-36

This looks like a bug.enter image description here The post is "on hold" for some reason. I can't see why. I said it "Looks OK", just like several others did.

However, I was banned for a week on this puppy.

What the heck is up with this?

By the way, week-long bans are counter-productive. In my case, I just forget about reviewing, and it ends up being a lot longer. The only reason I review is to be a good citizen here. It's work. It isn't fun, and I don't mind skipping it.

7
  • 4
    Don't know why this is downvoted so much. Another user was banned for the same review item, and his meta post was well received. It even sparked a feature request to make the review description more clear: meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/332546/….
    – user000001
    Aug 16, 2016 at 19:24
  • 20
    @user000001 There's a pretty big difference in tone and apparent intent between that post and this one. One expresses confusion and a willingness to learn, and it contains a focused question on what is on- versus off-topic. The other is a "bug report" with an angry, flippant tone and seems to reject the possibility that there is anything to be learned from the situation. The former tends to get a much better reception than the latter.
    – elixenide
    Aug 16, 2016 at 19:28
  • 7
    @user000001 I didn't look into the message but on the roaring title alone I already didn't expect to find a constructive discussion and I was right...
    – rene
    Aug 16, 2016 at 19:29
  • @EdCottrell: That's true, but I still think that we should be a bit more grateful to the people that try to help moderate the site through the review queues, even if they make an occasional mistake here and there.
    – user000001
    Aug 16, 2016 at 19:31
  • 5
    @user000001 I can't speak for everyone here, but I think the problem is that the downvoters are grateful to people who try to help moderate the site through the review queues, but don't appreciate anger and questions with relatively obvious answers. OP wrote, "The post is 'on hold' for some reason. I can't see why," even though the hold message explains exactly why the question is on hold. In other words, the downvotes are probably a response to the "don't help me, I'll help you" tone and the lack of effort put into the question.
    – elixenide
    Aug 16, 2016 at 19:43
  • 11
    @user000001 We should be grateful to people doing a good job of reviewing and who are improving the site with their reviews. Being grateful to people not reviewing properly, and not willing to learn how to review properly, doesn't seem warranted.
    – Servy
    Aug 16, 2016 at 19:43
  • 1
    I edited out the caps, and the post reads a lot more constructively. Might be worth re-reading if you downvoted the first time through. Also, the message doesn't specify a test, so your title is semi incorrect given that the mod flagged you Aug 18, 2016 at 19:51

1 Answer 1

28

The "on hold" message is perfectly clear: that question is off-topic. The question really is about server administration, so it really is off-topic, and "Looks OK" was definitely the wrong choice.

Also, you weren't banned automatically by the system. You were banned by a moderator who saw that you were reviewing posts incorrectly.

In short, this isn't a bug; it's user (reviewer) error.

4
  • Oooookaaaay...if you say so. I admit that I did not review the question as pertaining to being "on-topic" for the board (which can be a VERY fuzzy area on these various sites). However, it's just easier for me to stop reviewing. Not a big loss for me. Aug 16, 2016 at 19:23
  • 18
    @MAGNAWS We're happy to have your help reviewing; it's best if everyone pitches in. But we do ask that you apply the site's rules when reviewing. If you do reviews without worrying about whether or not something is on-topic, you're not helping; you're hurting.
    – elixenide
    Aug 16, 2016 at 19:25
  • 2
    No prob. I'm a bad reviewer, so I'll stop, and leave it to the experts. I'll see if there's anything else I can do to help out. I can mop the floors and clean the toilets. I do tend to have quite a few distractions on my plate, so I'll admit to not "giving this my 100%." A lot of other folks are almost obsessive about their SO membership. I'm not. I don't especially care that much, but this site is extremely useful, and I'm grateful it's here. Cheers. Aug 16, 2016 at 20:30
  • 6
    @MAGNAWS Be aware that you can always skip when you are not completely sure about how to review something.
    – Oriol
    Aug 17, 2016 at 0:39

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .
https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/332584/why-am-i-banned-for-a-failed-test-when-there-was-no-test
meta.stackoverflow.com
CC-MAIN-2024-10
116237
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:P33OVB4ZF6JV3BPJUF72LI23EAGXPOXW
<urn:uuid:ba85d049-c70a-4e90-8ef6-684e19216400>
2024-02-29T11:57:12Z
172.64.155.249
text/html
sha1:3LS65LWHMESKTQOCMMMJULA2PO6SBY7U
<urn:uuid:6110efee-4b90-44ad-a047-e25d5068b2c0>
https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/332584/why-am-i-banned-for-a-failed-test-when-there-was-no-test
response
<urn:uuid:318fc54a-08b5-423b-875a-fbccfaa79657>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2024-10
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for February/March 2024
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-31
software: Apache Nutch 1.19 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.5-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/