2

While going through the review queue I was shown the first answer of a new user, correct, well explained and perfectly formatted. I thought this was strange, so I opened the original question page and found the identical answer posted by an experienced user. I upvoted this answer and flagged the answer in the review with the comment "identical copy of existing answer".

Then I was told that this was a test and I didn't pass! Didn't pass because I take the reviewing seriously and identified a case of plagiatism? If you do such tests, then don't link to the real question, but also to a fake question site where this answer is shown as posted by a new user. I would gladly have upvoted it then.

  • Was the post you saw in review the actual upvoted answer, or was it actually plagiarism? – Zanna Sep 19 '17 at 6:34
  • No, it just seemed to be plagiarism: It was shown as unvoted first answer by user X, while in the full question page I saw the already upvoted answer by user Y, so it appeared to be plagiarism. If it had not been a test, it would have been correct to flag it. – Philippos Sep 19 '17 at 6:48
  • 1
  • I think, when you get more used to review audits, you'll find the link to the real post useful - in general clicking it gives the game away – Zanna Sep 19 '17 at 7:16
  • Well, I'm pretty used to reviewing from a sister site. That's why I got sceptical and followed the link to the original post. Only following that link led to the "failing". If reviewer should be encouraged to read the whole context, the "game" should be played to the end by not linking to the real original, but to a generated fake matching the review version. – Philippos Sep 19 '17 at 7:34
  • I don't think U&L has review audits. I would hate for the link to point to a fake post! – Zanna Sep 19 '17 at 9:56
  • Correct, it hasn't and doesn't seem to need. But I don't want to reduce the quality of my reviews (ignore plagiarism) because of the audits. That's what this question is about. – Philippos Sep 19 '17 at 10:21
8

This happens often enough: a highly upvoted post is shown in review as a 0-score or downvoted post with user information anonymized (or sometimes replaced with an existing user's info, but one different from the OP). The intention, as with most audits, is to see whether you'd judge the post like most users here would.

To that end, visit the actual post, from the link in the sidebar. This will take you to the exact post that's used for the audit. The linked post is highlighted for a brief time when the page loads, the highlighting fades away quickly.

If no post is highlighted, then it's already been deleted and this is an audit. You can safely proceed to apply negative actions to the review post (delete, downvote, etc.).

If a post is highlighted, and the account and scores differ, again an audit. This will usually be an upvoted post, testing that you can recognise good content, so upvote or edit the review post. You're supposed to judge the post purely on its merits independent of other posts*. Considerations of plagiarism don't apply since these are the same post.

If a post is highlighted, and the account is the same, this is not an audit. Review as you would have.


* Which is nonsense. I've seen tons of upvoted crap and I absolutely refuse to click the I understand button after failing those audits. Petty, I know.

  • This doesn't answer my question. I didn't ask for an explanation how to pass the audits. I ask for a change in the auditing system so it doesn't contradict good reviewing habits. – Philippos Sep 20 '17 at 7:30
  • 2
    @Philippos it does: your test for plagiarism is flawed since you didn't check the post link but the question link, and failed to identify that the posts were the same. If you don't see that, maybe you should be failing audits. – muru Sep 20 '17 at 7:35

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .