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.
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.
It's probably a lost cause to try to get people to vote more:
Most mature SE sites suffer from a lack of voting - I've seen comments about it on almost every one I'm somewhat active on. You seem to be talking mostly about voting to close but lack of voting applies across the board: up- and down-voting posts, voting to close, and reviewing close and re-open ...
I disagree. The bar should be exactly as high as it is for everyone else. We're meant to be curating a corpus of high quality Q&A. If you let one class of user get away with low quality Q&A then you have to let other classes do the same (Broken Windows just like here).
The OPs self answer was basically I fixed the problem by reinstalling the ...
Ah nonsense, this was the new "Are you paying attention" crap, which now thinks I didn't pay attention as I clicked "no action needed". There was no action needed, Ian dealt with it already :)
This was the second such test today.
I'll leave this question for reference...
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.
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 ...
Before the close reason reform,
No, it's always been like that. (At least, I'm sure it happened to me before the new close vote reasons were implemented.)
It makes some sense... you have reviews left, so you could pick "Leave Open."
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 ...
However the close reason is clear and just, it seems a bit odd to put this under "off topic". The question is just lacking details, but that would be more of an "unclear what you're asking" type of close reason IMHO.
From the little details that are in the question, it seems to be about networking/firewalls on a Windows Server 2016 machine, so that would ...
This question doesn't look close-worthy at all.
Certainly it solicits the "best" method of accomplishing a reasonably normal Windows system administration task. Though, leaving aside for the moment the less than perfect word choice, this is something that is easily answerable with "facts, references or specific expertise." Best practices are "best" for a ...
This is a broken review audit. There's a question on mSO about it already, though that question doesn't really address this specific aspect of the problem. (This question doesn't quite do it either, so I'm going to post this separately on mSO.) At the moment there's a lot of review audit breakage related to the change in close functionality.
The "right" ...
Honestly, um. Sometimes self-answers can be mock-worthy. I once parodied one to a friend as,
"Q: How do I put on my underwear?"
"A: Slit the crotch open with a razor blade and pull them over your head, then bend over and stitch the crotch back together."
(No link, because it's mean. But the user in question was last seen over a year ago, so if you're ...
The approach I generally use is as follows:
Will this question be useful to someone who I perceive as having the minimum amount of training for their job? (mistakes by those people pass this test)
Is the answer too specific to the environment in which it occurred?
These are signs that the entire Q&A needs to be junked. If these conditions are cleared, ...