Recently, I have asked why did a question has a lot of views, and it turned out that it is an HNQ. But in the timeline, it said the question is removed from HNQ by a moderator. But why is it removed?

This a part from the timeline.


2 Answers 2


Let me take a crack at answering this, being the moderator in question. There are essentially two reasons:

  1. The question is subpar. The fact that it was later closed, reopened, and attracted more closing votes now show that I am not the only person who felt this way. I don't think it's necessarily a bad question, that's irrelevant. But I don't think this is the sort of question we want to advertise on the HNQ list as representative of our site.

  2. Arguably, the title should contain $\rm\LaTeX$ anyway.

You can learn more at the link Martin posted in the comments to your question here, where I explained my view on removing HNQ status.


Moderators frequently remove questions from the HNQ. Our site is large and provides many interesting questions. The number of questions per site is limited. Removals increase the turnover of math-questions in the HNQ and thus allow more math-questions to get known network-wide.

Put differently it seems better to have eight questions there for three hours each, rather than one for a full day. Except maybe if that one question is stellar, and thus likely to be much better than those that will replace it; with all due respect that does not apply to the question you mention.

  • 11
    $\begingroup$ I'm not really convinced that more questions making it onto the HNQ is truly better. A question staying longer in the HNQ generally means that there is a sustained interest in that question, and it is continuing to bring interested people to the site. Could you explain why routinely replacing questions, and thus causing more questions to appear on the HNQ, is necessarily an improvement? $\endgroup$ Oct 3, 2019 at 23:05
  • 8
    $\begingroup$ The issue is that anything somewhat good that gets a lot of exposure will continue to get upvotes for quite a while (due to ever more views). I think that it is desirable to avoid extreme distortions of the score distribution due to overexposure as this messes up the value score has an indicator. $\endgroup$
    – quid Mod
    Oct 3, 2019 at 23:13
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ The "distortion-problem" would be solved if this feature request got implemented: The association bonus should not enable users to vote on every site. However, it is already marked (status-declined). I am not sure whether we can expect that this one (which is a bit less restrictive) gets implemented at some point: Prevent questions on Hot List from being upvoted by casual visitors (only rep is from association bonus). $\endgroup$ Oct 4, 2019 at 7:18
  • 8
    $\begingroup$ I agree with this. A lot of HNQs get upvoted by those who are not familiar with the mechanics and expectations of this particular site, leading to questions (and perhaps even their answers) of mediocre, or sometimes outright bad, quality getting way more upvotes than they deserve. Such is the case with this particular question, I do not believe it is an exemplary question for MSE standards. $\endgroup$
    – YiFan Tey
    Oct 4, 2019 at 10:28

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .