I occasionally see recommendations here for specific audit questions that should be scrapped.  It isn't clear whether there is a mechanism to cull bad questions that I assume are selected by some automated means.  If so, here is another recommendation: one of the answers to [Do rackmount servers need to be in a rack?][1]

The question has a number of suggestions to use Ikea Lack tables, including a comment by Journeyman Geek, and tombull89's answer, complete with picture.

The answer selected for use in the audit was probably picked because it received 12 upvotes, which it likely got because it was an early answer, and apparently the first to mention the Ikea tables in an answer.  In the audit, however, it is presented as a new answer.

As a "new" answer, it probably should be deleted because it does nothing more than regurgitate an idea already mentioned several times, and covered well in an answer.  The audit answer is pretty paltry and adds no additional value.  It also contains an admission by the author that someone else had already suggested the idea, so it's really just a "me too" post in this context.

I didn't flag it for deletion, but left a comment explaining why it wasn't a good answer.  That failed the audit because the upvotes had identified it as a good answer, and any comment is taken as negative (which in this case, it was).

This makes a bad audit example because modifying it and presenting it as a new answer takes it out of the original context.  While it attracted upvotes when, and in the sequence, it was originally posted, as a "new" answer, it's a bad one.

Is there a mechanism to cull audit examples the system gets wrong?  If so, is this the place to identify them?


  [1]: http://superuser.com/review/first-posts/363544