DR think youre overreacting/ out of line. TvdZ already said sorry, maybe you missed that...? ie an actual human expr of remorse? all reviews are reversible, right? by higher rep users? so maybe get your panties out of a knot somehow on all that.
@vzn Reviews can only be undone in the sense that it's always possible to go back and un-edit edits that were made (for some reason, there's no rollback on tag wiki edits). Undoing the effects of bad reviewing is much more effort than just clicking "No action needed" multiple times.
And, sure, Tom apologised but what annoyed me about that is that he apologised for the minor issue of not knowing exactly what tag wiki entries are, rather than the major issue of not even reading the material he reviewed.
@DavidRicherby I get your disappointment/anger, but please don't disregard the "assume best intentions"-paradigm completely. That said, I second your confusion. Five edits in 19s does not imply "bad review" but rather "no review", @TomvanderZanden.
SE gives zero rep credit for reviews. makes one wonder. it doesnt seem likely anyone is motivated much by earning badges. maybe anger over reviews will have the inadvertent effect/ unintended consequence of discouraging volunteers/ effort. "bad volunteer!"
@vzn If somebody volunteers to a piece of work and then does it so badly that other volunteers must not only spend time fixing it, but must spend more time fixing it than they would have needed to just do the work themselves then, yes, that was bad volunteering.
That doesn't mean the volunteer is a bad person, but it does mean that their voluntary action made the situation worse rather than better.
DR, you raised the issue in harsh/ nondiplomatic way, the person quickly responded in an adult way without negativity/ hostility/ adversarial tone to behave differently and does it serve anything productive to continue to harp on this further? how many minutes does it take to fix the tags? and how many minutes have been spent with grievances/ complaining?
@vzn It only takes a minute to fix the tag wikis, but if people keep making the same mistakes, and you multiply that minute by the number of times you have to do it again and again, it ends up being a lot of time. Hence letting people know that they're getting it wrong and asking them to pay more attention isn't just the right thing to do, it's also a time saver.
Therefore, @DavidRicherby, thank you for bringing up these issues.
@vzn I don't think you understand the reason people volunteer to do things. There is more in life than numbers next to one's name.
this isn't rigorous, an arbitrarily slow f won't be computed in constant time, but you can do things like Ackerman, busy beaver, etc. that grow extremely fast with very little memory requirement
← lol, far fewer lines in chat than the accusers, as a "lecture". endlessly marvels at how much SE angst is associated with tag wikis by (some high rep!) ppl who dont seem to fully understand the concept
@Gilles we are all volunteers here. we all choose our focuses differently. what is that buzzword for it in academia? diversity :) am obviously (long!) in favor of good cyber hygiene, but am also in favor of civility.
