The low quality posts review queue has become available to me. As I write this post the queue is empty and there is nothing to serve as an examples of what kind post gets put into it. So I ask: what qualifies a post for relegation to this queue? I ask because there a couple or recent posts that I personally consider low quality, but I don't want to flag them as "very low quality" without having some understanding on the site policy or precedents on this subject.
Community ♦ , which is a background process, automatically assigns every new post (questions and answers) a "score" based on some heuristics and if found to be low, it places the post in this review queue. Some of the reasons a post can end up in this queue are:
The above list is not exhaustive and the exact heuristics are not public either, but you get the idea. All of the above examples were once in the review queue. In addition to this, if the score is very low, Community also raises a flag for moderator attention (example 1, example 2; both need 10k) and one of the moderators decides whether or not the post needs to be deleted or left alone.
As for reviewing items in the queue — sometimes, a short answer is all there is to be said, but in almost every other instance, the post can be improved with a bit more explanation. Users can mark these as "Looks good" or recommend/vote for deletion/closure or flag/edit them or do nothing.
The trend that I've seen is that spam, questions/comments as answers, etc. get flagged for moderator attention and proper answers to questions get marked "Looks good". Some editing for context or a comment prodding them to add it would be nice, but no harm either way. Poor questions get votes to close.
The important point to note is that "low quality" here simply means that the possibility of it being badly formatted or spam or just a code dump is high and it needs a human to verify it. It should not be used to judge the technical quality of an answer or a question. So if someone uses a