up vote 7 down vote favorite

It seems a bit foolish to have users review their own posts. Would it not be fairer to have others do that?

Screenshot: enter image description here

As indirect evidence, I have also deleted posts. This is not possible for me to do, unless I was the post author.

In addition - and this is far less significant - it seems to me that the same should be true if the reviewer had the last edit.

link
1  
Screenshot or it didn't happen! – Daniel Beck Dec 22 '11 at 18:23
@DanielBeck, Done. – soandos Dec 22 '11 at 22:34
There are actually 3 of mine on this page (subject to change, move to different pages, or getting reviewed) – soandos Dec 22 '11 at 22:36
2  
I guess you just need to write higher quality posts then :-) – Daniel Beck Dec 23 '11 at 5:22
I saw some of yours too :) – soandos Dec 23 '11 at 5:47
*Gasp* Impossible! But if I were a frequent user of /review, I would have seen them too and could have fixed my posts. – Daniel Beck Dec 23 '11 at 5:54
I think (but am not sure that it takes two different people to review something before it goes away. – soandos Dec 23 '11 at 5:59
feedback

1 Answer

up vote 3 down vote

I don't think this causes any harm; the low quality algorithm is impartial in that it only looks at a basic heuristic, and doesn't factor ownership in.

Besides, this means you can be encouraged to improve your own posts! :)

link
You don't think that there are issues of impartiality? – soandos Jan 23 at 0:04
@soandos It's an indicator for you that a post might be poor. Of course you can just decide "It's mine, it's good", but you have a similar problem with any post: "That's a post by user X, I'm sure he knows what he's doing". – Daniel Beck Jan 23 at 10:54
feedback

You must log in to answer this question.

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