# 提案：整合审查队列 **URL:** \ **Category:** Feature\ **Created:** [2019年一月3日 15:33 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/proposal-consolidated-review-queue/105588 "2019-01-03T15:33:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 18
**Author:** ![eviltrout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/meta/user_avatar/meta.discourse.org/eviltrout/32/5275_2.png) [@eviltrout](https://meta.discourse.org/u/eviltrout)\ **Post date:** [2019年二月14日 18:10 UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/proposal-consolidated-review-queue/105588/18 "2019-02-14T18:10:21Z")
I haven’t updated in a couple weeks, but I’ve made some good progress on migrating flags over to the review queue. I have been distracted this week with some family emergencies but those should be sorted out soon. The refactor here is quite major and involves many changes. I am unsure how other team members will be able to review the PR eventually because it will be giant, but we’ll do our best! I have reached the point in the refactor where I want to implement scoring properly. This means removing a bunch of settings we had for flags (`min_flags_staff_visibility`, for example) and replace them with score based equivalents. I wanted to jot down my idea for flag scores here and see what people thought before I go too far implementing: - a `ReviewableFlaggedPost` has a `score` - The `score` is the sum of the `ReviewableScore` records for that flagged post. Each `ReviewableScore` record represents a flag a user has applied to the post. The `ReviewableScore` score is calculated as `user_flag_score` + `flag_type_score_bonus` + `take_action_bonus`. - `flag_type_score_bonus` would be configurable by flag type. For example you could set `spam` be higher than `inappropriate` if you desired. - `take_action_bonus`: a value (0.0 or 5.0) depending on whether a staff member “took action” - `user_flag_score` is calculated per user, and is: 1.0 + `trust_level` + `accuracy_bonus` - `trust_level` is the user’s trust level (0.0 - 5.0) - `accuracy_bonus` is the percentage of the user’s previous flags that were agreed with \* 5, for a value of (0.0 - 5.0). A minimum of 5 flags is required. So for example, if a post was flagged by two users. One (u0) is TL1 who has never flagged before, and the other (u1) is TL3 whose flags are agreed with 50% of the time. Both are flags whose `flag_type_score_bonus` are set to 1.5: ```plaintext # 1.0 + trust_level + (5.0 * agree_percentage) u0_flag_score = 1.0 + 1.0 + (5.0 * 0.0) = 2.0 u1_flag_score = 1.0 + 3.0 + (5.0 * 0.5) = 6.5 # user_flag_score + default_for_flag_type + take_action_bonus reviewable_score_u0 = 2.0 + 1.5 + 0.0 = 3.5 reviewable_score_u1 = 6.5 + 1.5 + 0.0 = 8.0 # sum of reviewable scores flagged_post_score = 3.5 + 8.0 = 11.5 ``` Reviewable items are sorted by reverse score, so this particular post with a score of 11.5 would show up before a post with a value of 9.3 and so on. --- _[View the full topic](https://meta.discourse.org/t/proposal-consolidated-review-queue/105588)._