3

Over on Mathematica.se, I was recently asked to review my own answer:

enter image description here

which seems like a bug in the review process.

12
  • Shouldn't this be on the main meta site? I assume this applies to all SE 2.0 sites.
    – Mr.Wizard
    May 20 '12 at 15:39
  • @Mr.Wizard I debated that, and figured at least initially posting it here was better. But, if it needs to go over there, I can put it there.
    – rcollyer
    May 20 '12 at 15:40
  • Leave it here; I'm not certain.
    – Mr.Wizard
    May 20 '12 at 15:42
  • @Mr.Wizard exactly my problem, so I erred on the side of caution and less spam. :)
    – rcollyer
    May 20 '12 at 15:44
  • 3
    Now how do we get journals to ask me to review my own papers?
    – rm -rf Mod
    May 20 '12 at 20:28
  • You should probably tag it as bug... It clearly isn't the expected behaviour (in some sense), and the bug tag is monitored by the team more closely than support. If this is the intended behaviour, worst case you'll get a status-bydesign
    – rm -rf Mod
    May 20 '12 at 20:31
  • @R.M done. more characters required to post this message. :)
    – rcollyer
    May 20 '12 at 22:24
  • @R.M self review of papers would be nice: this paper is eminently worthy of publication! :)
    – rcollyer
    May 21 '12 at 14:51
  • 1
    But even better would be self-review of funding requests. ;-)
    – celtschk
    May 22 '12 at 12:54
  • status-completed per this. Closing as TL so that the damned bot doesn't bump it up in the future...
    – rm -rf Mod
    May 24 '13 at 23:19
  • @rm-rf you could have answered it, too. :)
    – rcollyer
    May 24 '13 at 23:24
  • Well, yeah... but why not take the path of least work? ;)
    – rm -rf Mod
    May 25 '13 at 0:55

Browse other questions tagged .