Podcast #128: We chat with Kent C Dodds about why he loves React and discuss what life was like in the dark days before Git. Listen now.

Hot answers tagged

61

Regardless of the practical consequences (or lack thereof) of your actions, there's one part of your complaint that I agree with: I find this a bit offensive, to be honest. It is! It's an unnecessarily sanctimonious phrasing in a message from a system that is known to have false positives on a semi-regular basis. The context in which this message is ...


45

So I hit "skip" the majority of the time. Is this sort of behavior OK? More than that. If you are not sure whether an edit is good and should be approved or not, "Skip" is exactly the button you should push (similarly for the other review tasks). Usually, there are other people who will know whether it should be approved or rejected (though not all of them ...


31

If the suggested edit produces garbage, like in the above cases, I would happily reject. If I didn't have enough energy to properly edit myself, but a small amount of excess energy, I would probably include a custom reject reason -- at least it was understood (if not pretty) that $x^{2.5}$ was meant in the original post, but such a proposed edit certainly ...


29

The idea behind rejecting an edit as it "[d]isguises the author's non-fluency in English" is others could take the fact that the poster is not fluent in English into account in their interactions. For example, they could write and answer in simpler English or could use more formulas instead of words when they know the asker is not fluent in English. (I ...


25

Not all users actually had the close privilege thus there were not five votes to close even though the review-ticket lists more than five reviews with that recommendation. Likely this distinction should be made more clear on the ticket (as it is done for "delete" vs "recommend delete").


24

When a user account gets deleted, some of its actions (votes, reviews, etc.) sometimes move to the Community account so they will not be nullified (sometimes we do want these to be nullified, in which case the Community user is not assuming ownership on these actions). Sometimes it's easy to just leave some traces of who was that user. But sometimes it's ...


23

Flag, flag, flag, flag, and flag. If you see something wrong, tell the mods. If you see your flag declined, you will know that you may be a bit too sensitive. If you see your flag marked as helpful, you will know that you've done a good thing. For what it is worth moderators can temporarily ban users from review queues. We have used it a few times ...


23

I agree we should be encouraging for attempts by new users to tackle difficult (possibly unanswered) Questions, though these will more often appear in the First Posts review queue. A typical phrase I use is to congratulate them on having chosen "a particularly challenging" unsolved problem for their first post. But if the attempt is inadequate, I think it ...


21

According to Grace Note's answer on meta.SE, answers are put into the late-answer review queue when the following conditions are satisfied the answer was posted at least 30 days after the question was asked, and the answer was posted by a user who has 10 or less reputation (disregarding suspension). In particular, it does not check the reputation of the ...


21

A couple of points to consider: It takes five votes to close any question. If everyone saves their votes for some greater need, nothing gets closed. Do your share and vote. It's a community effort, and you have done a helpful share by giving 20 votes in a day. Some closure decisions are trivial, some are hard. If you're in a hurry, help with the trivial ...


20

The only consequences of failed audits can be a temporary and short-lived review ban if this happens multiple times within a short duration. Even if this does happen, you can still vote to close questions you find elsewhere. As you have just noticed, the system isn't perfect hence why the penalty is so small. It's just to prevent people from mindlessly ...


20

An experience I recently had might answer this. I was so misled by a question title that I went ahead and spent half an hour writing an answer to the wrong thing, which I then had to discard. So I edited the question title, to save anyone else being similarly misled. The first reviewer accepted the edit. The second reviewer rejected it. The third reviewer ...


19

I think this would be a very good feature. It happens to me too often that rejecting an edit is already too late - it was approved by other users. Even though there were much more obvious issues to address than removing a tag or adding two dollar signs. An example from a couple of hours ago: an edit changed "Leibnitz" to "Liebnitz" and was quickly approved....


19

Because the post has a positive score. According to Shog9's answer on Is “recommend deletion” secretly a vote to delete? Yes, a sufficient number of delete recommendations (currently 6 on most sites, 4 on Stack Overflow) will cause the post to be deleted immediately, provided it has zero or negative score. (If it has a positive score, it will raise an ...


18

I would say either is fine. From what I've seen, questions which are correctly-formatted and worded are almost always reasonable. The main purpose of the First Posts queue is to catch posts from users who don't understand how to use the system or are intentionally abusing it.


18

This is the result of a very recent change to the way answers enter that queue. Previously, the conditions were: the answer was posted at least 30 days after the question was asked; and the answer's author has at most 10 rep. It appears that condition (2) has been altered to the answer's author has at most 50 rep. As before, it doesn't matter how old ...


16

Ask the answerer in a comment to expand their answer a bit, and explain that the idea of the site is that in general an answer is not just a link or a reference to a source that gives an actual answer. Yet, at least for the time being, I would let the answer stand; it does appear to provide some potentially useful information (the reference is quite precise, ...


15

Apparently "YES!" Just today a relatively new member came up with the bright idea of removing the "soft-question" tag from a few dozen "ancient" questions. In some cases the edit was ok, in some it was questionable, in yet others it was IMHO wrong. I approved some of them early on, but then I caught on that this is what the entire review queue was all about....


15

I find myself being a newbie who answered a question long after the problem was debated. I thought on one hand that people will keep calling up that old issue and find a more versatile answer - I consider my answer as a real contribution since I've done some research on the topic already. On the other hand I wanted to get my first reputation points to be ...


14

The description of the custodian badge says: Completed at least one review task. This badge is awarded once per review type. Whenever a suggested edit is made, the owner of the post receives the notification about the edit and he is asked to review it (even if he has reputation lower then 2k+) and his vote is binding, see: How do suggested edits work? ...


14

No, you did right. That's not an answer in any way, and voting to delete it is the correct action. The poor audit system was misled by the post having a score of +5. Since it doesn't know any mathematics, the only criterion it has to pick posts for audits is the vote tally. Sometimes that leads to wrong-headed audits. But that's at least as much an issue ...


13

Nope, there is no mechanism involving "unresolving" flags handled by a moderator, once that moderator has resigned. There is no bug, either. All that's going on is that someone is flagged stuff that had previously been "resolved", but someone thinks "No, it hasn't". For example, while that post author's merge situation has been resolved, there are still ...


13

I quote from Shog9 (emphasis mine): Currently, this means that a closed question will automatically be added to the reopen queue when it is... ...Edited (body edits only) within 5 days of closure by the author. Or, ...Edited (body edits only) within 5 days of closure by a 3rd-party, provided the editor has not also flagged the question or voted ...


13

This question seems half-way based on a false premise (although this is quite understandable). Let me try to explain what is happening. I assume we are talking about this review There are two unrelated things happening that make this confusing. Some items in the review-queues are audits and just there to test if you are reviewing carefully/correctly. ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible