It has been observation as of late that moderator Asaf Karagila has been removing quite a bit of questions from HNQ. What is the basis for removal? and, under what circumstances is a moderator removing questions of HNQ justified?
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
21
asked Aug 6, 2022 at 20:59
1 Answer
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
22
I've explained most of the reasons that I normally apply in the past. But let me also add that if I see a user whose questions very consistently and very frequently end up on the HNQ, then I will default to assuming that the user is trying to game this system. If nothing else, it will make me more judicial when looking at their questions that do make it to the HNQ.
Of course, sometimes honest mistakes happen. I sometimes remove questions and instantly realise that I did not want to remove that question.
answered Aug 7, 2022 at 9:15
-
11$\begingroup$ Shouldn't the default assumption be innocent until proven guilty? $\endgroup$– user1082389Aug 7, 2022 at 11:05
-
9$\begingroup$ "I will default to assuming that the user is trying to game this system" Because of the power of diamond moderators, you do not need to justify your assumption to anyone, do you? And nobody except the community moderators can effectively question such an assumption; but of course, maybe they don't care at all. $\endgroup$– user1046533Aug 7, 2022 at 13:19
-
8$\begingroup$ I feel extraordinarily conflicted reading that gaming the system part. Other than voter fraud, how could one possibly game a system, if any question can only be democratically voted up? Or, are you saying the site should be a mix of democracy + some curators who filter the items which are voted up. But wouldn't that sort of be hypocritical in some sense because you got voted up to become a mod yourself..? $\endgroup$ Aug 7, 2022 at 13:46
-
5$\begingroup$ @Beautifullyirrational a question in the HNQ tends to get upvotes from people who see it there and visit it. Rightly or wrongly, that's the trend. So if you could write questions that appeal to the HNQ algorithm, you could get a lot of (possibly unjustified) upvotes. And since reputation is something that appeals to very many people on StackExchange sites, there's a motivation for it. But, since the details of the algorithm are not made public, if you were to keep appearing in there, you would appear to have gamed the system.... $\endgroup$ Aug 7, 2022 at 13:56
-
5$\begingroup$ Labelling votes as justified or unjustified is beyond the scope of the site as far as I understand. I remember some users mentioning in a few previous posts ago that there should be no justification for downvotes, and one can throw if they don't like... but for upvote, it needs approval of external agent to be attracted..? So, it seems to me , that the site users have come to a conclusion that the universal suffrage democracy doesn't work, and even voting must be vetted. $\endgroup$ Aug 7, 2022 at 14:06
-
6$\begingroup$ @postmortes IMO, these are highly subjective and speculative decisions. Unless there's strong evidence to suggest malpractice, I find it inappropriate to remove questions from the HNQ on a whim. $\endgroup$– user1082389Aug 7, 2022 at 14:09
-
5$\begingroup$ @postmortes: We actually do know something about that algorithm. It is public knowledge that you need to get some answers fast enough, with some votes, and be aged at least 8 hours. In the case of this site, it also requires that the title will not have any MathJax. It isn't very hard to write questions like that. And when certain names appear more often than others, it does raise a suspicion that some kind of gaming is being done. $\endgroup$– Asaf Karagila ModAug 7, 2022 at 16:48
-
8$\begingroup$ I also don't understand why people are so riled up. If you are not gaming the system, then the votes don't matter, then being on the HNQ doesn't matter. $\endgroup$– Asaf Karagila ModAug 7, 2022 at 16:49
-
6$\begingroup$ Mods should curate the HNQ, like everything else, in the interest of making the site better. People do not have some constitutional right to seek reputation or a spot on the HNQ list. $\endgroup$ Aug 7, 2022 at 16:56
-
7$\begingroup$ Many of the sites policies like EOQS are not in the site's default "Constitution" . It's a question of how much power the moderator should be allowed to swing around. @JonathanZsupportsMonicaC $\endgroup$ Aug 7, 2022 at 17:00
-
8$\begingroup$ It is unclear what exactly the issue of "gaming the system" is when a question appears on HNQ, and how it adversely affects the site. $\endgroup$ Aug 7, 2022 at 17:02
-
7$\begingroup$ By your logic, if a mod started randomly banning people on their whim, that'd be justified too. Since they have the power , they can do whatever with it . $\endgroup$ Aug 8, 2022 at 10:53
-
5$\begingroup$ @Beautifullyirrational: No, by that logic, if a mod started banning random people on a whim, you can complain to the SE Community Managers, which will investigate the matter, as the "random" might not be random at all, and the "whim" might not be as whimsical as you see it, from your side of the terrace. And if the SE people find that the moderator is not conducting themselves properly, they will correct the problem and issue some punishment as they see fit. $\endgroup$– Asaf Karagila ModAug 8, 2022 at 12:49
-
8$\begingroup$ @Nij: Not to mention that a lot of utterly incorrect answers get tons of upvotes from the HNQ drive-by voters who know zilch about proper mathematics. HNQ creates not only a bias towards upvotes, but also a bias towards junk promotion. $\endgroup$ Aug 8, 2022 at 15:54
-
6$\begingroup$ @Beautifullyirrational: Don't twist my words. You were talking about a moderator suspending people on a whim. I gave you the oversight in that case. Moderators do not discuss suspension of users in public. $\endgroup$– Asaf Karagila ModAug 9, 2022 at 6:23
${}$appended to a title). SEDE enquiries found here showed that this was rare behaviour though. Either way, the discussion was supposed to gather input from the community to generate a policy that mods would then try to stick to. $\endgroup$