5

I just flagged https://superuser.com/review/first-questions/1224426 as opinion based in the First Questions review.

enter image description here

I am struggling to see why it is not opinion based. Who knows what IBM devs were thinking when they first designed the PC?

14
  • 1
    Does this answer your question? Failed audit trying to report apparent bug in review queue
    – bertieb
    Nov 26, 2023 at 22:05
  • 1
    It is seeking an opinion. However, the question and answers received upvotes, so any audit, will expect you to recognize the quality of the question. This is the reason asking out of scope questions is discouraged.
    – Ramhound
    Nov 27, 2023 at 5:02
  • @Ramhound, Shouldn't it then be flagged to not appear in the audit queues ? Nov 27, 2023 at 10:31
  • @RohitGupta - That only happens if people with the permissions to vote to close questions, actually use those permissions, to close the question
    – Ramhound
    Nov 27, 2023 at 12:16
  • 1
    @Ramhound I'm patiently anticipating the resolution of issues within the review system, yet those with the necessary authority to address the matter haven't had the opportunity to do so. Consequently, the system remains imperfect and occasionally flawed. Regrettably, there is no accompanying guide signaling that it is flawed or broken, leaving individuals uncertain about the reasons behind apparent "failures" despite providing seemingly correct answers. We are left to learn on our own, ask about it, and figure out how to cheat the system per its interface for the specific purpose we use it. Nov 27, 2023 at 13:33
  • 1
    @VomitIT-ChunkyMessStyle - For my part I voted to close a very clear case of a question seeking our opinion
    – Ramhound
    Nov 27, 2023 at 14:32
  • @Ramhound The fundamental source of confusion persists, irrespective of whether the answers to the questions are accurate. Instead of fixating on the individual queries about a particular question, it is essential to direct attention to the underlying cause of all inquiries related to the pervasive "flawed review queue" issue that underpins these concerns. In this respect, I think for that sort of answer/response/action you say you took means you failed in the same sense when the deceptive and flawed questions fail the people of community. Nov 27, 2023 at 14:37
  • I get frustrated w/ audit queue things from time to time. It is what it is. I appreciate the idea behind the audits, and most of the time they work fine. For the ones that should not be closed, I wish the sample for those were based on mods flagging the question as being appropriate for the queue, rather than something pulled by an algorithm. Or even, the algorithm pulls questions it THINKS are good, and then mods get to say "yea, use this one and this one, not that one". But, if the audit question is incorrectly flagged, I'll go in after and raise my own flag as others have suggested here. Nov 27, 2023 at 17:01
  • The review system is beyond terrible and especially audits are beyond useless. As I wrote in a question here (meta.superuser.com/questions/15065/…), audits in some queues are basically aimed to stop just bots and autoclickers. In some others they're overzealous and inaccurate and they might promote wrong user behaviours like in this case. But some people defend it for some reason - probably just not using these queues enough.
    – Destroy666
    Nov 28, 2023 at 20:07
  • "Who knows what IBM devs were thinking when they first designed the PC?" they do, and many of them are alive still today and probably using Stack Overflow.
    – M-Pixel
    Dec 3, 2023 at 20:00
  • Haha .. in the meantime, you managed to get the question closed because it actually IS opinion based .. Before you raised the issue, it just didn't get enough attention from people with enough privilege to actually close it ...
    – 1NN
    Dec 4, 2023 at 18:08
  • Now we need to delete it to prevent it getting re-opened. Dec 5, 2023 at 18:23
  • I have revised the title to accurately reflect its intended meaning. This adjustment is prompted by the observation that some individuals seem to be overly focused on the wording of the title, rather than engaging in a thorough analysis of the root cause based on comments I'm seeing. Dec 8, 2023 at 23:19
  • @music2myear - There isn’t enough users with the ability to reopen it that would attempt to reopen it.
    – Ramhound
    Dec 10, 2023 at 10:06

2 Answers 2

3

Beating the flawed review system

You can always right-click on the link to the review post to open it in a new tab or browser window to inspect with further detail before making a decision.

  • If a post has garnered numerous votes and has zero close votes, it's probable that it's a deceptive question within the flawed review system.
  • Answering a deceptive question in the review system from a technical/correct perspective might result in failing its test.

Therefore, when applicable, answer those based on an answer that does not justify closure, etc. as the correct response to such questions might paradoxically be deemed incorrect by the flawed review system.

Additional Cheating Method

  • Before making a decision, you can Add Comment and if you see a red message stating This is an audit, then answer it based on what you know they want you to answer. You can always still go to the post and inspect it further in a separate tab still.

Been there, done that—flaws of the system...

5

Don't worry about failing an audit or two

This question, opinion-based or otherwise is from an audit, which are auto-generated. I don't have access to the code, but from having done many and failed one or two I would suggest the somewhat cheeky heuristic:

  • if the question looks like something you seen on HNQ, it is automatically 'good'

Or to put it another way:

hnq audits encode... strange outcomes

Aside: not all "why" questions are opinion-based

Sometimes there's a decent learning point for OP/future searchers/querents about the implicit assumptions underlying a question that has a "why is X this way" phrasing. Bear in mind frame-challenge answers are acceptable too.

1
  • +1 for recognizing that a not-insignificant percentage of "Why" questions do have observable reasoning, that dosen't require you to mind-meld with the original development team to answer without it being an "just an opinion". Dec 1, 2023 at 18:30

You must log in to answer this question.

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