For anyone finding this later: the short answer on per-category review queue is that it depends on one thing, and the rest of the thread is people identifying which thing.
0 likes 1mo
Meta · Feature requests · continued
Request: a per-category review queue posts 61–90
This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1.
Understood. Thank you for being specific about the limits of it.
0 likes 1mo
Staff post. Actions described here are recorded in the public moderation log and may be challenged in Meta.
Staff view: this is a good request and a larger one than it looks, because the citation is currently a link rather than a relationship. Recording it properly is the work, displaying it is trivial.
20 likes 1mo
Nardone, post #25: Modest request: remember my sort preference per category rather than globally. I want newest in announcements and most-replies in analytics, permanently. I would put a moderate confidence on that and no more. Go to post
Taking post #61 at face value and following it one step further.
Small request: let me filter Latest by whether I have read the topic. Unread exists as a tab and does not combine with anything else, so a busy category is either all of it or none.
I read post #61 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.
Adding the boring version of per-category review queue, because the interesting version keeps getting posted and the boring one is usually right.
Check the ordinary explanations, in order, and stop when one of them accounts for what you are seeing. Most of the time the second one does.
0 likes 30d
Duplicate requests: if several people request the same feature, the requests often get merged. Check whether your feature has already been suggested before posting.
Somebody will have a better source than mine, and I hope they post it.
28 likes 30d
a.adeyemi, post #34: Second-hand on per-category review queue, so weight it accordingly — someone whose method I trust told me this and I have not verified it myself. Go to post
Where I have landed on per-category review queue, having got it wrong once in public: the direction is clear, the magnitude is not, and anyone quoting a precise magnitude has borrowed it from somewhere that did not measure it.
j.petrov, post #19: Adding the measurement that post #17 says would settle it. I have been on both sides of the per-category review queue argument in this category within eighteen months, which should tell you how strong the evidence for either side is. Go to post
I would use that constantly. The objection is presumably that it is data the site then has to hold and protect for no benefit to anyone else.
t.varga, post #26: Appreciated. The plain phrasing does more work here than a longer post would. Go to post
Request from the analytics side: allow a table in a post to be marked as data rather than layout, so it can be copied without the formatting. Half the tables here are worth pasting into a spreadsheet.
Post #69 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.
Modest request: remember my sort preference per category rather than globally. I want newest in announcements and most-replies in analytics, permanently.
Reading it again, the caveat matters more than the finding.
21 likes 28d
Tamburello, post #21: Request with a caveat attached: a compare view for two vendor pages side by side. The caveat is that it would encourage exactly the ranking-by-number reading the pages are written to discourage. That is what the documentation says. What happens in practice is usually close. Go to post
What I can speak to on per-category review queue is narrow, so I will keep it narrow rather than generalising from it. Beyond that boundary I do not know.
week_three, post #37: Post #36 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit. Request from the analytics side: allow a table in a post to be marked as data rather than layout, so it can be copied without the formatting. Half the tables here are worth pasting into a spreadsheet. The short answer was in the first line; everything after… Go to post
Deprecation requests: if you think a feature should be removed or changed, that is also a request. Explain why you think it would improve the site.
Reading it back, the second half matters more than the first.
This follows post #72 rather than contradicting it.
Request with the use case rather than the feature. I frequently want every topic that cites a particular maintained document. At the moment I can find the document from the topic and not the reverse.
I would want to see it done twice before believing it once.
21 likes 26d
Worth separating two things that post #70 runs together.
Summarising the per-category review queue thread so far, since it is long and the answer is buried: the first reply has the method, the fourth has the correction to it, and the rest is people agreeing at length.
0 likes 26d
Staff post. Actions described here are recorded in the public moderation log and may be challenged in Meta.
I had written a reply contradicting post #74 and deleted it. Here is what survived.
That reframing is better than the original request and staff would consider it. Which is a good illustration of why these belong in public: the first version would have been declined and the third is worth building.
Two sources, same conclusion, and I could not rule out that one copied the other.
6 likes 25d
Seconded. It reads as careful rather than confident, which is the right register.
15 likes 25d
The failure mode on per-category review queue is boring rather than dramatic. It is almost always the step everyone assumes was done correctly because it is too simple to get wrong.
30 likes 24d
Post #76 is the version of this I will quote in future. One addition.
Request with a caveat attached: a compare view for two vendor pages side by side. The caveat is that it would encourage exactly the ranking-by-number reading the pages are written to discourage.
0 likes 24d
Nardone, post #25: Modest request: remember my sort preference per category rather than globally. I want newest in announcements and most-replies in analytics, permanently. I would put a moderate confidence on that and no more. Go to post
Request that would help newcomers more than regulars: show the subcategory description on hover in the category list. The names are terse and the descriptions are good.
Everything in post #79 holds. The case it does not cover is the one I have.
An honest declaration on per-category review queue: I have a prior here and it is strong enough that you should weight what I say downward. Stating it rather than hiding it.
0 likes 23d
Narrowing post #79, because the general version has more than one answer.
Having read the whole per-category review queue thread before replying: the question in the first post has not actually been answered yet, and three of us have answered a nearby one instead.
0 likes 22d
resistance_first, post #58: Where the per-category review queue reasoning breaks down for me is the step from the group result to the individual case. That step is almost never argued for. Go to post
Staff post. Actions described here are recorded in the public moderation log and may be challenged in Meta.
That is exactly the objection, and it is not a refusal on principle. Anything the site stores about you is something the site has to look after, and the bar for adding a new category of that is high.
The variance between people here is larger than the effect being discussed.
The arithmetic in post #83 is right; the assumption feeding it is the part to check.
Small methodological point on per-category review queue: repeating a measurement is cheap and resolves most of what is being argued about here at no cost to anyone.
25 likes 21d
preregistered, post #52: Everything in post #48 holds. The case it does not cover is the one I have. Use case: explain why you think the feature would help. "I would use this to..." makes the request concrete. Adding this to the thread rather than to the wiki, because I am not confident enough for the wiki. Go to post
This settles it for me, at least until somebody posts a reason it should not.
Collapsed as off-topic by two members at trust level 3 or above
Community support: if other people support your request, they can reply with "+1" or "I would use that too". Widely-requested features are prioritised.
Noting that I have skin in this question and have tried to discount for it.
Staff post. Actions described here are recorded in the public moderation log and may be challenged in Meta.
Staff view: this is a good request and a larger one than it looks, because the citation is currently a link rather than a relationship. Recording it properly is the work, displaying it is trivial.
Not a conclusion. A place to stand while looking for one.
0 likes 19d
c.dahlberg, post #13: Building on post #10 rather than restating it. The practical version of per-category review queue is three sentences long. The rigorous version is three pages and reaches the same conclusion with the conditions attached. Go to post
Small request: let me filter Latest by whether I have read the topic. Unread exists as a tab and does not combine with anything else, so a busy category is either all of it or none.
One more caveat and then I will stop qualifying: the sample selected itself.