I'm sorry, but that question is not a perfectly fine question for this site.
Serverfault is for questions applicable to professional sysadmins. As soon as you run into "sorry, I can't do this the right way because I don't have admin rights on the server", then the question is one for an end-user. That means the question is not appropriate for this site.
The other have addressed your concerns regarding the content of your question.
In regard to reporting personal issues with a moderator there is a contact button at the bottom of every page. It links to a form which allows you to contact the Community Team.
I read over the question...and you added the bit about not being able to upgrade Fedora 14 after the comments were made.
On ServerFault, we expect askers to have some measure of professional experience with the servers/equipment they work on. Fedora 14 is wayyyy out of date and no-one should really be using this. "I can't upgrade this" doesn't really fly ...
To my understanding canonical questions are a ServerFault convention, of which the review-question selection algorithm is completely unaware.
Which is to say, it had to happen some time. Treat it like any other question.
This rate limit applies to users with less than 125 reputation, and all posts made by anyone from the same IP address on any Stack Overflow or Stack Exchange site count toward the limit, even if they are made by accounts with more than 125 reputation. If someone is sharing your IP address and also posting, then you may see this unexpectedly.
There are ...
It depends on the reputation level of the person whose answer you're reviewing. If they have too low a reputation to be able to post comments, the first option will be used. If they have enough reputation, the second will be used.
Yes, it confirmed by looking of source code of svg file. The xml below was grabbed from svg file especially on SF logo parts.
<rect x="-176.6" y="-178.1" fill="#A7A8AB" width="22" height="4.4"/>
<rect x="-176.6" y="-171" fill="#808284" width="22" height="4.4"/>
<rect x="-176.6" y="-164.4" ...
There's a bug with some localization code - a fix is going out right now.
Also, your vote was properly recorded; the bug only affected any optional display message that might have been sent back to the client.
If I'am not mistaking, it's a Chrome/Chromium bug;
I got the link from that thread; Cannot dismiss scrollbar in code box, blocks view
It show how to bypass the problem too
and you can see shog9 comment's from that thread;
Marking this "support" since it appears to be caused by a toxic
We are a site aiming for professional system administrator.
I can easily understand the downvote for that sentence alone;
don't downvote me if that concerns you and makes you upset, just be a
jerk in the comments section.
Your question could have been good, but don't tell me you didn't expected to be downvoted with such sentence ?
Second point, you ...
The count in the top bar is site-wide, and includes items which you may have already reviewed or skipped, both of which no longer appear for you in the individual queue counts.
There's also caching, but that only lasts a minute or so.
To see the full counts, visit /review while logged out (e.g. in an incognito window).
You got a Review Audit. On those, if the original edit was approved then you can only "pass" the audit by also clicking "looks okay". If you click anything else, including leaving a comment, you fail. It's dumb, but failing makes no difference unless you fail a lot...
This seems to happen once every few months, you're not alone.
Your question was closed by the members of our community on 6th May. It was deleted automatically 2 days ago by the Stack Exchange system due to a combination of:
Having no votes
Having a very low view count
I will undelete the question as I can see you've put some effort into it, but it will still need to be edited for it to hit the re-open ...
I've noticed these over the last month or so - I think (hope) it's just the spam tide coming in and they'll go back out the way they came soon.
The short answer is "Yes, something automated can be done", but it requires a little extra work: If you see that these are from new accounts ping one of the mods and we can nuke the account. Statistics on spam nukes ...
Regular badges will not be revoked except in very special circumstances.
How do "badges" work?
Regular badges, however, once earned, are yours to keep. Even if the criteria by which you earned a badge have changed (the post was deleted, you got downvoted, etc.) you get to keep your badge. If you qualify for the same badge again (another post ...
This must have been an audit as I deleted the Answer a month ago. Unfortunately moderator actions are used as the basis for some of the audits; even when the whole question get filed in the circular bin.
The question is locked and retained for historical significance - from the close reason
This question exists because it has historical significance, but it is not considered a good, on-topic question for this site, so please do not use it as evidence that you can ask similar questions here. This question and its answers are frozen and cannot be changed. ...
The site used to have considerable talent but it mostly moved on when it got bored answering basic questions that already have answers here or are easily found elsewhere, reading manuals as a service (like you want) and generally having to waste too much time wading through those questions to find something interesting.
The site has been in considerable ...
Breaking it down:
Comments are a neutral concept.
Badges for review tasks are dumb and encourage people to do dumb things things.
The devs need the comment action to trigger a pass or fail, because Review Audits are more focused on catching you "gaming the system" than teaching good behavior.
Review Audits are dumb.
The audits do take a little longer to load. If I remember correctly the bad "suggested edit" audits are generated on the fly by inserting junk phrases into otherwise-good posts, and that requires some CPU time to make it happen (in addition to all the other "audit" bookkeeping the system needs to do).
(Good suggested edit audits are pulled from a list of ...
This answer at Meta SE posits that this is OK:
This is, while unusual, an expected result of the system.
The way the late answers queue works is by checking two things.
Was the answer posted at least 30 days after the question was asked?
Was the answer posted by a user who has 10 or less reputation (disregarding suspension)
If both of these are true, it ...
After digging out SEDE once more , I found some explanation why this happened. But still I need SE-dev to finding the root cause of this inconsistency.
Inconsistency when viewing and editing post
The source of the problem lies in dual data source when you edit and view the post. When you view the post, web page pull data from rendered content (with HTML ...
It's just about as killed as killed can get. In fact, vmware is in our list of blacklisted inputs right along side amazon. I'm afraid I don't know how those tags are being translated in the edit screen to those banned tagged. This looks like a bug!
Based on the comments received on this question I believe we can conclude that:
The particular suggested edit can for some reason only be reviewed by moderators.
There is consensus that the edit should be rejected.
Before I flag the answer in question for moderator attention I will wait for a few days to see if anybody else have anything to add about the ...