMHO. If the selection method is algorithmic, I suppose there's no reliable way to detect sarcasm in a highly-rated answer, but if it's manual, weeeellllllllll ... :)
46982
Under accounts tab of a user's profile, words questions and answers are used even when count is 1. For live example, you can go to my profile &amp; click accounts tab. Scroll down to Drupal Answers row where you can find &quot;1 answers&quot; which should be &quot;1 answer&quot;. Or, scroll down to Server Fault row to see both &quot;1 questions&quot; and &quot;1 answers&quot;.
81609
So  came up. It was clearly not a crap answer, and I could tell it was probably an audit because no username was being displayed, but I wanted to read the question before deciding whether to "no action" or "skip". The question had slightly fuddled grammar so I decided to look at its comments. The comment expansion text read "show 8 more comments" (all 8 comments were hidden). I clicked it and it failed the audit.  Why should an audit based on a known good answer fail because I was attempting to get more information on the question?  Interestingly enough, several non-audit reviews I've seen replace the "add comment"/"show more comments" link with the text "comments disabled on deleted / locked posts / reviews". At the very least this text should have shown for this audit.
224
I recently received this rather amusing message while reviewing a user's first post:  Congratulations! This was only a test, designed to make sure you were paying attention. This post has already been removed, but thanks for taking time to leave feedback for the author.   What is the purpose of this test? How does the audit work? What happens if I fail? Why was the system expecting me to negatively review a good post, or positively review a bad post? A review is obviously an audit. Should I report it? Do review audits count toward the Reviewer badge? Do robo-reviewers dream of electric sheep?
40680
Anonymous and unregistered users with &lt; 15 reputation (the amount required to earn the upvote privilege) will now see       feedback   on every post in the area that a logged in user would see "add comment":    When the post area is moused over, the area expands to:     Was this post useful to you? [Yes] [No]     once clicked it will say     sending feedback...   and eventually     Thank you for your feedback.   The goal is to offer the 90% of our traffic that is anonymous users a way to provide more meaningful feedback on posts rather than passively incrementing a view counter.  This click data is currently being evaluated to see what we can do with it. Ideas welcome!
72101
Few arguments against it:   Pressing the flag button doesn't mean actually submitting it (as in every test/form). There might be an unknown duplicate, if you assume it's the first post (as you were told) it might be worthy to flag it. You might want to look if someone else thought it was duplicate by "making half way" to flagging it.   Why pressing the flag button makes you fail an audit? I think it shouldn't.  Edit:  The implementation difficulty (fake flagging UI) and the tips about how avoid failing (and reviewing!) by skipping the answer adds some insight, but still doesn't answer the question why it's not a valid review.    Moreover, I would like to add one more,  describes a reviewer that failed an audit while trying to flag a question as off topic. The question was clearly off topic, and still after 1300 views no one flagged it.
44443
After an extended alpha period, we are pleased to announce the release of Custom Filters (formerly known as Custom Question Lists).  Custom Filters provide a rich UI for building more tailored views of questions around your specific needs  (e.g. ) as well as the ability to save those lists for quick access later.  So, what does it look like?  The change in the UI is subtle, and if you never use the feature it shouldn't impact you too much.  We're going from this:    To this:    With this component in the sidebar:    Notably, the order of tabs has rearranged slightly, Featured has been renamed Bounties, and a few items have been tucked into a "More" dropdown.  There's also a blue Filter button.  Once you click Filter or "Create a custom filter", though, you're brought into a new UI that lets you select tags, choose a sort order, and specify the attributes of the questions that you want to view.    From there, you can apply your filter to the current page or save it so that you can quickly access it again from the sidebar or More dropdown.  .  What about new content indicators?  If you've been following this project, you know that new content indicators have been "just around the corner" for a while.  It's not a trivial problem to get right at scale, and while we've been close for a while, there's one last issue we want to resolve before shipping.  That is targeted for mid-July.  Where do I file bugs and feature requests?  You can file on meta using the  tag.  Special thanks to our alpha testers  You have all been a huge help both not just in finding bugs but also in shaping the direction of the product.  For a history of the project, you can view these previous meta posts: