Timeline for Enforcement of Quality Standards
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 7, 2022 at 14:37 | comment | added | Sarvesh Ravichandran Iyer | Without reliability and organization, I cannot see a difference between MSE and other websites. Discussions, help etc. can all be accommodated (in fact, I'd say encouraged), so long as organization and reliability continue to be the main facets of discussion for users performing such actions. Lopsided contributions on each side of the debate is the reason we're in this situation, so either our actions are balanced or we hope that our opinions balance each other out sans trust : something that, post EoQS, seems to have improved personally. | |
| Sep 7, 2022 at 14:34 | comment | added | Sarvesh Ravichandran Iyer | @GTonyJacobs The way SE began, it felt like (leaving reputation aside) the goals of "help an asker" and "create a library of high quality answers" could be synergized into one platform. When I threw my support for EoQS forward, it was for two reasons. One , that duplication was ruining the organization of the site. Two was that rampant answering was reducing the quality of answers and the amount of attention good questions received. I still believe that (generally) enforcement of quality standards are the reason that this site has managed to mix quantity and quality till now. | |
| Aug 10, 2022 at 17:47 | comment | added | G Tony Jacobs | (cont. from above) I fear that moderators might therefore see me as a "rep farmer". If they were to eliminate rep entirely, though, I'd do the same thing; I like helping individuals who ask for help. Such behavior seems less and less welcome here. If it is indeed welcome, then there's a disconnect with communication. The scoldings I've received lately (only twice, to be fair) don't even try to address the matter of helping people, only enforcing a standard that I don't think most users care about. If the enforcers even pretended to care about individuals, we'd see less static. | |
| Aug 10, 2022 at 17:46 | comment | added | G Tony Jacobs | "If the people wishing to close it had really cared about the user learning math (what I thought we were here for)..." I'm not convinced that's what everyone thinks we're here for. The goal of building a searchable library of high quality questions and answers could indeed be at odds with that. I'm here to have interactions in which people, who want to learn, end up learning. (cont. below) | |
| Jun 27, 2022 at 0:21 | comment | added | ryang | @Asinomás s referring to this SEDE query then sorting by Downvotes. | |
| May 24, 2022 at 12:23 | comment | added | kcrisman | Sorry, by "interesting" I meant "sadly predictable", but point taken. | |
| May 23, 2022 at 21:29 | comment | added | Asinomás | It isn't interesting, it's an established phenomenon, by the way you can probably use SEDE to find the people on this site that downvote the most (it's staggering), it is not unreasonable to consider the downvote came from there. It is almost as established as the factthat if you have a question you want undeleted or reopened that isnt very good but still undeserving of what happened to it, you should never put it in the requests for reopening and undeletion meta thread. | |
| May 23, 2022 at 20:49 | comment | added | kcrisman | PS interesting that two of my (unrelated) questions on MSE got downvotes within an hour of the one actually referred to here getting a downvote as well. Whatever ... | |
| May 23, 2022 at 18:28 | comment | added | kcrisman | @D.W. sorry, I was imprecise there. I meant the following through part - actually voting for a close is fine, but the actual closing (again for the demographic I mention) seems to happen very quickly. | |
| May 23, 2022 at 18:27 | history | edited | kcrisman | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
slight clarification
|
| May 22, 2022 at 3:18 | comment | added | D.W. | @dxiv, this answer appears to be asking for a delay on casting close votes (i.e., putting a question on hold). I am responding to that part of the answer. I am well aware of the challenges of re-opening a question. | |
| May 22, 2022 at 1:12 | comment | added | kcrisman | @dxiv correct. And more to my point, a newcomer may not at all be someone conversant with the lightning pace of internet forums of this type - or someone working three jobs with three kids and three elderly parents who might have better things to do than hang out waiting ... At least, we should not assume that the ability to respond within even a day or two to be the case. | |
| May 21, 2022 at 8:15 | comment | added | dxiv | @D.W. "it's a good thing to put on hold immediately, to give a chance to improve the question before anyone answers" $\;-\;$ Many questions get deleted, not just closed, before the OP has a chance to even see the objections and act on them. I think you grossly underestimate the effort it takes for a closed question to get reopened, let alone a deleted one. | |
| May 20, 2022 at 2:31 | comment | added | D.W. | There is no guidance on timing needed. It's fine to leave that to the folks who are casting a vote. If the question doesn't meet the standards, it's a good thing to put on hold immediately, to give a chance to improve the question before anyone answers. Putting a question on hold is not permanent -- it is a temporary pause to give the poster a chance to remedy the situation by editing the question. It is important to do it immediately, before it accumulates answers. | |
| May 19, 2022 at 23:19 | history | answered | kcrisman | CC BY-SA 4.0 |