CURED

But as long as gamification is part of the conversation, this entire site is built on gamification. How many posts on meta are complaints from users about how the gamified elements of the site have hurt them? How many flags do moderators handle complaining about a downvote her or there (hint: quite a few)? While you might be above it all with respect to gamification, it is clear that many other users are not.

You are the one who keeps bringing up gamification, and how evil it is. Personally, I think that being clear about one's own motivation is good.

@XanderHenderson There is no need to say "I answered this". That should play no role whatsoever in the evaluation of whether the question should be closed, reopened, deleted etc. We are here to disseminate mathematical knowledge, not to win gaming points, badges etc.

I'm also not sure that I understand what you find so onerous about the request that people take three words to say "I answered this" or "I edited this." It gives decision makers some up-front context.

@BillDubuque Whether or not it worked fine before, the change occurred, reflecting the evolving culture of the site. Math SE is not the same place it wasa decade ago.

@XanderHenderson Afaik your claim that "there is a consensus" is quite unjustified. Even the SE system does not attach such scarlet letters to administrative actions such as flagging, voting, etc, e.g. there are no notices in the review queues highlighting actions by users who are "affiliated" with the post (whatever that may mean).

It is a request: If you are involved in a closing or deleting or reopening or whatever, and you have significantly interacted with the post which you want closed or deleted or reopened or whatever, please let us know.

And no, it is not always obvious that someone asking for action is involved in that action, e.g. the very question which was discussed a couple of hours ago, where it was not immediately obvious that the person requesting action had rewritten the question.

I won't accept what you said, I still disagree with you on multiple points. None of the things you tried to apply actually applies to this case

The original question was 158 words (822 characters). The version you posted was 339 words (1781 characters). You more than doubled the length of the question. The version you posted contained more text written by you than by the original author. This is not appropriate.

How is my action different than adding a relevant definition or theorem

Those five other members were wrong

@Jakobian You keep moving the goalposts. You believe that the question was good as is. Five other members of the community disagree. And it very much looks, to an outsider, like you usurped the original author's post by adding inorganic "context", in a way which misled open voters.

It didn't have to be included. The question was good on its own

And how was it changed

The question was only improved on

It doesn't change anything other than the quality of it. It doesn't count as an attempt

The author stated the theorem, I only added the proof

@XanderHenderson I don't see how this violates any of the points here

@ТymaGaidash I don't see a problem with it. Its a contribution to the community at large. If the OP disagrees with it, they can roll it back

What baffles me though is someone downvoted my hard work just because they felt like the question needed to be closed. Well thought behavior it is not

Motivation, relevant definitions - its all there

@Sahaj I would be inclined to close it, yes. I would suggest that, in future, if you think that something lacks context, you should not answer.

A user has asked three PSQs (one two three) in the past 16 hours, two of which got complete answers from the same high rep user :(

Perhaps this requires some sort of moderation attention? I don't know

@Peter “Everything was already clarified in the comments” is not a reason to downvote an answer.

you can just copy the relevant info out of the post and email it to yourself or something like that.

math.stackexchange.com/help/self-answer

@Peter I plan to use "dudplicate" in the future!

3 reopen-votes , please do not hesitate to delete this

reopen-voted! - please downvote so that it is deletable again

please delete

please close

This question, now closed, has been absurdly upvoted, yet it's a bare psq; needs a lot of downvotes, or deletion in three days. Please star this message.

@JoseAvilez Structural duplicate - no reason to reopen

Here in this comment a user insinuates that "closure erased my question" when in fact they self-deleted it. I proposed to them they should undelete it to remain as a duplicate signpost. If that doesn't happen, I'm thinking about voting to undelete it myself...

@Ѕᴀᴀᴅ That's hardly a new phenomenon, unfortunately. I've long struggled to propose a mechanism for flagging edit suggestions, but no mods, nor SO overseers have done a thing about very poor edit suggestions.

I am just trying to reset the tone of this room a little bit, as it seems to have gotten heated. I would suggest that all parties take a certain snow princesses's advice, and let it go.

Hence the reason for the request for deletion is largely handled by closing.

@Peter Comments are ephemeral, can be deleted at any time, and are not a replacement for a proper answer.

@amWhy I didn't downvote (yet) because I'm not sure how to best handle an accepted non-answer. Please strive to be more open minded. Not everyone manages the site the same way you do. It is absurd (and rude) to request others not to post here unless they follow your methods.

@Jakobian Looks like you answered your own question.

I don't think that either is a very good question for the format, and have no problem with either being closed.

↑ See also this message from the next door.

There's no quality control, when users over 300k continue to answer whatever they choose to answer, and are adorned with upvotes, even when answering questionable questions, and flagging re: EoQS of such users proves futile.

In any event, my main point was about the tone of the rhetoric in this room: please refrain from telling other users that the decisions they (or the community) have made are "correct" or "incorrect"---this tends to have an inflammatory effect. Focus on desired future actions (e.g. "I think that this post should be closed because..." or "I would like to reopen this post because..."), not the legitimacy of past actions.

This room is now eleven years old. Happy anniversary - I guess...

D1, D2

del-pls 20k+ combinatorics This decade old PSQ with no answers will not be Roomba'd, but should probably be deleted. Monochromatic triangles in a two-coloring of the plane‭ - Ternary‭ 2012-05-15 18:46:52Z

It should be given a biscuit.