We can't merge accounts any more. We basically use a duck test + a quick look at whatever PII we have, and pass it up to a CM. There's nothing that a regular user can do. In many cases I actually suggest OP request a merge themselves just to ensure they're aware of it. There's been cases of folks creating what seemed like a endless stream of new unregistered ...
There is nothing else to do to them
This is where you are incorrect. These questions are thrown onto the "Review" page, and we can actually edit them, and improve them. Once they are improved, we can flag them to be re-opened by a moderator, or by asking on Meta. I am against taking them out of the review tab.
If the questions are duplicates, one should be closed as such. In that case, it should be explained to the user that we prefer information to be centralized, so they should flag instead of posting the same answer to both. Once the duplicate question relationship is established, one of the duplicate answers can be deleted. Those two questions look pretty ...
Is this a random process and I've been unlucky or have I been singled out for some reason? Have I been a bad reviewer (gasp)?
The review honeypot posts are inserted automatically, and I'm fairly sure it's a random process.
We do not single out users and put them to the test. If we observe unusual reviewing behavior, we'd rather check that manually and ...
First of all, the reputation and privileges system, as it stands today, wasn't designed with the case in mind that someone would just rake in 500 point bounties and get the privileges by only answering a few questions. It is generally assumed that the privileges are earned "naturally" by applying yourself in the community.
That being said, you've earned ...
Don't flag answers as "not an answer" unless they don't attempt to answer the question at all. If an answer post at least tries to answer the question, don't flag it, even if it is factually incorrect. Instead, you should downvote the answer.
The "very low quality" flag should be reserved for genuinely unsalvagsable posts. If an answer can be made ...
Per this MSE, posts are enqueued into Late Answers if they were posted more than 30 days after the question and their owners have less than 50 reputation. This was not always the case; originally the rep threshold was 10 points. Here's what I think happened:
The new user posts the answer several months after the question was created
It swiftly receives an ...
Although the others posted good reasons, I look at answers as a few things:
Would it stand on its own, if it was the only answer to a question?
Does it answer all the parts of the question?
Does it include any citation of where the information is from (for risky-looking answers like # sudo rm -rf /)
Does it include the instructions for how to accomplish ...
If you're thinking about when the question was asked, then you're already thinking about that post more than the typical review robot we're trying to catch does.
The post is not an obvious audit if you just mash the "No action needed" button.
But I agree that the small number of review items at any given time will make people realize that audits are coming....
There are enough people who could be reviewing these to drop the queue to nothing very quickly, if they were inclined to do so. It's important to encourage as many reviewers as possible; when a small handful of users are effectively acting as gatekeepers for every question that arrives on the site, it becomes very difficult for the majority of active users ...
At the moment, I'm against that. Not totally, but I'm not sure whether this would be a good idea.
Your premise is that "all of these votes are good". At the same time, the system would allow you to go through all questions that have pending close votes like crazy. Maybe even without properly evaluating them before – just because it's so easy.
While I'm ...
This is the result of a bug having been fixed; new questions were not being added to the First Posts queue. The behavior you experienced is by design.
The 20 reviews per day limit exists to allow everyone a fair chance at reviewing posts, rather than becoming limited to a few users who end up dominating the review tasks. This ensures that a broad set of ...
Changing just the misleading title
If nothing else looks wrong and the change in title helps then it is probably not too minor. But if there are other things that look wrong at a quick glance reject as too minor. If you see only 1 or 2 things that could be fixed click improve instead.
Editing formatting of menu options from backticks to emphasis
If you can identify which post (question or another answer) the "answer" should be made a comment on, then it's best if you raise a custom flag, saying:
this should be a comment on https://superuser.com/a/819760
Of course, replace the link with the actual link to the specific target answer. Or, if it should be a comment on the question:
this should be ...
As soon as you have the rep, you can certainly dive in! If you don't feel ready though, don't. Take some more time around the site then, read Meta, and the Help Center extensively! They are a wealth of information.
Trust me, starting the mod stuff too early will only piss people off. If you take your time, and dedicate some time to learning, then it does ...
Now that you mention it, I was somewhat curious. I ran the following simple query on both Super User and Stack Overflow to see how many users had edit permission (>= 2000 reputation):
Users.Reputation >= 2000
Which returns 488 for Super User, and 18890 for Stack Overflow. As a percentage of total users (i....
Welcome to inflation. Or at least the close votes queue.
Currently, we allow 20 reviews per user per queue per day, but we double this to 40 if the queue size is over 1000.
So long as the close waiting count is above 1000, then you'll be able to use 40 from the queue.
Other times, it will shrink back down to 20 if under 1000.
I can see 20 in the last 16 hours, and then more 18 hours ago. I suspect that you were reviewing either side of the daily cut-off and 5 of those were yesterday.
I can't remember exactly when the review period starts, but I suspect it is at 00:00 GMT and is not a rolling "day" and instead your limit is reset daily.
It is a result of raising the reputation level of what should be slotted into the Late Answers review queue.
[...] I'd like to try raising the reputation for getting enqueued to the Late Answer reviews to 50 and reconsider upping it to 100 at some point in the future.
Previously it was at 10 reputation.
We should be doing our best to avoid letting users pass with "Here's some code, go figure" answers. These should all still reside in the "low quality" queue, and actually, we should be more active as a community in improving them.
I know some users score quite a lot from one-paragraph answers that contain code, but completely fail to explain what it does, ...
Remember, the point of editing includes any/all of the following:
Improving the readability of the post
I include spelling or grammar with this part here. We are mainly native English speakers, so that is the language we expect questions written in. Proper grammar and spelling help to also bring "professionals" to the site, since they would feel they're ...
You shouldn't flag them at all.
By flagging the post, you would essentially tell a moderator to handle the post. But there really isn't anything moderator-specific about it. Link-only answers are bad and they should either be:
edited to include the information that was linked to
I usually use the auto comment:
Whilst this may ...
In my opinion this is a situation that do with a bit more scrutiny. The Low Quality queue seems to be encouraging the deletion of answers like this that, while they may be concise, do actually answer the question.
In this case I believe this is an answer that could bear a little more effort to explain why it is a good solution. It would be nice to include ...
The mere fact that you feel the need to be cautious about diving into the review queue and took the step of posting on meta about it tells me that you're probably well suited for reviewing and moderation activities. Congratulations, you passed the first test!
So yeah, you have the right idea. Take it slow at first: pay attention to feedback (e.g., reply ...
That about seems right. If you have a post which doesn't need any changes to be done, then "no action needed" is the right course of action. Vote up/down is not mandatory - the point of review queues is to ensure that the post has been vetted properly, not to be artificially inflated/deflated for whatever reasons
You don't, you comment and optionally downvote. There's nothing that inherently needs a mod's immediate attention unless its spam. In this situation a quiet word and a gentle nudge in the right direction is the best idea
I think this is a great idea but with a caveat. New reviewers have a less limited ability as opposed to tried and tested reviewers. This can be tested based on the badges relative the reviewing queue that's used.
< Bronze - 20 reviews
Bronze - 25 reviews
Silver - 35 reviews
Gold - 50 reviews
This would help to give more power to those that actively ...
From my edit to this answer:
If a question is on hold and the suggested edit does not completely resolve the reason for the question being put on hold, you should Reject the edit.
This is a guideline I added to my answer there that attempts to lay out general rules for how to decide on approving/rejecting trivial edits.
I'm not expecting most people to ...
For the record, when this was in the Reopen Votes queue, I skipped the review, but if somebody held a gun to my head and forced me to choose, I would have hit Leave Closed.
The question is no longer opinion-based, but it definitely is too broad. Defending against Internet malware is a massive ordeal - there's an entire industry about it! That's definitely ...