-17
$\begingroup$

Just now, I received a request to approve an edit, but it looked really weird. So I chose "reject and edit", and got "Congratulations! This was only a test, designed to make sure you were paying attention. You passed. Next" Congrats, too. You may test your students, but I'm not one of them. Wait for "Next", if you're Methusalem.
Well, that didn't sound like a question until now, but what do you think, am I overly sensitive, seeing it like that?

$\endgroup$

closed as unclear what you're asking by kingW3, Namaste, rschwieb, Shailesh, hardmath Jun 18 '17 at 5:12

Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • $\begingroup$ grin OK, downvotes are easier than arguments, especially since downvoting questions doesn't cost you reputation, but: what are you trying to prove? $\endgroup$ – Professor Vector Jun 17 '17 at 16:59
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ This sounds like the review test which has been around since 2013. At that moment, it is so annoying that I completely stop participating in the review process. I don't know whether it has tuned down the wordings or not. In any event, if you disagree with something, you can just walk away from that particular part of math.SE. There are more than one ways to contribute. $\endgroup$ – achille hui Jun 17 '17 at 17:00
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ downvote on meta doesn't cost any reputation, it simply mean someone is disagreeing with you (for whatever reason). $\endgroup$ – achille hui Jun 17 '17 at 17:01
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @achille hui Thanks for confirming my feelings. Of course, I'm here to contribute (much like you, I guess), but you're absolutely correct, there are other ways, less susceptible to test-happy professors.. $\endgroup$ – Professor Vector Jun 17 '17 at 17:06
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ @ProfessorVector I think this complaint errs on the side of being too pedantic $\endgroup$ – mrnovice Jun 17 '17 at 18:58
  • $\begingroup$ @mrnovice That may well be, but as long people prove my point by downvoting without being able to argue, I can't be totally wrong. Let me quote the rules: "Everyone here is volunteering, and no one responds well to demands for help." Well, I would, but... is it really demanding too much that I should be treated like a grown-up, then? $\endgroup$ – Professor Vector Jun 17 '17 at 20:11
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ What exactly is your problem with the test? $\endgroup$ – kingW3 Jun 17 '17 at 20:30
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ @ProfessorVector You seem to be very hostile,I don't know what this is about and I don't want to insinuate what it is,if you're asking for discussion please explain what do you want to discuss. $\endgroup$ – kingW3 Jun 17 '17 at 20:52
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ "If what I wrote there isn't clear enough, feel free to ask." Didn't @kingW3 do just that? $\endgroup$ – quid Jun 17 '17 at 21:08
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ @ProfessorVector I didn't get an answer,is your answer no I won't clarify what I mean? If it is it really contradicts the feel free to ask as I already asked twice. $\endgroup$ – kingW3 Jun 17 '17 at 21:20
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ If you feel you're "above" tolerating some of MSE's protocols, you can leave the site altogether. Oh, and to answer your only question, I wouldn't describe you as "oversensitive", but rather as having too much hubris. $\endgroup$ – Namaste Jun 17 '17 at 23:32
  • $\begingroup$ I'm not a downvoter, but I've voted to close because I can't see what question is being raised. Audits of the review queues have been discussed here and on Meta.SE about as long as they've been implemented (which is about as long as SE has been here). So please take this as constructive feedback and consider if literally you meant to ask "am I overly sensitive, seeing it like that?" $\endgroup$ – hardmath Jun 18 '17 at 5:16
11
$\begingroup$

You are not alone in getting a bit irritate by these tests, and the wording chosen by SE is typically to the more playful side, which does not go over well with everybody.

However, there is some point in having such tests, as it offers at least something of defense against users blindly and irresponsibly clicking through.

I prefer the occasional test, even it may feel a bit silly, over more bad edits getting approved.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I'm afraid I didn't put that precisely enough: I don't have to wait for approval, I edit (or approve). But I didn't get the reputation needed for that out of nothing. So would it be fair to expect that at least the wording (cited above, literally) could be toned down a little bit? I mean "be nice" shouldn't be reserved for users. I do know about the responsibility. And rest assured, I won't approve a bad edit, @quid. $\endgroup$ – Professor Vector Jun 17 '17 at 17:15
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I am not sure why you believe that I am talking about anything but tests encountered while doing reviews (of edits). Somewhat tangentially, yet not completely, I am wondering is the "Next" actually part of the explanatory text or is it just what the button you are supposed to press says? Further, I do not see what is not nice about the text. It informs you that you passed and even congratulates you. Alright, one could take it as ironic or demeaning to be congratulated for this minimal achievement, but why be so negative. $\endgroup$ – quid Jun 17 '17 at 18:07
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Sorry, but "I do not see" is an argument better reserved for your oculist. I think the condescending "you passed" is the main obstacle, most people I know are glad they left that behind. Even if those tests are necessary, I could think of several versions to word that in a moderately civil manner. $\endgroup$ – Professor Vector Jun 17 '17 at 18:37
  • $\begingroup$ Have left what behind? Passing tests? If you are so aghast of this context, maybe you should reconsider your user-name. :-) $\endgroup$ – quid Jun 17 '17 at 18:44
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ It is an empirically established fact that users that "did something to deserve that reputation" still might approve poor edits. Thus, these tests are in place. $\endgroup$ – quid Jun 17 '17 at 19:30
  • $\begingroup$ Then I do not understand the relevance of "people getting the reputation for approving edits did something to deserve that reputation." $\endgroup$ – quid Jun 17 '17 at 20:45
  • $\begingroup$ (Bad edits will always be approved. You probably want to say that "over bad edits getting approved more often", or something like that...) $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila Jun 17 '17 at 22:36
  • $\begingroup$ @Asaf yes, yes. But I sense some ambiguity in "Bad edits will always be approved." too? ;-) $\endgroup$ – quid Jun 18 '17 at 0:49
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @ProfessorVector Given the language you've used in this comment thread, I find it extremely ironic that you complain about the site test notices being condescending. $\endgroup$ – David Richerby Apr 3 '18 at 11:13

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