Starred posts | chat.stackexchange.com

quid

Jul 26, 2020 18:41

Yes.

8

quid

Aug 4, 2020 20:09

Thank you to all the candidates that volunteered. It was great to have so many good candidates and thus some actual election.

5

amWhy

Aug 4, 2020 15:42

What I appreciate most about this election is that by and far, the tone set by both candidates and for the most part, users in comments below the candidates' answers has been far more civil than in the last election. Credit to the candidates, the mods, and most users, too!

5

Alexander Gruber

Aug 4, 2020 05:17

I think next election, we should have two rooms, something like 20XX Moderator Election Infomation, and 20XX Election Discussion / Chat with the candidates. The former room can be for the bot fielding basic info queries (some find it useful) and the latter can be for actually having discussions with non-bots.

5

Alexander Gruber

Jul 27, 2020 13:48

why not, ElectionBot? why not?

5

quid

Jul 26, 2020 18:40

Poll: Do you want to keep the bot? (Star the comment below.)

5

amWhy

Aug 4, 2020 20:57

@pisoir No one, not even the best of contributors of high quality content, is beyond reproach for misconduct.

4

quid

Aug 4, 2020 20:37

@pisoir it is not very clear how you possibly could know it was for no good reason. Anyway, it would be appreciated if you not stir up controversy here.

4

ElectionBot

Jul 27, 2020 20:00

The election's final voting phase is now open. You may now cast your election ballot for your top three preferred candidates. Good luck to all candidates!

4

Aloizio Macedo

Jul 19, 2020 21:23

Personally, I find this heterogeneity to be more positive on average than a homogeneous understanding of a moderator's role.

4

quid

Aug 4, 2020 20:08

Congratulations to @Xander for winning not only the election but more importantly also my betting game. :-)

3

Asaf Karagila

Aug 4, 2020 20:02

Congratulations to Xander, and I'd like to say that this was perhaps the best election cycle we had so far in terms of participation, quality of candidates, and overall spirits. Kudos to everyone!

3

Jyrki Lahtonen

Jul 29, 2020 21:37

Crudely, the moderatio badges mean:

3

Martin Sleziak

Jul 28, 2020 05:02

There is now 18544 Caucus badges and 7581 Constituent badgse. AFAICT it was 15174 and 6676 before the election.

3

quid

Jul 26, 2020 18:41

No.

3

user185131

Jul 26, 2020 17:48

Go home @ElectionBot, you're drunk

3

Matt Samuel

Jul 26, 2020 17:45

Given that I have almost 53K reputation that seems to be inaccurate.

3

user21820

Jul 23, 2020 15:58

@sai-kartik Even if "most of them end up discouraged", we'd have to consider whether in the first place most PSQ posters just want answers and don't want to learn, much less follow instructions on how to ask a good question. As you said, if they are really interested to know the answer, they will put in effort to provide more of their own thoughts.

3

quid

Jul 23, 2020 15:04

In practice some want the opposite, namely as soon as somebody thinks they understand it it is clear.

3

quid

Jul 23, 2020 14:56

@MattSamuel I disagree with that. Something is "clear" does not mean that somebody can understand it, but instead it means that essentially everybody (with the relevant qualification) will understand it, and will understand it in the same way.

3

quid

Jul 23, 2020 14:48

@MattSamuel you keep saying that but did not answer what "clear" means.

3

Xander Henderson

Jul 23, 2020 14:47

@sai-kartik Sorry... I am only half here. Frankly, there is not much which can be done about answerers who answer poor questions. I often downvote and leave a comment explaining the downvote. I think that commenting is necessary, as I think that one needs to send a signal to the answerers that their behaviour isn't great.

3

quid

Jul 22, 2020 21:24

Moreover an issue with so-called PSQs is that the question is only inferred. The default inference being. "Please provide the answer that is likely expected in the context in which such a problem is commonly posed."

3

Rand al'Thor

Jul 22, 2020 17:39

Treatment of new users can definitely be a good topic to discuss during an election, but please try not to make it personal, especially about non-candidates.

3

Rand al'Thor

Jul 22, 2020 17:39

Of all people I'd expect mathematicians to be objective ;-)

3

Theo Bendit

Jul 22, 2020 17:03

@amWhy They're learning. Mathematically, they are children. Many of them require patience and leniency. Mix in maths anxiety, and they also need a safe space to actually gain some confidence. And while you talk about having respect and faith that your comments will cause positive growth, your comments like "Too bad for them" and "I'm happy to know they won't ask questions here" suggest something different.

3

user21820

Jul 22, 2020 11:16

And as a member of the wider mathematical community and human society, I believe we have a responsibility to make policies that encourage integrity.

3

user21820

Jul 22, 2020 05:32

@TheoBendit: So maybe you should consider the fact that users against PSQs are not actually blindly against them, but only against the whole package of "bad question plus spoon-feeding answer".

3

Jyrki Lahtonen

Jul 22, 2020 05:22

@TheoBendit And handing out copy/pastable solutions to PSQs cures math anxiety? How?

3

Thomas Ward

Jul 22, 2020 01:43

Just so you all are aware: chat flags ping all Moderators in the StackExchange Chat. Please keep this in mind when using chat flags here. Thank you!

3

user434058

Jul 21, 2020 17:33

Hi! I am quite new on MSE, and I was just looking through the 2020 moderator election nominations. And I currently see two candidates, Paramanand and Matt. To me, both of them are quite good candidates (though I am not much inclined to Matt's nomination because he apparently wants to be kinder with PSQs, whereas on Physics SE (where I primarily hang out), we close such HW like PSQs without any mercy, so yeah, basic difference in ideologies due to different exposure). [Contd.]

3

quid

Jul 20, 2020 20:56

Participation in this vote exceeds that of voting on most any meta post by at least an order of magnitude, for the most part rather two orders.

3

quid

Jul 20, 2020 20:02

1

Q: 2020 Community Moderator Election

The 2020 Community Moderator Election is now underway! Community moderator elections have three phases: Nomination phase Primary phase Election phase Most elections take between two and three weeks, but this depends on how many candidates there are. Please visit the official election page at ht...

3

Alexander Gruber

Jul 11, 2020 09:04

room topic changed to 2020 Moderator Election Chatroom: A room for users to discuss the election and interact with candidates. Please remember to keep debate civil and constructive. math.stackexchange.com/election/8 (no tags)

3

Martin Sleziak

Aug 5, 2020 06:44

Meta Stack Exchange: Which moderator election was decided with the smallest margin? (Since somewhat similar topics have been discussed here.)

2

quid

Aug 4, 2020 20:52

@pisoir how is that even relevant given that it says the suspension is for "voting irregularities"?

2

Xander Henderson

Aug 4, 2020 20:48

@pisoir My answer to question 6 is relevant. It may also be relevant to note that moderators are not at liberty to discuss moderator actions in public.

2

Asaf Karagila

Aug 4, 2020 20:05

I actually improved upon my previous announcement by 6 seconds.

2

Asaf Karagila

Aug 4, 2020 20:03

@Catija Dude, that's tradition.

2

Alexander Gruber

Aug 4, 2020 01:43

@amWhy i agree with you actually. I found it very disruptive.

2

amWhy

Aug 3, 2020 19:50

@quid The ElectionBot has dominated this thread more than any human user, in part because users have been spending more time playing with the bot than discussion the election. I see very little participation by candidates and real human users. If this is how future election chats on SE are going to operate, no one should even bother with such a chatroom.

2

user21820

Jul 30, 2020 15:34

You'd have to read their election questionnaire answers to get an idea of their character and whether you think they are suitable or not for the moderator position, not whether you think they would produce good content. One does not need to be a moderator to produce good content, but one needs to be able to listen to the common users to be a good moderator.

2

user21820

Jul 30, 2020 15:32

@Babydesta No, because there are prolific content producers who are very unsuitable to be a moderator.

2

user1729

Jul 30, 2020 07:41

I think the election bit seems more of a distraction. A lot of the chat here is bit baiting, and anyway it pushes a readily available metric over the content of the candidates nominations.

2

quid

Jul 28, 2020 10:50

The election bot answers only to a fixed set of questions (to be given in the exact form specified), which are listed on "@ElectionBot help" It is not an AI chat-bot one can talk to or anything like that.

2

user435118

Jul 27, 2020 20:34

@NikeDattani I don’t think anyone will be able to say in public if there is anything

2

user185131

Jul 27, 2020 19:18

@ElectionBot Weird, now it doesn't know that Asaf is a moderator?

2

quid

Jul 26, 2020 17:10

Good. I had that creeping suspicion it was only me. ;-)

2

sai-kartik

Jul 23, 2020 15:45

I believe that is the right action to take. Even if a PSQ is totally clear, It still is a PSQ. When we ask the user to provide some attempt, we're actively trying to help them learn. Unfortunately, most people don't get that we're trying to help them. Closing the question should ideally encourage the asker to provide more **details** or **insight** into the question. If they are really interested to know the answer, they will do so, but most of them end up discouraged and some **might** take to meta to complain about it.

2

quid

Jul 23, 2020 15:22

@MattSamuel to come back to this, I wrote about this frequently. I disagree. Many PSQs are much less clear as questions than some want to make us believe. "Determine the inverse of A = {some 2 by 2 matrix}." I would agree that it is reasonably clear what the solution is, but it is not clear what the implied questions actually is. We can default to assuming it is: "What is the solution to this problem and how to obtain it?" but that already is an interpretation, which at times is incorrect.

2