Timeline for Add an "I don't understand" option for review audits
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
29 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 2, 2023 at 20:19 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| Apr 2, 2023 at 20:51 | |||||
| Feb 23, 2020 at 15:08 | comment | added | MikeBeaton | What's happening with this? If I can add, just disagreeing with one small part of the suggestion in this answer, that if there was a 'Contest Audit' button then I'd be happy to have the audit still count against me (which isn't necessarily a ban, right; but even if it is...) until reviewed. Obviously any ban or negative impact being reversed if the appeal is upheld. Obviously also only if the appeal process had some kind of reasonable (< 1 wk, say?) timespan. It seems hard to avoid people just auto-contesting and carrying on doing bad reviews, otherwise? | |
| Aug 26, 2019 at 10:11 | comment | added | peterh | @BaconBits Another two year passed. Some high-rep important users left the SO because unfair treatment of avid reviewers. SE seems deaf to the whole problem. | |
| Apr 26, 2019 at 11:16 | comment | added | AncientSwordRage | @Manishearth Quis compotos ipsos compoto? | |
| Apr 18, 2017 at 18:27 | comment | added | Kyle Strand | This has been proposed here: meta.stackoverflow.com/q/348085/1858225 | |
| Apr 10, 2017 at 13:05 | comment | added | Bacon Bits | Another year has passed. Still missing this feature. Still getting bit by poor audit questions. | |
| Jun 23, 2016 at 8:11 | history | bounty ended | rene | ||
| May 3, 2016 at 22:42 | comment | added | CodeMouse92 | Another year has passed, and we still desperately need this. The audit system keeps proving itself to be broken, sometimes training opposite behaviors simultaneously. | |
| Sep 14, 2015 at 14:41 | comment | added | AdrianHHH | This Q&A has been open for over two years. Is there any update? There are many questions on meta that relate to poor review audits so it would seem that that doing something about them is considered highly desirable by the Stack Overflow community. | |
| Jun 18, 2015 at 9:01 | history | bounty ended | psubsee2003 | ||
| Jun 12, 2015 at 2:54 | comment | added | BoltClock's a Unicorn | @Manishearth: This looks to me like a flag queue for audits, so if we had review audits for these things, we'd need audits for all moderator flags. | |
| Jun 11, 2015 at 16:30 | comment | added | Diminutive Colossus | Just an idea, but say if the audit was good then it should be included in a list somewhere with an explanation of why it was a good audit so other users could learn from it. | |
| May 20, 2015 at 19:33 | comment | added | stkent | Not at this point :) Should something removed as a duplicate not show up in the review queue then? | |
| May 20, 2015 at 19:31 | comment | added | Deduplicator | @stkent: Are you sure it was removed for being NAA, and that wasn't just one reviewers guess? | |
| Jan 4, 2015 at 15:19 | comment | added | stkent | Any news on something like this being implemented? I just failed an audit where an answer was removed for being "not an answer", even though it was actually a duplicate of an earlier answer with 203 upvotes. No way to know that from the review screen, of course. | |
| Sep 10, 2014 at 18:57 | comment | added | Deduplicator | @MarkBennet: Well, when he gets around to it, his edit will push his question into the reopen-queue, and if he actually resolved the problems with his post, it will be reopened fast. It's working as intended. | |
| Jul 3, 2014 at 17:03 | comment | added | ouflak | @Manishearth, "Will there be audit review audits for moderators?" If there are going to be, I volunteer. | |
| May 23, 2014 at 6:05 | comment | added | Warren Dew | I like this proposal with the exception that a disputed audit should continue to count against the user until resolved. Otherwise, users have an incentive to dispute even legitimate audits. | |
| Apr 22, 2014 at 19:59 | comment | added | Mark Bennet | On Mathematics I have just had my first fail after several passes. I think it was a judgment call, yet I was told I was wrong without any chance to engage. I think that fail rate should be taken into account before suspending anyone - everyone will disagree occasionally, and sometimes a consensus needs to be tested. And I also think that the tests need to feed a live conversation about what a good review is. Some of the Maths homework questions get closed before the original poster has a chance to respond to very helpful comments. | |
| Dec 10, 2013 at 4:07 | comment | added | zwol | Any progress on implementing this? I just hit a borderline one myself (poor but salvageable question, not all that old, named user account) and would have liked the opportunity to explain my reasoning. | |
| Dec 5, 2013 at 12:48 | history | bounty ended | Richard Tingle | ||
| Nov 5, 2013 at 0:33 | comment | added | hardmath | It took a while for me to come around to the "This audit is incorrect" version because of the more confrontational tone, but I'd always envisioned typing an explanation for disagreement. I can see the virtue in directly disputing the audit case. | |
| Nov 5, 2013 at 0:30 | vote | accept | hardmath | ||
| Oct 15, 2013 at 12:09 | comment | added | Qantas 94 Heavy | A good idea would be to place the action that failed the audit (downvote for good audit, commenting on good audit, upvoting bad audit, etc.) so that they can place it in context. | |
| Jul 23, 2013 at 5:36 | history | bounty ended | gnat | ||
| Jul 16, 2013 at 13:55 | comment | added | gnat | Note by the way, that the very ability to dispute review audit can be rate-limited in addition to already established rate limits on review. I would consider something like starting with allowing one audit challenge per week (or maybe even per month) for a novice reviewer. For steward reviewer, one challenge a day feels reasonably safe. | |
| Jul 14, 2013 at 20:05 | comment | added | Undo | @Manishearth I'd think you could unban yourselves :p | |
| Jul 14, 2013 at 19:04 | comment | added | Manishearth | Will there be audit review audits for moderators? :P | |
| Jul 14, 2013 at 18:07 | history | answered | Brad Larson | CC BY-SA 3.0 |