Timeline for Review queue workflows - Final release
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 28, 2021 at 10:30 | comment | added | Toby Speight |
Perhaps "unattributed" might be a better word than anonymous. Personally, I don't think it should be anonymous anyway - if a new user needs help understanding what's required, they should be able to ask. Attributing comments to Community is as bad as sending emails from [email protected]....
|
|
| Aug 27, 2021 at 13:33 | history | edited | kristinalustigStaffMod | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 21 characters in body
|
| Aug 27, 2021 at 12:23 | comment | added | Ramhound | What’s even the point of providing feedback, if it’s going to be that trivial, to determine who provided the feedback. Might as well just submit it as the user themselves, add a sentence to whatever they typed (no matter what the length is), explaining the feedback was an commentary from the review queue. Revenge downvotes are a real problem especially on Stack Overflow. Users will find any community, they have the ability to downvote contribute, that is shared between the reviewer on themselves | |
| Aug 26, 2021 at 22:33 | comment | added | 41686d6564 | FYI, I had requested highlighting the word "anonymous" and it got a [status-planned]. I just pinged the staff member about this so that they can hopefully take it into account. | |
| Aug 26, 2021 at 22:19 | comment | added | 41686d6564 | If/when the "I'm done" button is restored, the review result could be changed to "Reviewed" (or whatever will be used for "I'm done") instead of "Share feedback". That way, it's not immediately obvious the exact action that the user selected. It could still be inferred if they're the only reviewer or by comparing the time of the comment to the time of the review. | |
| Aug 26, 2021 at 22:01 | history | answered | Ian Campbell | CC BY-SA 4.0 |