I sometimes get first-time posts in the review queue that I cannot really judge, since I have no knowledge of the universe whatsoever (e.g. "Does this question even make sense?" / "Does this answer even come close to addressing the question?").
Should I mark them "No action needed" if they seem to be non-spam and decently formatted, even though I have no way of checking if the text is complete nonsense or might not address the question (if the post is an answer)?
[To clarify: That seems to be the mode the moderators are supposed to operate under, but it might not be the way the review tool is intended.]
So, if in doubt I could always say "Skip" and hope that somebody with expertise on the subject gets the question in their queue. On the other hand, if the post seems to contain no spam/offence (or otherwise obviously inappropriate content) I might just as well approve of it and let the community decide on the post's quality via votes.
What is the consensus here? Where is the threshold for Approving/Skipping in such situations? I don't think there is a one-fits-all rule here, so a rough threshold seems to be the most sensible thing, right?