@Ramhound - there is the option to flag as spam, or many other 'real' actions from Review. Just dumping the same boiler-plate on everything is really not reviewing, it's banging through the list as fast as possible. Look at today's history, it's right there. & I realised earlier, this is an 18k user… really should know better by now. There are a couple of other frequent fliers, but this is the worst by far.

@Ramhound - They can flag from Review - i.sstatic.net/oCcBn.png [I thought I'd just managed to catch one to show the whole action, but it turned out to be an audit. …I passed ;) If flagged it should just show as 'Reviewed' in History. As I noted earlier, there's always 'no comment' or Skip, if they're not sure.

@Mokubai - sure, I can see who does it most frequently & repeatedly. I didn't want to name names in here & not many users can see those lists anyway. Is it 10k or 20k gives access? That particular comment is my least favourite anyway, but when I see it applied to things that really should have had other actions performed, it's even worse. tbh I hadn't noticed spam getting upvotes & of course, we have no way of knowing who that was:\

Note: for those of us who still like a clean front page even with the strike ongoing, flag as spam but don't downvote. That keeps it near the top of the page so people find it to flag it faster.

Does someone want to drop that into an answer - I mean, I get the idea, I just like putting big green ticks on things ;))

Personally, I feel it could be the type of QA that adds value to the site - but getting it right without raising the ire of the fly-by dv/cv crowd is going to be the stumbling block on here. AD does tend towards more tolerance of borderline on-topic generally, if there's value.

This stack has traffic too… Hardware Recs doesn't. Are you planning to release the next James Cameron to cinemas worldwide, or play shadow puppets in your living room for the kids & neighbours? ;) Getting it in here gets it an audience. I know you don't need the rep, but a good canonical is a good canonical for time to come. I have a couple that actually took little effort & little maintenance generating views all the time, & 1200 or so votes; another that I do have to actively maintain with 1/10th of that interest, but of equal if not greater usefulness.

I think sometimes it's how fast you can run in front of the down & close voters, who can get pretty quick on the draw on SU. Ask Different puts up with this type of question if it could be labelled 'canonical'. On AD Meta there's a maintained list of canonical QAs, pointing to all these. Many are maintained, sporadically, by but a few. Some start from a general OP question that later gets fleshed out. The brave go all-in with a self-answer… that they then become honour-bound to maintain. How brave are you feeling?

Before I saw this, I'd already raised a new question on what might be done with the software recs close explanation. meta.superuser.com/questions/15008/… Personally, I'm with the majority here that simply migrating doesn't help 'fix' a question to that target stack. Better for the user to ask in a way that fits that site properly. The link is just asking for a better way to inform them of that.

@DavidPostill - Yup. I have some rubber-stamp very similar to that, but I'm sure it would be better in the big blue box than tucked away in a comment underneath. It does feel like we need the whole thing rewording to cover much more like your copy/paste.