Timeline for Review queue workflows - Final release
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
38 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 14, 2021 at 18:41 | comment | added | Yaakov Ellis | The fix is now live. See here for details. | |
| Sep 14, 2021 at 18:40 | history | edited | Yaakov Ellis | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
completed
|
| Sep 2, 2021 at 18:05 | comment | added | Yaakov Ellis | Proposed fix is detailed here | |
| Sep 2, 2021 at 17:32 | history | edited | Yaakov Ellis | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
planned
|
| Sep 2, 2021 at 10:08 | comment | added | Yaakov Ellis | @user253751 I never said that it was impossible. Read the other comments please. Will be posting shortly on proposed solution. | |
| Sep 2, 2021 at 10:04 | comment | added | Stack Exchange Supports Israel | @YaakovEllis at least you recognize it is not impossible, just that it is impossible without making larger changes to the codebase. | |
| Aug 31, 2021 at 16:58 | comment | added | Yaakov Ellis | @ouflak no that has not changed | |
| Aug 31, 2021 at 16:08 | comment | added | ouflak | @IvanOlshansky, That might be ok for larger sites with considerable participation in the review queues, but on the smaller sites where it can literally take years to get to Reviewer or Steward, that can be the same 'kick-in-the-teeth' if they were just a few away from that half-way mark. I think the only reasonable suggestion would be a one-time roll through the FP queue to just dole out the First Questions and First Answers accordingly. I'm not so sure I'm convinced that a one-time-runs script like that has to complicate the rest of the code as Yaakov Ellis says. But we can only assume so. | |
| Aug 31, 2021 at 15:31 | comment | added | ouflak | @YaakovEllis, I don't think badges are taken away ever. Has that changed? | |
| Aug 29, 2021 at 3:40 | comment | added | Vincent Thacker |
@YaakovEllis To be clearer, what I meant is that you changed Low Quality Posts to Low Quality Answers without changing either the review count or review history. Why couldn't you also change First Posts to First Answers in exactly the same way, while creating a new First Questions queue? For example, if I had 800 reviews on First Posts, the outcome would be 800 for First Answers and 0 for First Questions. Are there technical differences behind the queues that make such a similar change impossible?
|
|
| Aug 29, 2021 at 3:14 | comment | added | Ivan Olshansky | @YaakovEllis, You can make a one-time gesture of goodwill: give the "Steward" badge to all those who have managed to go more than half the way from "Reviewer" to "Steward" (more than 625 reviews). And similarly - for those who have passed more than half the way to the "Reviewer" (125 reviews). For those who were only at the beginning of the path, the loss of the rating is not so painful. But those who were close to the new sign are now experiencing great sadness and disappointment. It is your moral duty to help them. | |
| Aug 28, 2021 at 19:30 | comment | added | Yaakov Ellis | @VincentThacker that is another option - pretend that FIrst Posts never happened, transfer the entire history to First Questions/Answers (though the queue actions dont line up exactly, so need UI updates for that). That would mean though that some people who earned badges for First Posts would lose them if they split their reviews between First Q/A. | |
| Aug 28, 2021 at 19:29 | comment | added | Yaakov Ellis | @thedefault. we can show vote counts for < 1000 rep, but it adds a lot of overhead to the system (expensive query), so need to be cautious how much we open it up. We can also solve it here - nothing is impossible, but there are always costs associated with greatly complicating code, some different edge cases that also have to be considered. | |
| Aug 28, 2021 at 8:35 | comment | added | Vincent Thacker | Why not just turn the First Posts queue into either the First Questions or First Answers queue, like what was done for Low Quanlity Answers? That way, the First Posts count will still be retained as one of the two new queues. | |
| Aug 28, 2021 at 3:30 | comment | added | the default. | @YaakovEllis What technical reasons are there? The same as for showing vote counts without 1000 reputation, "we don't have the code for this"? If I can look at a user's review history and manually count questions and answers, obviously, a program can do the same. | |
| Aug 27, 2021 at 9:11 | comment | added | Lars Bosteen | @YaakovEllis Thanks for "going back to the drawing board", that's good to hear. | |
| Aug 27, 2021 at 8:49 | comment | added | Yaakov Ellis | @zovits yes, it is | |
| Aug 27, 2021 at 8:46 | comment | added | zovits | @YaakovEllis Is it really more complicated than introducing a new field for each user which contains a fixed value (of the progress achieved before the transition) and adding this to the end result of the existing calculation? | |
| Aug 27, 2021 at 7:28 | comment | added | Yaakov Ellis | @luuklag "arbitrarily populating a field" would require completely rewriting the badge logic for this badge. It is something to consider, but it is not trivial. | |
| Aug 27, 2021 at 7:25 | comment | added | Yaakov Ellis | @LarsBosteen yes, it did occur to us. Yes, we talked about this (and the different options) before launch. I made the call then that we would not initially be able to transfer progress from one queue to the other. The reaction here is making us go back to the drawing board. | |
| Aug 27, 2021 at 7:03 | comment | added | Lars Bosteen | @YaakovEllis "we'll be thinking about other potential approaches to this that could address the request". While it's good to know that you might still do something about this, didn't it occur to staff that users might just be a little upset to have their work / time wiped out like this? Didn't anyone think 'Hmm, maybe we should respect the time and effort that people have invested before we split this review queue'? And what assurance do users have that staff won't do something else in the future which will negate users' time & effort, without any warning (as far as I can tell)? | |
| Aug 27, 2021 at 6:49 | comment | added | Luuklag | @YaakovEllis how about deciding on a fixed percentage (ratio between FQ and FA in the old queue) and arbitrarely populating a field with those numbers as progress towards the new badges? | |
| Aug 27, 2021 at 4:49 | history | edited | Yaakov Ellis | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
review
|
| Aug 26, 2021 at 18:43 | history | edited | Thomas Markov | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 163 characters in body
|
| Aug 26, 2021 at 17:36 | comment | added | Yaakov Ellis | @ThomasMarkov best to reword as a feature request if you can | |
| Aug 26, 2021 at 17:14 | comment | added | Anita Taylor | Seconding what @YaakovEllis just said. We want to be fair. We'll give some thought to a solution and reply back to this post. | |
| Aug 26, 2021 at 16:14 | comment | added | Thomas Markov | @YaakovEllis Should I reword my answer as a proper feature request, something like "feature request: dont abandon progress toward steward", or is this fine as is? | |
| Aug 26, 2021 at 16:11 | comment | added | Yaakov Ellis | This was my recommendation, as the dev who worked on it. There are technical reasons why we can't carry over the first posts counts to count towards first questions/answers scores. That said, we'll be thinking about other potential approaches to this that could address the request. | |
| Aug 26, 2021 at 14:40 | comment | added | animuson StaffMod | @EmilJeřábek I happen to be familiar with how the badge award scripts work and know that it is not anywhere nearly as simple as you think it is. Nor do I think there is much value in people continuing to try to think up ways that it "might be easier" because it's really not. So I'll just leave it at not possible. | |
| Aug 26, 2021 at 14:31 | comment | added | Sarov | While not 'ideal', what about just dividing the First Posts progress by 2 (round down) and then adding that amount of progress to both First Answers and First Questions? So that 451/1000 would turn into 225/1000 and 225/1000. | |
| Aug 26, 2021 at 14:28 | comment | added | animuson StaffMod | @EmilJeřábek That would be literally more impossible of a task than moving things. | |
| Aug 26, 2021 at 14:26 | comment | added | Emil Jeřábek | @animuson So change the criteria for badges related to First answer and First question queues such that they count tasks both in the queue itself and in the First posts queue. This should be much easier than moving tasks around in the database. | |
| Aug 26, 2021 at 14:13 | comment | added | caird coinheringaahing | @kristinalustig That doesn't really answer the question. I doubt anyone expected their badges earned in FP to be removed, but we are wondering if the literal years of progress and effort we put into the FP queue will be remembered with the changes, rather than just wiped clean | |
| Aug 26, 2021 at 14:13 | comment | added | animuson StaffMod | @TylerH It is not. It is calculated by counting the number of tasks you've completed in the queue, so granting progress would require moving all the tasks between queues, which has the potential to break a lot of things since the queues are similar but functionally different. | |
| Aug 26, 2021 at 14:12 | comment | added | TheSimpliFire | @kristinalustig I think what Thomas asked for was the transfer of counts onto the new system, since First Posts = First Questions + First Answers and nothing more. | |
| Aug 26, 2021 at 14:10 | comment | added | kristinalustig StaffMod | Badges you've already earned for First Posts will still be there but you won't be able to earn further badges as you won't be able to complete further reviews. | |
| Aug 26, 2021 at 13:57 | comment | added | TylerH | It would be nice if they took the effort to split out your progress on this queue so that you had it applied to the two new queues created from it, but I don't know if that amount of work is feasible. | |
| Aug 26, 2021 at 13:50 | history | answered | Thomas Markov | CC BY-SA 4.0 |