I did read what you said, and it is bad enough.
The notion that "anyone [with xn edits] can review", and no admin can
revoke, makes the right less scrutinised that rollback - that has the
effect of making the quality control utterly useless.
That someone has xn edits only means that they have not (yet) behaved in
a manner to get blocked. It in no sense is equal to clue,
perceptiveness, or diligence.
The problem with widespread flagging is that in order to prevent
backlogs, you will be under pressure to maximise the reviewers, and give
the reviewers incentives to rack up numerous reviews per minute. That is
inconsistent with useful scrutiny.
wjhonson(a)aol.com wrote:
I did not suggest doc that "anyone can
review".
Review what I said again.
I said that established users can review, that it should be an
automatic right at a certain point and that admins cannot remove that
right.
That is quite different from "anyone".