8
$\begingroup$

Sometimes I follow up on reviews that I made, or reviews on flags that I raised. Often I see the posts ended up deleted, which is good (since it means that I'm not the only one who thought the post was bad).

But often there will be someone marking the post as "Looks OK" or "Leave Open". And a lot of the times, those names are repeating themselves with that behavior. So it feels like someone just going through everything as "Looks OK" and "Leave Open".

Does the system keep track on how many posts you reviewed opposite of the outcome? Does it take action against such users? If not, then do the moderators have tools to track that somehow and take actions against users?

$\endgroup$
  • 8
    $\begingroup$ Yes, moderators track such behaviour and act accordingly. $\endgroup$ – Pedro Tamaroff Aug 1 '15 at 23:15
  • $\begingroup$ That's good to know, Pedro. Thanks! $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Aug 1 '15 at 23:19
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ It can easily appear as though someone always clicks "Leave Open" when there are 74 questions up for close review at a time and most of them are (in the reviewer's opinion) unworthy of a close vote. $\endgroup$ – Matt Samuel Aug 2 '15 at 3:19
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Matt, yes it is possible. But close votes can be made outside the review queue as well, so it's not always that bad. Low quality posts are much harder to remove once they have gone away from the queue. I think that a substantial portion of my disputed flags ended up deleted by moderators or other users on a second-flagging. And if I shouldn't attribute to malice that which can be explained by incompetence, then I would like to both malicious and incompetent reviewers not to review anymore. $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Aug 2 '15 at 6:25
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @MattSamuel What is noteworthy though is that some of those reviewers also have many "No Action Needed" reviews in "First Post"-queue. Now, some might respond perhaps they just find the posts appropriate as they are. Which would be fine. Except, then they might consider casting an up-vote on them (at least on some of them). Beyond that if I'd find myself in a state of opinion where I virtually always click "No Action Needed" in a queue I might just leave that queue to those that might want to take some action rather then to undermine purpose of the queue by seemingly aimlessly clearing it. $\endgroup$ – quid Aug 2 '15 at 12:40
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @quid: Exactly. When I feel that I don't know what to do, I skip. Skipping is there for a reason. Maybe if they also implement prancing, frolicking and running through a meadow, it will help people understand that this is a valid option. Saying you don't know what to do is not something to be ashamed of. $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Aug 2 '15 at 12:58
10
$\begingroup$

Yes, moderators can impose temporary review bans on users. Additionally, the failure of too many review audits can lead to automatic review bans.

Currently it is not particularly easy for moderators to keep tabs on an individual user's review history. There are URLs for an individual user's review history in specific queues, but even I tend to forget how to exactly reach these links. (Bookmarks, bookmarks, everywhere, nor any link to click.) Also, I am unaware of anything that tracks what percentage of a user's choices have gone against the majority opinion.

If you feel that someone has been reviewing in bad faith, it is probably a good idea to flag a post for our attention.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Can you confirm or deny that anyone on the site was ever banned from reviews? $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Aug 3 '15 at 21:52
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @Asaf: Yes, I can confirm or deny that anyone on the site was ever banned from reviews. Logic is fun. (But seriously, some users have been given review bans, but not very many.) $\endgroup$ – user642796 Aug 4 '15 at 5:00

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .