Timeline for Why do even high reputation users do not pay attention on close votes? [duplicate]
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
80 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 14, 2018 at 8:46 | review | Reopen votes | |||
| Mar 14, 2018 at 11:55 | |||||
| Mar 13, 2018 at 15:07 | history | closed |
amWhy Simply Beautiful Art GNUSupporter 8964民主女神 地下教會 Andrés E. Caicedo achille hui |
Duplicate of Requests for Reopen & Undeletion Votes, etc. (volume 01/2015 - 07/2018 ) [duplicate] | |
| Mar 12, 2018 at 20:03 | comment | added | Jaideep Khare | @amWhy and others, This is the re-post with content related to this post. | |
| Mar 12, 2018 at 14:50 | comment | added | amWhy | No you should not delete this yourself, Jaideep, since you claim that you plan to repost your "non-edit" to this question (which has since been rolled back by another user), and in that case, then this should remain for historical reasons relating to the motivation that prompted you to ask that "new" post you plan to ask here. I will delete my question now, because this was addressing your attempt to render original comments and answers posted here. Hurkyl has taken care of my concerns addressed in my answer, so it no longer is needed here. | |
| Mar 12, 2018 at 8:26 | answer | added | quidMod | timeline score: 14 | |
| Mar 12, 2018 at 7:41 | comment | added | Did | "Why do even high reputation users do not pay attention on close votes?" Two basic remarks. 1. The title, using the present simple, thus indicating either the repetition of an act or a general truth, is pure slander of any high rep user downvoting anything on the site. 2. The question, pretending to address a general problem, is a farce since, o surprise, the only post linked to, which is obviously the main (the only?) topic of interest to the OP, is a question answered by the OP themselves. | |
| Mar 12, 2018 at 2:18 | comment | added | user14972 | I have rolled this back since the edits substantially changed the question to a practically new one, which invalidates all of the existing comments and answers. New questions should be posted in new posts, not by editing previous posts! Including the case when the new question is what was originally meant, but something substantially different was originally posted. To the OP: here is the source to the post before I rolled it back in case you wish to repost it in a new post | |
| Mar 12, 2018 at 2:16 | history | rollback | user14972 |
Rollback to Revision 2
|
|
| Mar 11, 2018 at 21:02 | comment | added | Did | This question should be reverted to its Edit 2 version, if only by respect to the two users who posted an answer before the subsequent massive edit. | |
| Mar 11, 2018 at 20:57 | comment | added | amWhy | Jaideep No, it is not an edit, and no it is not better. It is an entirely different question than you originally asked. What you should have done is delete this, and posted you "new question" which users are forced to see here now, as a separate question. You've rendered comments and answers a tad confusing, because most of them all refer to your question that you've now replaced. Hence it is rude to commenters and answerers, and any user that wasted their time on your your question. Please see my answer for more details. | |
| Mar 11, 2018 at 19:21 | comment | added | Carl Mummert | @Jaideep Khare: for the updated version of this meta question, I would agree with this comment by Hurkyl: math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/28039/… . It's also important to keep in mind that the options in the "close" dialog are limited, and the wording is not very good. There is an option to close for a free-form reason that can be filled in, but sometimes editors just select one of the default reasons even if it is not perfectly accurate. | |
| Mar 11, 2018 at 19:17 | comment | added | Carl Mummert | @Jaideep Khare: I don't see full context in the current version of the post at math.stackexchange.com/q/2648960/630 . "My brother gave me this random problem" is not very compelling to me, and the link to math.SE makes the question look like a duplicate at best. What is the motivation of the question? Where did the formula arise? That is the sort of context that is missing, in my opinion. | |
| Mar 11, 2018 at 18:18 | history | edited | Jaideep Khare | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 2 characters in body
|
| Mar 11, 2018 at 13:52 | comment | added | Jaideep Khare | @amWhy Did you see my edit to the post? I think it's better now. BTW, I am open to suggestion for improvisation of the post. | |
| Mar 11, 2018 at 13:40 | comment | added | King Tut | One question, I think I deleted my rude remarks to Robert some time after he voted, so how could possibly other close voters see it (regarding the comments here which talk of close voters teaching me manners by closing the question) | |
| Mar 11, 2018 at 13:37 | comment | added | King Tut | @amwhy please don't get personal. I was not manipulating anyone. I was rude to one person called Robert Z so I apologised. End of story. If you still wish to publish fictional stories and give wings to your imagination then I think this is not the right platform. | |
| Mar 11, 2018 at 13:35 | comment | added | King Tut | @quid I request you to restore or post the whole sequence of events. I can't remember exactly what happened and I cannot see any comments unlike you. Posting things in parts can be very misleading. Thank you. | |
| Mar 11, 2018 at 13:32 | comment | added | King Tut | I confess that I was (a little) rude to the person Robert Z. This was triggered (I am not justifying it) by the vote to close as duplicate. I sincerely apologise for this behaviour to @RobertZ. | |
| Mar 11, 2018 at 9:58 | history | edited | Jaideep Khare | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 2 characters in body
|
| Mar 11, 2018 at 9:47 | history | edited | Jaideep Khare | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 5 characters in body
|
| Mar 11, 2018 at 9:41 | history | edited | Jaideep Khare | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 458 characters in body; edited title
|
| Mar 11, 2018 at 6:54 | answer | added | Aloizio MacedoMod | timeline score: 7 | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 22:11 | comment | added | Jaideep Khare | @amWhy It's OK. No problem. ^_^ | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 22:07 | comment | added | amWhy | @JaideepKhare I am very sorry if you aren't at all related to the account of King Tut. My apologies in that case. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 22:07 | comment | added | Jaideep Khare | @Tobias Just answer this question of mine : Is the question linked, missing any context details? Is this do-my-homework type of question? | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 22:06 | comment | added | quid Mod | Everybody please slow down. Maybe give the discussion a short break. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 22:05 | comment | added | Jaideep Khare | And I repeat, @amWhy I don't know who King Tut is at all. Swear to God. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 22:05 | comment | added | Tobias Kildetoft | You might get somewhere if you stopped acting like the original close votes were in some objective way wrong, when you clearly have no argument for this. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 22:04 | comment | added | Jaideep Khare | @amWhy Look, I have no affection to my (previously) single voted answer, because, a reputation of +25 is a joke in front of ~16.9k. You really think I spent time on posting this question so that my single voted answer doesn't get deleted along with the removal of question? If you think so, let me know you that you're into wrong path. I came here to ask you and others, the reason of close-vote, which is obviously wrong to have done(other actions are available for dealing with rudity) | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 22:01 | comment | added | amWhy | Please don't keep attacking me here, Jaideep. Others have commented to you with very important and highly valid points, which I doubt you can answer with any credibility. Again, you seem to be very well acquainted with King Tut, the asker of the question you answered. In any case, this will likely be explored. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 21:57 | history | edited | amWhy |
edited tags
|
|
| Mar 10, 2018 at 21:54 | comment | added | Jaideep Khare | @amWhy Just giving my opinion every where, and wandering here and there in chatrooms, pretending to be the most ideal and intelligent and correct person on Earth, and...close voting for off-topic, due to rudeness of OP, just out of rage, doesn't make me eligible to accuse other users who seem-to-be-inactive, (though may be, they read Meta posts, and vote up-and-down, instead of commenting). Got my point? And for your second question, he is just a question-poster for me, who asked for help, whom I responded. I don't know who he/she is, where do they live and all nonsense background. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 21:43 | comment | added | Tobias Kildetoft | How can a mod "know" that a question should not be closed? How can you have accumulated so much reputation without learning anything about how the site is supposed to function and how the standards are meant to be upheld? | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 21:42 | comment | added | amWhy | You're clearly not here, and never intended to have a discussion here, Jaideep, but merely acted here in bad faith. How are you related to King Tut, by the way? | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 21:41 | comment | added | Jaideep Khare | @amWhy pitied over me, or the mod "actually" had the knowledge of whether the question should be closed or not, because they have knowledge of this level Mathematics too. I guarantee that it would have remained open. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 21:31 | comment | added | Jaideep Khare | @Tobias Not that it's opened by 2 only, but it has been viewed 65 times since this meta question was posted, most of them are above 3k (eligible to close-vote), some are mods, some are the very same users who voted to close, and is still open, without even a single close-vote. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 21:27 | comment | added | Tobias Kildetoft | That is a terrible argument. It was closed by 5 users and then reopened by 2. How does that make the closing in any objective way wrong? | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 21:22 | comment | added | Jaideep Khare | @amWhy For the reason of it being wrong, is the very reason it stands opened right now - It's not at all off-topic and therefore should be closed. If there are other problems with the post or OP, we have other methods to deal too. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 21:21 | comment | added | amWhy | When a user fails to be kind (is only "not being nice"), regarding their question or answer, the site does not require that we accept "oh well, yeah they're rude, andinsulting, but the question is okay", or that we don't vote to close a questions asked in a rather rude manner. Just because you think a question should be judged apart from the rudeness of an asker or answerer, that's not the way things work here. And it's not the way things "should work". There are expectations of every user on this site; if one fails to act accordingly, they should be ready to pay the price. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 21:20 | comment | added | Jaideep Khare | @amWhy So if the main-OP isn't being nice, the right thing to do is, flag comments as offensive, or flag for a mod to look into it. Is rudeness of OP the reason for your close-vote? You haven't answered explicitly yet. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 21:15 | comment | added | amWhy | That's my point, Jaideep, 2: "It's wrong". You never gave a reason. Why should I discuss this with you when from the start you are asserting others are wrong and you are right? Your last point? this site expects from all askers and answerers to "be nice." When an asker is rude and offensive, that's wrong, first and foremost. There is no rule on this site that allows askers to ask a question, and also to be very rude and insulting in doing so. So even if you think the questions is "okay", the rudeness and insults are not okay. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 21:07 | comment | added | Jaideep Khare | @amWhy Sorry if I have disrespected you in any way. But here are my some points 1. I am not insisting that I am right 2. It's not that someone voted in a way I didn't like, it's not personal. It's wrong, that's why I posted on meta. 3. Last line of my second comment from the top, I asked you for reason for close-voting, you haven't responded yet. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 21:01 | comment | added | amWhy | Yes it is your right to close-vote, and reopen-vote, downvote and upvote. It is also other users right to do so, so you need to be more respectful of your peers who have the same rights as you do. Typically, you're setting yourself for disengagement in an issue if you disrespect others, by attacking them, when you insist you are right and they (whoever those that voted in ways you don't like) are wrong. Your post was written in an argumentative posture, and you never did, ask sincerely, what "their" reasons were. When you want to have an honest and respectful conversation, let me know. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 20:52 | comment | added | Jaideep Khare | I do not vote enough because I can't. I use my phone to access MSE and ask/answer questions. I don't own a laptop/PC of my own, and therefore, am unable to access close-vote review-queues. I occasionally vote to close from the options given below to the question itself. This doesn't mean that I don't know how and when to close-vote @amWhy . And, it's not my duty to close vote it's my right to close-vote. Though, I still don't understamd that how am I possibly blaming top close-voters | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 20:33 | comment | added | amWhy | Jaideep, you've not voted enough (up or down, close or reopen). Please don't blame folks for exercising their rights to weigh in on matters, and no, it is not the case, as one commentor claimed, that "five users have standards that lie somewhat outside community norms." Too many folks are hell-bent on gaining rep, contribute nothing in a rational manner to votes, to community moderation, but are quick to turn on those that aren't so "self-interested". | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 20:31 | comment | added | Simply Beautiful Art | @JaideepKhare well, glad to clear that up $\ddot\smile$ | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 20:30 | comment | added | amWhy | @KingTut It's really sad that you deny your rudeness in this case, and distort the time line. You are quick to lash out at folks, often, as I remember, while not being entirely honest of your hand in your own undoing. As we see by your comment today to Jaideep, you were yet again trying to manipulate a user (Jaideep in this case) to try to trigger them to reactively come here (in an effort to save their answer) to fight for you. Why did you not post on meta? You've clearly spoken up and attacked users before. Why manipulate a user trying to help you to speak for you? | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 20:29 | comment | added | Jaideep Khare | @Simply No no no I think you got that wrong. I wrote "...too many vote" in order to indicate that since he has voted for many questions' closure, may be, this slips out, and he doesn't remember voting for this. This is not at all offensive. It is indeed a very light compliment, because voting for closure is something the site needs, and is good to do. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 20:21 | comment | added | Simply Beautiful Art | "...because José has voted for too many close votes till date." The wording implies that José has done wrong because he has voted too many times and that José should cease voting because of this. I personally, would take that offensively. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 20:20 | comment | added | Vidyanshu Mishra | ....Furthermore coming to the question I would like to say that yes!! You have prevailages and badges but it doesn't mean that you can do whatever you want. I know that you can't know how much efforts OP has put in the question (in real life) but closing certainly isn't the way to deal with such things. I have seen questions closed as off topic and unclear in less than 10 minutes which in my opinion were well written and well explained but I don't know what these [users] have in mind while closing these questions. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 20:19 | comment | added | Vidyanshu Mishra | I have been quite irregular user on meta and even on the main site for the past 6 months and there is a huge reason behind it. I made some attempts like Jaideep earlier and saw myself being criticized and rebuked (what I like about MSE is that people here often say much more in very few words) and disappointed by all that I stopped making efforts as I thought I am either too immature to deal with the things going on or too mature so as to leave this all as my intention of welfare of community wasn't accepted | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 20:19 | comment | added | Jaideep Khare | @Simply I think there is some confusion. José voted for closure of that question. He also voted to close as duplicate this meta-question. That's why I added Again to remind that he was one of the close-voters for the linked question, and he is probably committing the same mistake to wrongly close-voters this meta-question. I don't see anything offensive here . Is there any problem with this comment? | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 20:11 | comment | added | Simply Beautiful Art | "I added "Again because..." because José has voted for too many close votes till date." That's a fairly generalized implication, and I'll have you know I have almost the amount of close votes José Carlos Santos has in total (close votes, delete votes, and other votes). Does that mean my close votes are always or often wrongly placed? I honestly did not think your line of reasoning would be so negative. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 20:06 | comment | added | Jaideep Khare | @Simply I added "Again because..." because José has voted for too many close votes till date. May be, he doesn't remember voting for this. BTW, I added "Sorry", in advance, to avoid any offense. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 20:01 | comment | added | Simply Beautiful Art | "Can't we do anything and take a strict action to avoid this scenario in future?" No, avoidance is not possible and indeed not something I'd be looking forward to. Those who think the post should be closed, for whatever reason, just or not, should have their right to vote to close, and if the reason is indeed not just, then it should follow by popular opinion the question should remain open, and hence they shall have their right to vote to reopen. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 20:00 | comment | added | José Carlos Santos | @SimplyBeautifulArt Thank you. Then there was an error of judgement from me. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 19:58 | comment | added | Simply Beautiful Art | @JoséCarlosSantos See here. Indeed you did vote to close it, though one cannot discern for what reason. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 19:56 | comment | added | José Carlos Santos | @JaideepKhare Don't be sorry. You are right; this question was not a duplicate and I've retractad my closing vote. But about the other question... I'm confused. Are you sure that I voted to close it? I don't remember having ever seen it and, yes, the OP made an effort. If I did vote to close it, it was an error. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 19:55 | comment | added | Simply Beautiful Art | "Again, because you too..." warrants unnecessary conversation and may be taken offensively. I'd recommend you explain why the question shouldn't be closed as a dupe of that over trying to cause a scenario. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 19:50 | comment | added | Jaideep Khare | @José Sorry, but I think you're again close-voting wrong question. (Again, because you too were one of the close-voters to the closure of linked question) | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 19:20 | comment | added | quid Mod | @KingTut you misrepresent the situation. Possibly inadvertently. I have no time right now but I can restore the full timeline. You lashed out right away on the first duplicate vote [actually flag] (not off-topic). Had you just explained why it is not a duplicate instead, nothing of all this would likely have happened. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 19:09 | comment | added | King Tut | But mind you, none of my comments came before the close votes. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 19:06 | comment | added | King Tut | Dear all who seem to be of opinion that i was being rude. Firstly my questiin was very clear, and after it got closed or close vote only then i added that comment. Also, it wasnt meant to be rude, i just happen to have a weird humour sense. I was just surprised how even after mentioning every detail i could think it got close vote. I apologise if I must for the comments. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 18:09 | comment | added | user296602 | @quid I see, thanks. That probably did encourage several of the close voters here - I am certainly more inclined to vote for closure on a borderline case if I see the asker behaving badly, so it makes more sense to me now. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 18:06 | comment | added | quid Mod | @user296602 "Is your mom proud of you now?"; "Do you understand english language?" are two of the deleted comments. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 18:01 | comment | added | user296602 | That being said, I think that your title is misleading. I do not believe that this is a case of not paying attention; I strongly suspect that at least some of the users fully intended to close this question after reading it. In that case, it would be a case where five users have standards that lie somewhat outside community norms, not a case of misunderstanding. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 17:56 | comment | added | user296602 | You're right, @JaideepKhare - this question absolutely should not have been closed. I understand the original dupe-closure (based on a quick reading of, especially, the first line). This is well written with full context, plenty of work by the asker, and has a concise and direct answer; in short, it's a great question. Maybe there's context that I don't see (quid mentions something about rude comments that aren't there anymore... but that's not a reason to close anyways), so I really strongly disagree with the closure. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 17:45 | review | Close votes | |||
| Mar 11, 2018 at 2:33 | |||||
| Mar 10, 2018 at 17:31 | comment | added | Jaideep Khare | @amWhy I don't understand that what do you mean by honest here,in this context. Suppose, I tell that I have answered (though there is no need to do so), will it alter anything? Also, I ain't at all concerned because I answered it. I would have posted on meta, even if it wasn't answered by me. Though, it is still unexplained why was this voted to close as off-topic in the first place. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 17:27 | answer | added | quidMod | timeline score: 4 | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 17:21 | comment | added | amWhy | And Jaideep, of course, it would have been more honest for you to have also shared that you answered the question, and so have invested self-interest in the posting to meta, in an accusatory, victim-like rant, in hopes you MSE answer to the question remains. In any case. (Note, I nothing to gain or lose when voting to close or not.) | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 17:15 | comment | added | amWhy | It would have been appropriate for @mixedmath to have commented or answered here, in meta before/immediately after they unilaterally reopened the question. I've rarely, if ever, seen a mod take action without commenting and/or explaining their action. Why mixedmath did so behind the scenes only, is questionable. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 16:43 | comment | added | Aloizio Macedo Mod | @pjs36 Didn't know that. Thanks for the info! | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 16:37 | comment | added | pjs36 | @Aloizio Although in this case, since the question hadn’t been edited, one must play with the URL a bit, to see the revision history (in particular, change “questions” to “posts”, keep the post number and not name, and add “/revisions”). | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 15:41 | comment | added | user304329 | Perhaps a good design change would be to stop showing people what others voted for - only show that people did vote close. That way people really have to have read the full question to see what's wrong with it and what to close it for. As another free plus that comes with that, if people do decide to vote close without having reviewed the question, the chance of them picking the same thing to close it for as the other people that voted to close it is smaller, so their "random" close vote is less worth in that sense. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 15:14 | comment | added | Aloizio Macedo Mod | Note also that voting to reopen won't make this question senseless: one can see the history of closure and reopening of questions, if they so desire. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 15:14 | comment | added | Aloizio Macedo Mod | This kind of question (yours, here in meta), with that kind of phrasing and assumptions, tends to be very controversial and may also be seen as somewhat rude, since you assume that no attention has been taken when it can be the case that it is just something you disagree with or something wrong you've not seen, and can also be an isolated case (I am quite surprised with no downvotes at the time of writing this comment). That said, I also disagree with the closure of the question (in main), and tried to vote to reopen (it was already reopened). | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 15:06 | comment | added | Jaideep Khare | @JoelReyesNoche Yes, I am familiar with that, but I don't want to. My question is not for this particular question, this is in general. Even I could have voted to reopen that (I haven't yet) but didn't, because if it's reopened, this question won't make much sense. | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 14:59 | comment | added | JRN | In case you are not familiar with it, if you want to request users to reopen a question, you can post an answer at math.meta.stackexchange.com/q/19042/18398 | |
| Mar 10, 2018 at 14:00 | history | asked | Jaideep Khare | CC BY-SA 3.0 |