« first day (12 days earlier)      last day (4 days later) » 

vzn
vzn
12:56 AM
agreed. not sure how much time it takes. maybe less than blogging wink
 
vzn
vzn
1:15 AM
there is not much info on what moderators actually do, what takes time. we can guess at that. was telling cohort today that frankly, maybe the job aint so great anyway haha
it probably has a lot to do with moderator style. if the moderator wants to micromanage it & hit the site "obsessively", it will defn take more time....
have learned lots here too myself over 2yr & its one of my main reasons for sticking around.
generally great way to keep a pulse on the field & occasionally inform others of it too.
agree the site could have a significant future depending on how the cards play out.
however have felt its been in the doldrums for awhile... somewhat indicated by low meta activity...
maybe you can work in some refs to the site on your blog... not a big deal hopefully?
2
Q: promoting TCS/stackexchange

vznhave tried to hold my tongue as long as possible to get a feel for this site culture. however, is it just me or does it feel like mass entropy has set in? there is a dribble of new questions daily, but it appears to me it has long been below the official stackexchange threshhold for launching gro...

discussion
wrote that 1yr ago it may be more true today....
I cite it tons on my blog...
do what I can. just posted announcement to google+ TCS... [geez their links are so long they dont seem to copy here]
oh typing "site:egtheory.wordpress.com link:cstheory.stackexchange.com" into google, see youve already been hard at it. ok! well done then!
 
 
4 hours later…
1337holiday
1337holiday
5:16 AM
anyone on?
need some help with a turing machine problem
 
 
13 hours later…
vzn
vzn
6:31 PM
r. asked me in cs.se chat about my opinion of the P vs NP topic etc on site. here is the "official" policy.
12
Q: Is it ok to ask about the correctness of preprints on crank-friendly topics?

David EppsteinSee this question in which someone asked for an update on the status of an arxiv preprint on graph isomorphism. It was downvoted, with a comment "Are this kind of discussions on-topic here? I think there are too many claims of P = NP, P ≠ NP, etc. in ArXiv and elsewhere.", but my own feeling is t...

discussion status-completed faq scope policy
my position on this: want to simply unlock this post to start. my position is close to that of Eppstein's who asks the question.
put comments on this post a long time ago iirc but they were deleted by k. & triggered him locking down the post.
ie typically heavyhanded
think se has a great potential role in analyzing electronic preprints and ties in re my advocacy of collaborative science etc. as in my intro.
here is a recent great example. an se question that recently went viral on stats.se a close "sister" site which I have ref'd many tcs.se questioners to (because of close overlap eg machine learning etc)
75
Q: Is Facebook coming to an end?

LessFaceMoreBookRecently, this paper has received a lot of attention (e.g. from WSJ). Basically, the authors conclude that Facebook will lose 80% of its members by 2017. They base their claims on an extrapolation of the SIR model, a compartmental model frequently used in epidemiology. Their data is drawn from ...

hypothesis-testing correlation epidemiology facebook
in fact have pioneered use of se for analyzing STEM papers/preprints etc re new, somewhat revolutionary peer review system.
20
stemreview

Proposed Q&A site for academics in the STEM fields (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics), this site will review papers, long and short, having some novelty (ie. not homework assignments).

Currently in definition.

 
vzn
vzn
6:57 PM
tooting the horn a little, here is an example answer/response for a preprint review type question
9
A: Is Facebook coming to an end?

vznA few basic issues stand out with this paper: It assumes correlation of search engine queries about a rising social network with the membership increases. This may have correlated in the past, but may not in the future. There are very few new large social networks. You can almost count them on ...

hi chao
 
 
3 hours later…
Artem Kaznatcheev
Artem Kaznatcheev
9:55 PM
@vzn the easiest way to see that I spend a lot of effort promoting cstheory is by looking at the booster badges.
@vzn discussing preprints is allowed on the site, as long as the questions asked are research level (hint: just because the question is about a research preprint doesn't necessarily mean the question is research level). What is not allowed is asking about crank-friendly topics, these are easy to see for active researchers but unfortunately hard to define and we usually follow Potter Stewart's "I know it when I see it".
Also, people expect one to abide by standard decorum and the 'rules' of public scientific discourse.
@vzn I understand that you feel persecuted, and that us "high ranked" members are trying to keep you down, but that is simply not the case. I think Dilworth's answer to your meta question and Gilles' comment really capture the feeling of a lot of cstheory participants (as might be obvious from the upvotes they received).
I really wish you would try to heed some of these comments. Even if you are a genius and have deep new insights into cstheory, they are not useful if you can't communicate them to the rest of the community.
Unfortunately, to communicate to the rest of the community, you have to abide by their norms. Including the norms of respect in writing and conciseness.
I hope you don't write off my comments as another prosecution and dismissal. You are a very active participant on the site, and I would be extremely happy to see you participating in a manner that more people find to be constructive.
 
vzn
vzn
10:20 PM
its constructive
the booster badges are great, you must be getting lots of hits on your blog
as for "persecution", did not use that word, it is your word
imho votes sometimes simply reflect personality conflicts & do not match content... ppl say the site is not a popularity contest but in many ways, that is an utter contradiction with reality....
its a popularity contest for scientists
slash academics
its all about the cliques[tm]
there is a lot of ulterior psychology with voting, there are the surface reasons for voting [x] and the ulterior reasons [y].
it is a well known tenet from psychology [proved in many experiments] that what ppl say motivates them vs what really motivates them are often 2 distinct things
so ppl are free to downvote without explanation & use petty reasons/criteria behind the scenes, or downvote and state reasons that are not accurate etc
have avoided meta for months! all my activity there tends to get downvoted anyway, nothing new there. my new burst of activity is based on k. resigning and no longer in a position to [lead] his near OCD "crank combat"...
am not really very active over last few months; its been falling because, nothing on the main site seems interesting sometimes
anyone with nonacademic credentials on the site will face an uphill battle at times earning rep, its not unique to myself, have observed it elsewhere...
am somewhat enjoying participating with the various disabilities piled on its just an additional challenge
have earned ~4.5K over 2yr and that rep/time is on the level of some sr members...
as for dilworth, he has 100pts last I looked, not sure why either of us should give a slightest @#$& about his opinion, he cannot even vote (150pt min)... he is likely to disappear quickly/indefinitely like 99% other "members" do on the site eg like the "vzn elite 6" referred to....
its a cyber bermuda triangle haha
if I get a single vote in the election all the [temporary burst of] effort will be worth it....
already a major paradigm shift on the site has been effected.... am judging dynamics of situation would have proceeded totally differently without any action(s) on my part....
so my middle name is catalyst
actually agree with r.s criticisms of the site ref'd in meta!
nevertheless sometimes it is good to have a reminder of what exactly are the boundaries slash limitations of the status quo
in Computer Science, Oct 9 '13 at 7:02, by Raphael
@RealzSlaw For what it's worth, I'm not that interested in complexity theory. The big open questions are relevant -- but not as much as complexity people seem to think -- and some of the techniques are interesting, but much of the field seems to be busy digging deep holes or erecting ivory towers, whichever metaphor you prefer.
in Computer Science, Jan 23 at 15:23, by Raphael
@Juho I have said once, and I still think it's true at least in part, that cstheory.SE suffers from a really narrow scope and according user base. The most active people seem to be "diggers" deep down in rabbit holes that have a very particular, shared point of view on mathematics and TCS.
ppl say they dont like my style....
guess what AK, got that same feedback on ~day1
my cyberzen question pondered for 2yrs on the site... which is the numbskull.... me or the group?
STILL dont have the answer to that one HAHAHA
it is true I sometimes play games, but maybe they are not the ones you realize, wink
speaking of rabbit holes...
do you really want that mod job? haha
....
This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill - the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill - you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes.
 

« first day (12 days earlier)      last day (4 days later) »