@XanderHenderson But moderators can still delete comments under nominations, correct? At least, I've seen some be removed (- very much in good faith, by the way -). So it's curious you can delete comments but not address flags

@FShrike Yes, I believe that diamond moderators can remove comments.

@jasmine There is an election thread (math.stackexchange.com/election/10) and there is a chatroom devoted to election discussion (this room). Please do not campaign on meta---the meta site should be reserved for discussions of Math SE procedure, policy, and the software which makes the site run.

That being said, I do have a question for you: in the now-deleted meta post (for users with sufficient reputation: math.meta.stackexchange.com/q/37671 ), you stated that you would "...remov[e] the downvoting policy for new users." What does this mean? What policy do you presume currently exists? How would you enforce this apparant "don't downvote posts by new users" policy?

@XanderHenderson is very serious about election :)

@XanderHenderson okay . I mean that the downvote feature will not be available for new user posts. So that new user posts won't get downvotes.This policy may be changed by moderators.

@jasmine How are you going to make that happen?

@jasmine And how is that gonna help the new users?

how long a user is considered "new"?

@jasmine new user posts? So answers as well?

That would, if implemented, create a lot of spam by the confused about the system new users that can't comment on questions, and community wouldn't be able to moderate those

Are you aware of how Math.SE moderation by the community works?

Hi all

I gelive a major issue is downvoating

I believe player should take their responsibilities when down voating

when I started sometime ago I got many dowvoates on a question that brought my score almost to negative, this was a major issue , it was one of my first questions and I was not sure of the rules and instead of explaining what was wrong many users just straight downvoted any question without explenations

you should be able to see who downvoted the question nd be abet o report people if their downvoted are illegitimate or if they were given without any reason of the downvote or issue otherwise users might have a hard time gathering reputaion

thanks for hearing me out

@FShrike you are right

for the thing of getting posts reoppened

@XanderHenderson I belve that downvoting on new users should be allowed it just should be a little harder on everyone to downvote and it should be first mandatory to explain the downvote and if the post is changed or the reason why it was downvoted gets commented on and flagged the user shoudl keep providing reasons of his downvote until an agreement in reached

@XanderHenderson By making new EoQS. In the new EoOS rule I will mention that downvoting won't be allowed for new user posts.

@Jakobian I have no experience with Maths stack exchange moderation

@SoumikMukherjeeThere will not be an automatic suspension for new users if there is no downvote. The suspension process is automatic for new users when downvotes appear on their posts without intervention from a moderator.

@jasmine I am not aware of any automatic suspensions of new users just because of getting downvotes, unless they have done something like serial spamming.

Following on from what I said: you know, really a big problem is how little we exercise reasonable upvotes

@jasmine I think you're assuming that all new users know about SE's policies and have read this

@jasmine How would you enforce such a rule?

Also, do you presume that you can just implement such a rule without support of the other moderators? What if the other moderators object?

@jasmine Such a rule would be plain and simply unenforceable. Did you know that moderators don't get to see who voted how either? You could achieve that only by getting the software changed. But the diamond moderators have no say on such matters - StackExchange the company could do it, sure, but then you should push it in the network wide meta.

^ In addition to the points raised by Xander.

@FShrike Some of your posts make it sound like you want to use a moderator's single vote to change the fate of some post. Don't you think that would be abuse of moderator power, ignoring vox populi? Can you elaborate on that? What if another moderator wants to overturn your vote?

@JyrkiLahtonen I'm not about ignoring vox populi. The people in the guise of question-askers are quite well in my consideration, in all I'm talking about here. If I may quote my nomination post, I wrote "I would broadly toe the usual line". I do not intend to, if I am elected, lock horns with everyone and chaotically overturn deletions or whatever on a whim. Cases where it is genuinely unfair are rare; if a moderator has closed something I felt shouldn't have been (cont.)

Then I would just ask for clarification about the reasons, respectfully express a disagreement - talk it out

If community users, not moderators, have closed something and I can see the question has now been edited into a good state, I would reopen it. If the question remains in a poor state, I would not. If it is in a murky state, I would .. do nothing, except maybe prompt the op to make some changes

I just maintain that sometimes questions are closed when, really, a little bit of good faith goes a long way and value can be found. E.g. in the post I mentioned earlier today in the CURED chat, the op did in fact come good on their promise - they edited with more details, and they thanked me for supporting them. That is a good thing, and an example of what I mean.

@FShrike: I think using moderators super-powers to reopen or delete questions is not very ethical. There are already mechanisms (the Reopen/Undelete post in Meta for example. Doing so, moderators become like greek gods (although luckily out current moderators have conduct themselves ethically).

@FShrike: As a moderator, even though you are also a member and have your own opinions and biases in what is fair and what is not) your vote has much more weight. That is why for the moist part I have not seen moderators voting to reopen, close, delete or undelete questions without having input (in the way or flags or request) from the community first.

@Mittens respectfully, please don't phrase it like that. I'm not sure where this image of me wielding moderator super-power like some King is coming from. Mr Henderson referred to 'cosmic powers' the other day. This was obviously not a bad thing.. moderators have more power, it is there to be used for something. Judiciously, of course.

The only recent indication I gave that might support this fear - I wrote to Jyrki that "... [if] I can see the question has now been edited into a good state, I would reopen it." This is already what the reopen procedure is for. I would not be perverting its use case.

There are two things to juggle here. My own opinion, and what I would consider worth acting on in my capacity as moderator. I guess I can't ask you to trust me to keep those distinct, since you don't know me, but I don't think I've given cause to be distrusted on that point. Let me reiterate: "I would broadly toe the usual line."

Were I elected, I would be the newest and youngest moderator. I know my place.. I would be quite deferent. Again, I have no wish to lock horns. Just bring some of my user-friendliness (which I know for a fact can lead to positive outcomes for users and the site as a whole) to the table

I don't mean, for example, to check every single closed post to see if I agree with the closure or not. If moderators rely on flags, then I will mostly rely on flags as well.

@FShrike The "community user" does not close questions. Do you mean "If a question has been closed by a vote of the community..."?

@XanderHenderson Community members would have been better wording. The intended meaning was, general users from the community

In general, I try to be very careful not to unilaterally close questions unless either (a) the question is, in my opinion, unequivocally out of line, (b) I have a strong suspicion that the question is a duplicate and I want to buy myself some time to find a target, ir (c) I am at least the fourth, if not fifth, close vote.

I practice a similar approach to reopen votes.

@Mittens Moderators are entrusted with such powers because we are expected to deal with spam and abuse, which typically requires faster action. It is necessary for moderators to have this power.

@FShrike: it is not about super-powers per se, but rather tools to make their Jons. My view of moderator is much more in line to what Webster's dictionary states or even along the lines of the Cambridge dictionary. Moderators should not be the judge and the jury at the same time.

@FShrike "Dr". If you are going to use titles, mine is "Dr". Though I am happy to just be called "Xander".

@Mittens Have you read A Theory of Moderation? Moderators on SE are empowered---and expected--- to be cops, judge, jury, and executioner. This is entirely consistent with definition 2 "a person who administers an online forum, chat room, or group" (for whatever dictionary definitions are worth in a debate).

@FShrike: Of course, as members of the community they have their own opinions on matters. So when they think a posting should be reopen, closed etc, they use the request at Meta or other community resources (some make their suggestions in CURED) instead of using their mod-tools do do it without community input.

(Generally, I find that if a debate has devolved to "That isn't what the dictionary says!", things have gone horribly awry).

If you believe that this is an incorrect view of moderation, I would encourage you to (a) lobby SE to change the powers that moderators have, and/or (b) run to be a moderator yourself.

@Mittens Am I coming off a bit strong? I'm concerned by this idea that I would pose a threat to fair use of a judge-jury-executioner model

Maybe I'm writing theatrically and I'm being interpreted at the wrong end of the scale, not sure. I'll just say it again: I would broadly toe the usual line.

Thanks for the clarification @FShrike. I'm not sure I approve of the idea of a moderator reopening a question in such a case: A) when I was a mod I got a similar urge sometimes, and was (in my opinion) duly chastised for it in meta. B) I have more faith on the reviewers. Usually a well edited question will be reopened, and it is a bit pointless to "accelerate" the process. May be I was too timid to use the diamond powers when I held them, but your mileage may vary:-)

I come from a perspective where I almost never see worthy things reopened or undeleted. As mod, maybe I would see a broader spectrum of cases.

@XanderHenderson: I am not surprise of your views, that is why this time I don't want to have buyer's remorse. My preference are for moderators that have been with us before you. I would not be either a good candidate for moderator, not have the appetite to add a taks to something that I do as a hobby. But thanks for your suggestions.

@Mittens Then I must admit that I really don't understand what your goals are. You seem to have a view of moderation that is wildly different from what SE believes moderation should be, what the majority of the community seems to think moderation should be, what the current moderation team seems to think moderation should be, and what the software explicitly tells us moderation should be.

If you are unsatisfied with this model of moderation, yet don't want to take any actions to change this model, how should I interpret your complaints about that model?

@XanderHenderson: at this point I rather spent time analyzing the candidates views than chatting with you.

@Mittens You don't have to respond to me, but this is a public forum, and I am just as entitled to speak here as anyone else. I don't appreciate your remark, which I basically understand to mean "Please shut up."

If I may, I understood it to mean "I don't really want to answer these questions / pursue this line of conversation".

@FShrike: As to whether you're coming too strong or you would post a threat, etc. No, after all there other moderators and I imagine they work based on consensus when major issues arise, but what do I know. I don't doubt that you have very good intensions and would strive to do conduct yourself according to the rules set for moderators in SE.

A question to all candidates: What are your feelings/thoughts about duplicates? In theory they are frowned upon, but in practice it is difficult to find a consensus. Some high rep users answer them because they are on mobile, when it is allegedly more difficult to search. Some want (IMO) too perfect a match even though the math is the same. Some use the dupehammers to link to their own old answers (I sort of see that because it is easier to find old posts within your own answers).

@FShrike That's possible, but, again, one doesn't have to proclaim that they are not going to respond---they can simply stop responding.

             new candidate

@FShrike: I just want to have an idea of how you intend to approach things. Specially in light of the comments of Jyrki, who I think was a superb moderator. Also, notice that as far as I now, there are no term limits, so I want to make sure that when I vote, I have some information.

That is very much fair

(cont'd) Confession time. I have been toying with a philosophy (not willing to call it a personal policy, yet) that in doubtful cases it is ok for newbies to answer a question that is "likely to be a duplicate", but it is absolutely an abuse for a veteran to answer such a question. To me, over 95 per cent of (new) calculus and/or elementary number theory and/or linear algebra questions are duplicates - at least in some sense. But...

@JyrkiLahtonen: how difficult it is to merge duplicates? I have seem duplicates whith answers are very different to other linked postings. Closure for me is not a problem, but deleting such postings it is. One moderator told me that merging is destructive, irreversible and a tool of last resort. In any event, I am looking forward for the candidates views ion this...

The idea being that allowing this would help talented new users to earn the basic privileges. I'm not sure it is a good idea :-)

@JyrkiLahtonen I think genuine duplicates should be closed, no doubt about it. However, if the duplicated question received a good answer, which is reasonably different from the other answers at the original post, then the answer should be migrated over to the original post. Sometimes this isn't possible, because the original question got closed (which is kind of funny). There are rare instances where users close non-duplicates as duplicates, which I would want to look out for.

I also think good faith would be assumed. Many times have I answered a duplicate because I simply hadn't realised it would be a duplicate: I myself tend to assume good faith in the questioner, that they couldn't find what they were looking for themselves. This is intentionally naive; if I'm wrong, then I can calmly delete my answer, no problem. If I'm right, then I've helped someone

@JyrkiLahtonen Honestly, that is very much how I have tended to handle EoQS flags. I tend to try to give new users a bit more room to make mistakes, particularly when it comes to the selection of questions to answer. And duplicate questions are not generally Roomb'd, so a new user doesn't generally lose XP if the question they have answered is dupe-closed.

So users, in my view, unless I guess reputation-hunting is obviously occurring (quite difficult to know for sure) shouldn't be especially criticised for answering dupes

@Xander Glad to hear our thinking is similar here.

@FShrike: Your second point is interesting. Hence my opinion that if several duplicates are found with good answers, they get merged. Unless that process is indeed a royal pain in the neck.

@Mittens On many occasions the idea of merging is rejected, because the variants use very different notation. It would take a non-trivial amount of editing of all the answers to get a passable match. And, yes, irreversible actions are a pain in the HQ to administer.

@Mittens well, I suppose moderators can get involved then... I wouldn't mind moving distinct answers over to duplicate questions when appropriate

@JyrkiLahtonen: thanks for the input.

@FShrike: thanks for taking time to answer y questions/objections. Time to go back to work.

:thumbs:

→ 6 messages moved to Math Meta Chat

Hi :) I've decided to withdraw, mainly because I don't have time lately but also because I need to manage my mental health. (I'll be fine.)

@Shaun That's fine. Don't overdo it