This article challenges a number of assumptions underlying marking of student work in British universities. It argues that, in developing rigorous moderation procedures, we have created a huge burden for markers which adds little to accuracy and reliability but creates additional work for staff, constrains assessment choices and slows down feedback to students. In this under-researched area of higher education, the article will explore whether there are other ways to provide confidence in marking and grading. These might divert this energy into productive activities with useful outcomes for students and learning.