Timeline for Should reviews limit be increased?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
19 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 20, 2017 at 10:32 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.stackexchange.com/ with https://meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Mar 20, 2017 at 10:04 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://superuser.com/ with https://superuser.com/
|
|
| May 27, 2014 at 15:22 | comment | added | harrymc | @Shog9: Please read my addition to my post. | |
| May 21, 2014 at 20:36 | comment | added | harrymc | @Shog9: It's illogical to suppose that a low review limit is an encouraging factor for reviewers. Just the opposite (at least in my case). I think it's more important that close votes be treated than waiting for more reviewers to arrive. This just places a greater burden on the mediators rather than spreading the load. | |
| May 21, 2014 at 20:24 | comment | added | Shog9 | As I stated in my answer, the reason for the low review cap is simply to give a broad cross-section of reviewers a shot at reviewing. The higher vote cap is to avoid penalizing reviewers for reviewing. @harrymc | |
| May 21, 2014 at 20:20 | comment | added | harrymc | @Shog9: I really don't think that a high-reputation user needs help in managing his vote count. Reviewing 50 posts in one day is really an exploit (might be worth a badge). I would suggest setting both limits to 50 and let the reviewers manage their own votes. 20 is too low, especially since not everybody does reviews every day. Also, seriously reviewing a complicated post just to find out it was only a test is really discouraging. | |
| May 21, 2014 at 20:01 | comment | added | Canadian Luke | Ahhh, OK. Misinterpreted then | |
| May 21, 2014 at 19:45 | comment | added | Shog9 | That's not quite true, @CanadianLuke - if it was, we'd give you more reviews than close votes. What we don't want to happen is you blowing all of your close votes in /review and then having to flag problematic questions you run across. It is a good idea to salvage useful questions if possible, but in many cases it simply isn't. | |
| May 21, 2014 at 19:42 | comment | added | Canadian Luke | @harrymc About the number of reviews: It's because SE wants you to be able to salvage or edit the questions, instead of always clicking 'Close' on every question. I asked this myself, as I had 25 Reviews, but still had close votes left (post from over a year ago) | |
| May 20, 2014 at 19:20 | comment | added | harrymc | @KronoS: I meant a gold tag vote. I also up-voted your answer. In the same direction you proposed, maybe we could have something like 1 gold vote = 3 votes and 1 silver = 2 votes. | |
| May 20, 2014 at 16:11 | comment | added | James Mertz | @harrymc what do you mean by a gold vote? A gold review vote or gold tag vote? | |
| May 20, 2014 at 8:39 | comment | added | harrymc | Also, the duplicate filter has some issues. See this screen capture. | |
| May 20, 2014 at 6:08 | comment | added | harrymc | This is a big step forward, but is still a bit skewed : If I open the post not thru the review system I can close 50, but only 20 thru reviewing, so I can still review 50 this way and bypass the 20 limit. So why not make reviews also 50? One more idea: Sort the Close queue first by number of close votes descending and then by date. This way, closing will not be postponed. Another remark: Duplicate votes are relatively rare, so maybe something should be done for the other types, for example setting one gold-vote to count as two votes, to speed up closing. | |
| May 20, 2014 at 5:59 | vote | accept | harrymc | ||
| May 20, 2014 at 6:05 | |||||
| May 19, 2014 at 23:24 | comment | added | James Mertz | Actually now that I think about it more and more I do like that Super Power and how limited the number of users would have it. | |
| May 19, 2014 at 23:23 | comment | added | James Mertz | I guess that makes sense. | |
| May 19, 2014 at 23:22 | comment | added | Shog9 | Only takes one of them to make a big difference, @KronoS. Which is kinda the point. | |
| May 19, 2014 at 23:18 | comment | added | James Mertz | Cool! Except there's only 14 Super Users with Gold Tag Badges and not all of those are consistent reviewers. | |
| May 19, 2014 at 23:06 | history | answered | Shog9 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
