Hot answers tagged

13

Please vote to close (or not) based on the question in its current form. This is especially important with migrations (“belongs on …”), because having a question migrated then closed is a far worse experience than closed on-site. When a question is migrated from site A to site B, it is closed and locked on site A and created open on site B. If site B closes ...


10

This sort of thing happens all the time. Enough rejects from reviewers helps prevent them doing it after a short while. In short, no anomaly, it's very common. You, and reviewers like you help prevent it being a problem.


7

You just made the first step, and hopefully, our reviewers also read our meta. Agreed, suggesting edits from same person accounts could be used to gain site reputation (say, only 10 reputation points are needed to remove new user restrictions, i.e. only 5 suggested edits which, if they were made on same user contributions, the same user can approve from ...


6

It was not auto-flagged but flagged by users.


6

Down votes are, in fact, one indication that reviewers are doing their jobs. One of the review actions that you can take on a first or late post is indeed to up or down vote the post. It stands to reason then, that posts with a lot of down votes are simply poor quality posts, and not in indication of a lack of proper review. This is in fact why we have ...


6

The rejection reason “too minor” was introduced for several reasons: Edits bump a post on the home page, giving the thread more attention. This is desirable in case something major has changed, but not to fix a typo. Suggested edits cost time for the reviewers. Each edit used to bring the post closer to community wiki status — but as you note this is no ...


5

In my eyes, you took over the question. In your own words, you "removed an incorrect statement", which is beyond the scope of an editor. You also doubled the word count of the question (from 78 words to 143 words). In your other linked edit that was rejected, you also made sweeping changes. When someone writes, they have a tone, a voice, and hidden ...


4

In my opinion, new users aren't gaming the system. Instead, they are confused by the multiple login options provided... perhaps they are at a different computer and log in using FB on one, and Google on the other. I know from personal experience that it's a pain to authorize a new workstation if multifactor and other security controls are set up. ...


4

Reputation gains from edits work only up to 2000 rep. An industrious user may pull it off once or twice (subject to actually doing 1000 edits, that all get accepted -- this is hard work), but repeated merges with accounts at 2000 rep ought to attract some attention. This is low-grade gaming. I don't see it as a major threat.


4

I'm pretty sure that orange icon displays the number of reviews waiting in the queues to which you have privileges - e.g. since you don't yet have close privileges you wont be seeing that queue. On the other hand, you should be seeing the number of reviews in the suggested edits, and etc queues - which you probably do, since these are usually quite small and ...


4

I think that is a good idea. I am one of the persons who accepted that particular edit. I simply did not think about googling to see if it was a copy paste. Had there been a friendly reminder in the top bar (when you click more) I would probably have done so.


3

I fully read your edit, and it was not appropriate as an answer - in fact the key bit you edited in (that I removed) was a new question. Leaving it to be deleted, as @Servy mentioned, would have been the correct action in this case.


3

The edit failed to improve the post in any way. The link was for illustration purposes, and whether it was HTTPS or HTTP was immaterial, and the comments suggesting it be changes were irrelevant. Discussion of protecting the key with HTTPS might have been relevant, but should have been addressed either by the original answerer, or as a new answer. Changing ...


3

There is a proposed reform of first posts review, which includes the idea of locking posts at some stage of the review to avoid precipitation. This being said, you seem to be confused as to the purpose of reviews. Posts in the review interface are already on the site. (This might change somewhat with the proposed new first posts review process.) Reviews ...


3

This is the user's first post now. The first post review system picks up a user's first non-deleted post on the site. What happened is presumably that the user's first post was deleted, so his second post went into first post review. I guess the intent is to route a user's first posts through review until one sticks — if post 1 is deleted, post 2 should be ...


2

The indicator that you see, as a user with between 2k and 10k reputation, is the number of pending suggested edits. It doesn't indicate anything about other kinds of reviews. There is an indicator for suggested edits because they are more urgent than other kinds of reviews. Sure, it's best to get working on advice to new users, close votes, etc. quickly, but ...


2

As @Xavier59 and @AviD explains in comments, this is not a bug. When a moderator converts an answer to a comment, all the comments to the answer are moved along with it. In this case the moderator didn't notice the autocomment, and it was automatically moved to the question. So nothing strange going on at all.


2

Maybe another way to handle this is to have a script that checks google or other search engines for the text and if it gets a valid hit back rejects the proposed edit(this would sadly have to be server side to prevent people from getting around it). With this a copy pasta version could never go up. The problem is trying to handle small edits to try and ...


2

I've found no technical answer for this, so my best guess is that the answer lies somewhere else. My observations are that the counter now takes into account all review queues from everybody, and pop-ups only when a certain threshold (most probably defined on a per-site basis, each site having different loads, the threshold appearing to be currently set to ...


2

Only some sites have Review audits. Information Security is not one of them. See this answer on the main Meta site which lists the sites which do have them.


1

When I look at the page, I see 38 reviews pending in the Close Vote review queue. (You might be able to see this by yourself by opening a private/incognito window and navigate to https://security.stackexchange.com/review. ) But if you've skipped those 38 review items, the queue will appear empty to you. The red dot is not cached on user level, that would be ...


1

This has been answered over on meta.SE It is the number of pending edit reviews. They may not be accessible to you because of rep, or because you have already reviewed and they are waiting on someone else to review.


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