So I was going through the First Posts review queue, and got trapped by a "honey pot" post after voting up an answer. Oops, this is embarrassing! Or so I thought, until further inspection:

Robo-reviewer caught in the act?

This actually looks like a decent answer, right? The answer makes reference to an external link, but it quotes the relevant part. Looking at the revision history, it turns out this answer was edited three days after it was originally posted. The original answer appears to have been edited and then deleted; the post was then copied and posted as a new answer, where it received 4 up-votes and was accepted.

The problem is, the honey-pot trap showed the fixed-up version of the post. I'm sure this wasn't intended; evidently some wires got crossed somewhere in the process.

share|improve this question
It's a good post, but not a great one; it's been fixed up by a code copypasta, but without any further explanation of how the code works. Nevertheless, your observation is correct; the audit should have shown you the revision that was deleted. –  Robert Harvey Dec 5 '12 at 4:08
You are not the first to mention this:… –  Toon Krijthe Dec 11 '12 at 9:20
Please don't use that tag on actual bugs, @gnat. –  Shog9 Aug 14 '13 at 19:03
add comment

1 Answer

up vote 8 down vote accepted

We have tweaked the audit tasks to include posts that are much worse than what you see here. We will continue to review these to make sure they are obviously good selections for audit tasks.

share|improve this answer
What about showing them as they existed, before the edit, at the time the flag was cast? The root problem is that we're showing a flag state based on a previous version... –  Jeff Atwood Dec 11 '12 at 20:26
One small part of the tweaks made to audit tasks is the exclusion of posts that have an edit. –  Geoff Dalgas Dec 11 '12 at 21:18
add comment

You must log in to answer this question.

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