1
$\begingroup$

Question: Why was my recent post: Side of the largest possible cube inside a cone? was removed from the HNQ list?

Context: I do realize related general discussions (see below) but I don't feel right the specific question was removed from the HNQ.

Related posts in meta:

  1. Why was a question proactively removed from Hot Network Questions even though it never appeared there in the first place? The question was removed as it was answered by the active mod itself. Not so in my case.
  2. Why did a moderator remove my question from HNQ? The question was deemed subpar as it was closed and re-opened. Not so in my case.
  3. Under what criteria should we remove questions from the HNQ list? It's quite an open-ended discussion, but the mod answered one of the reasons as clickbait-y titles. Not so in my case. The title is apt.
  4. Mod removing questions out of HNQ It's mentioned that if a users' questions frequently end up on the list then the mod considers the user gaming the system. Most likely in my case, this was my first question to make it to the HNQ list. But I'm definitely not trying to game the system.
  5. $\LaTeX$ is not hard and fast rule either. This recent question didn't have it throughout the two days and it's title was apt.
$\endgroup$
56
  • 9
    $\begingroup$ I cannot find anything on meta justifying what you claim. $\endgroup$ Aug 11, 2022 at 8:43
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ I still see no justification. The only thing I can find is that while a post gets into HNQ, it will be taken down before 72 hours. It's not clear what else would make a post no longer eligible. $\endgroup$ Aug 11, 2022 at 9:10
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ If this is intended to be about this particular question maybe the tag (specific-question) would be suitable here? (See the tag-info for the guidance on how to use this tag.) $\endgroup$ Aug 11, 2022 at 9:27
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ The reasons that questions are removed from the HNQ have been discussed before. If someone posts a new question to meta every time they disagree with one of those choices, meta will become useless. I don't think that there is anything new here, so I have closed this question as a duplicate. $\endgroup$
    – Xander Henderson Mod
    Aug 11, 2022 at 12:10
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ @XanderHenderson generally the reasons were not a good heading or too easy but that does not seems the case here. So, since I'm primarily asking for reasons related to my question and not a general discussion, so I don't think it should have been closed. Please consider re-opening it. $\endgroup$ Aug 11, 2022 at 12:13
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ All of these recent HNQ-complaining meta posts are based on "why was mine removed?", and is packed full of unsupported claims and paranoid accusations. If you want to open a serious discussion of how math.se deals with the HNQ, that's not a good way to go about it. $\endgroup$
    – JonathanZ
    Aug 11, 2022 at 13:51
  • 9
    $\begingroup$ Not clear to me why anyone cares whether or not one of their posts is on the HNQ list. $\endgroup$ Aug 11, 2022 at 23:17
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ "One may reasonably concern if moderators are abusing their power". I disagree. We can discuss how we want the site to use and interact with the HNQ, and how best to acheive that, but throwing accusations of abuse is the kind of paranoid, hostile talk that interferes with us actually having that discussion. $\endgroup$
    – JonathanZ
    Aug 12, 2022 at 13:49
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ @JonathanZsupportsMonicaC "reasonably concern" won't translate to "accusations" but genuine concerns. Despite so many meta posts and several users showing their discontent towards certain moderator's actions and the moderator not considering in the least to change their ways in the slightest or themselves propose something so mitigate their concerns is I don't know what you call. It may not like abuse of power to you, but what do you call it? $\endgroup$ Aug 12, 2022 at 13:57
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ @SarveshRavichandranIyer in your 2nd comment, the first 2 quotations aren't (valid) reasons. If mod realizes such things happen then they shouldn't do as much or take some other measures to not let that happen (involving some other mod? or something else (discussing with community)). And also consider restoring the HNQ status. Your last sentence I don't get. I'm here as it happened to me and I found it unjust. $\endgroup$ Aug 12, 2022 at 17:56
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ (1) Not that you requested my opinion, but: I believe that this answer addresses why, I, personally, would have removed the question from the HNQ. Read past the bit about titles. The relevant quotes are "When this feature was introduced, there was a fairly unanimous agreement between the moderators that questions on the HNQ should reflect content as we want it, rather as picked by an algorithm," and "If they are lacking context, or somehow very uninteresting ("please verify my proof that sine integrates to cosine"), they should be removed." $\endgroup$
    – Xander Henderson Mod
    Aug 12, 2022 at 21:52
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ (2) In this case, my feeling is that the question you asked is not the best that Math SE has to offer. It is a problem statement together with an image that has moderate explanatory power, and some musings on the problem which contain no actual mathematical content. The presence of images is somewhat click-baity (I have often joked that the best way to get a highly-upvoted answer is to include an image), and the self-answer artificially inflates the "hotness" of the question. This question, whether intentionally or not, could not have been better designed to appeal to the algorithm. $\endgroup$
    – Xander Henderson Mod
    Aug 12, 2022 at 21:56
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ @XanderHenderson thank you for your considerate comments. Though there are some issues. (1) "reflect content as we want it" & "somehow very uninteresting" essentially translates to the former and can, as a blanket, justify anything and so I think it's the root cause of the problem and many members are not liking it this way. Please, if you mods care, heed to our concerns, they are not for naught. If I were a single case then perhaps ignoring would be fine but the issue is raised several times so I think we need a stricter format than that & also not just 1 mod going rampant over the list. $\endgroup$ Aug 13, 2022 at 4:58
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ ... (2) I respect your opinions about the question but the community felt otherwise and so I went on the HNQ list. "could not have been better designed to appeal to the algorithm": Well, this is very unhealthy, considering you assume everyone guilty and look at it that way. If someone scores high, I may assume they cheated or that they worked hard. I not know except if I assume the latter, then I'll accept the score and if I assume the former, instead of rejecting the score, I must check their background or check their behavior in past (& future?). Then come to conclusion. ... $\endgroup$ Aug 13, 2022 at 5:03
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ If I may suggest, it would be best if mods themselves create a meta post asking for views and suggestions on possible ways to mitigate the problem. There all sorts of suggestions will come as answers and the most popular suggestion will get highly upvoted. We understand the necessity of moderators' intervention just like with everything else but this issue in particular is (totally) different. Later discussions, if required, may be done further on that answer or may be the top 3 "nominees", however the community wishes. $\endgroup$ Aug 13, 2022 at 5:23

0

Browse other questions tagged .