I have been noticing that there are more frequent occurrences of the Closed Votes queue getting over 200-items (red-dot).

I have not seen this on any of the other queues.

Should consideration be given to allowing reviewers more than the current 20-reviews max per day on the Closed Votes queue only?

Maybe statistics can be reviewed to see averages and increase the number to say $30-40$?

This is allowing items in the close cycle to stay open longer, which almost seems to go against the purpose of the queue.

  • 8
    $\begingroup$ Great question! I've always just thrown up my hands and sighed in frustration when I see such numbers of close votes in the review queue, even after I've "put in my 20 reviews" in for any given day. $\endgroup$ – amWhy Nov 15 '17 at 22:07
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @amWhy: I agree, there are many excellent reviewers such as yourself that fill their quota of 20. I think these reviewers should be able to do twice as many and maybe there is a rule that the folks that can do this have a rep = ... in order to even qualify to do more reviews. $\endgroup$ – Moo Nov 15 '17 at 22:20
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ If it ever gets over 1000, we'll get 40 reviews per day. $\endgroup$ – Glorfindel Nov 18 '17 at 10:01
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Glorfindel: Is that an update as I don't recall it being the norm? $\endgroup$ – Moo Nov 18 '17 at 13:16
  • $\begingroup$ It has been so for years on Stack Overflow (where the queue regularly reaches 10k entries). They’ve done some experimenting with other queues as well, e.g. for Triage the 40 reviews already kicks in at a queue size of 150. $\endgroup$ – Glorfindel Nov 18 '17 at 13:20
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @amWhy: I have seen that you reach 20/day frequently, Have you noticed the above behavior? $\endgroup$ – Moo Nov 18 '17 at 13:23
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Moo I don't think Math.SE ever had more then $1000$ reviews pending for one queue. $\endgroup$ – kingW3 Nov 18 '17 at 15:03
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It happens at least once, when policy changed @kingW3 $\endgroup$ – user99914 Nov 18 '17 at 17:07
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @Moo The numbers do get high; I know that (only once in Jan. this year, when I went on a "reviewing strike" how crucial it is to have committed reviewers. It would be great if the "burden/maintenance" would be spread more widely, but some active answerers are too caught up in chasing rep and answering (often questions needing closure) that they take for granted the work behind the scenes that makes there rep chase possible, to begin with. So I believe that it makes sense to grant extra review privileges to those with a gold badge in a given queue. $\endgroup$ – amWhy Nov 18 '17 at 22:14
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ But yes, there've been times when the numbers waiting in the queue become astronomical, virtually undermining the intention of review queues in the first place. $\endgroup$ – amWhy Nov 18 '17 at 22:16
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Well, you must strike often, @MartinArgerami, because I think half the votes to "leave open" absurd, and often cast by the answerers of proposed PSQs $\endgroup$ – amWhy Nov 18 '17 at 23:54
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Perhaps if more people reviewed, there'd be fewer closed questions? You are retreating from the fact that there are too many questions/answers in the review queue as compared to the number of users who actually care to review. I only occasionally see you, @MartinArgerami, in the review queue. Put your money where your mouth is, and spend more time. And get over the "idiotic" audits we all confront. $\endgroup$ – amWhy Nov 19 '17 at 0:00
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ There you go, @MartinArgerami! If you don't want to be part of the solution, then don't post noise in this thread. $\endgroup$ – amWhy Nov 19 '17 at 0:36
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ @amWhy: I offered you the other side of the problem (a huge number of frivolous closing votes) and you choose to berate me. If you want to negate that problem, then yes, I'll leave you alone to solve it. $\endgroup$ – Martin Argerami Nov 19 '17 at 0:38
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @MartinArgerami If you would not have negated the problem ("No thanks": Choosing not to be a part of the solution to the problem, and only simply a naysayer attacking those who want to be a part of the solution), I'd have no reason to comment as I did. You were the one who opted out, and berated yourself. When you're active in the review queue, regularly and vote as you see fit, that's how you offer the "other side of the problem." Empty words and claims have little value when you don't behave accordingly. So stop complaining, and start contributing, "close" or "leave open"... $\endgroup$ – amWhy Nov 19 '17 at 0:50

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .