« first day (506 days earlier)   

6:14 AM
@Tyberius I totally agree that a no-bump edit mechanism would have lots of value! There's things we want to edit without making them go to the "front of the line", especially when we're doing a massive re-tagging campaign to burninate one tag and replace it with another (new questions don't deserve to have 10 questions go ahead suddenly!). I totally agree that the 90% answered target is far more realistic than the "absolute" target of always staying under 201 unanswered.
I have though, been doing a lot of work on the unanswered queue (even more than normal) whenever we hit around 50, 100, 150, and 200 unanswered questions. It might not have been obvious, but I was doing a lot, which is why we stayed mostly under 50 for so long, then mostly under 100 for so long, then same with 150. The number of pages in the unanswered queue makes a huge difference, but of course we can't stay under 201 forever.
About voting practices: I wrote a long time ago:
"Hi Tyberius, I noticed you answered this question, so have seen it. However there's only 1 upvote (from me). This user seems quite new to Stack Exchange, with <200 points on MMSE and <20 points on their 2nd highest stack (Engineering.SE).
According to your answer, their question asks about their confusion with something that turned out to be a typo in the original published AIP paper. For a seemingly junior researcher to find a mistake in a published paper seems good. Can we vote like private β?"
I still do not understand why you didn't vote on that question even though you answered it. The user asked something that was on-topic enough for you to answer without closing it, and apparently it was about an error they found in a published paper?
Your answer begins with "This seems to be a typo in the paper" doesn't that make it a completely valid question for a novice researcher?
If mods don't believe in voting consistently with how we all did earlier in the site's lifetime, that's totally their right, but could we discuss it on Meta then? I would start the discussion but I feel like I've already posted too much about my frustrations with this community's drop in willingness to vote, and posting again on Meta about the same topic might not be so constructive by and large.
 
 
9 hours later…
3:10 PM
@user1271772 I actually did wind up voting for that question, I believe after you pointed it out. It was mainly just an oversight that I forgot to vote on the question after typing up the answer. I did decline the flag (and your more recent flags) about my/the other mods voting as I felt this was an inappropriate use of flags.
I think we can discuss voting behavior here in chat or on Meta, but flags should really be for pointing out problems with the question/answer itself or abuses of voting (sockpuppeting, targeted down voting).
 

« first day (506 days earlier)