I do not enjoy particularly reviewing work, and do not find that SE always makes it too easy to do. But I do try to contribute, and I try to do it well, which means in no way that I consider my contribution perfect.
There was a disagreement recently, regarding question Finding the minimum number of calls in a tree
User guest reacted to this question with an answer that was not really an answer, since the question was already answered. But he did not have enough rep to do otherwise.
The fact is that he had himself given the answer in a question a day earlier, and wanted to make it known. The fact is unusual enough to attract attention: I have never seen it before on SE, whatever the topic.
His comment was humorous and in a style strange enough that it attracted my attention. But his comment was founded, and did deserve to be added to the question though he could not do it himself.
I was actually shocked that 2 people had already chosen to vote to delete his answer, without apparently attempting to do anything to deal with the issue. As of now, the answer is deleted, and the issue raised has not been dealt with.
I wanted to deal with the problem and make it apparent that something was amiss. I do not believe much in Meta effectiveness, and it concerned the readers of the technical question anyway.
One other thing did bother me: I wondered what Baader-Meinhof have to do with the issue ... though the rest of the text was fine and rather amusing.
Then I realized that this was not the only coincidence, and I did ask the concerned user what was going on. He did answer, but I am still wondering.