« first day (1178 days earlier)      last day (469 days later) » 

2:20 AM
@HDE226868 I sure will
Hello chat, next person who looks at this, please star me so it gets more attention. I've spend basically a whole day analyzing voting patterns, and it has become apparent that some voters are casting very many close vote compared to the historical pattern on this site. Is it justified to call them out by name in Meta to suggest that they tone it back on the close votes?
8
 
hey there @kingledion
 
@Shalvenay Hey, whats up
 
@kingledion not a whole lot, tinkering with adventure-bits here and waiting for parts to come in, as for you?
 
I am just about to leave work......now
Sorry I have to run! See you around
 
@kingledion ah, cya
 
2:29 AM
@kingledion Better safe than sorry: contact the users via chat and ask if it's alright to put their name on a "leaderboard". If they object, anonymize their name.
Although I feel it's alright to build a list.
 
hey there @Vylix
@Vylix worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/review/close/stats << is this what you and @kingledion are after?
 
@Shalvenay nah, it's this answer on meta worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com/a/5658/34288
Personally, I don't mind being named out, but I'm not sure how the community react to naming.
 
ah, I see
 
3:08 AM
@kingledion I'd second what @Vylix said; it's probably best to ask them first.
Very nice answer, by the way.
 
hey there @HDE226868
 
@Shalvenay Hey there. How are you doing?
 
@HDE226868 alright here, as for you?
 
0
A: Sandbox for Proposed Questions

DubukayHow debilitating is it to lose an arm? It's a common enough TV trope where someone loses an arm, usually to great dramatic effect. However, there's a huge variation in how debilitating this, between someone going into shock and dying almost immediately, to someone continuing to fight for the rem...

 
@Shalvenay Pretty good.
 
3:24 AM
@HDE226868 I really wish that I could find a way to get random terrain gen and GIS to play nicely without having to do all the hard work myself pretty much
 
 
2 hours later…
5:29 AM
@kingledion Not really no. If you want to have a conversation I would suggest posting on meta first.
 
 
3 hours later…
8:43 AM
@kingledion If they are active in the chat it might be a good idea to talk with them here. There is no guarantee that people will see a Meta Post. Theoretically you could vote very often, but never visit Meta. You would need a featured Meta Post to make it at least somewhat visible on the Main Site. And that doesn't sound too nice because it's shaming, for the whole community to see. There are not so many people in the chat, which makes this a bit more relaxed. At least that's what I would expect.
 
If we have someone voting to close everything that passes by them in the queue then yes, that's a problem. If the votes are all reasonable and the questions needed to be closed, then they're helping the community by being more active.
3
Noting that I barely register in those stats, I'm glad other people are keeping the queues under control.
 
@Separatrix Yes, we need people who are actively watching out for those queues. There are too many people who never look at the reviews even if they have the reputation. It's a difficult topic.
 
9:09 AM
The biggest problem is making a call on borderline cases or cases where one has no expertise.
My biggest grip with the close queue at the moment is that we seem to close anything that depends on "soft" sciences as opinion based.
gripe*
 
I think everyone has a few "favourite" tags and a few "hated" tags, as in: you are more strict or lenient with one or the other. For example I know that I skip softer science more often than harder science and that I tend to leave magic open.
I feel like some people don't realize that they could also choose "skip" and instead have a tendency of voting to close if they are not sure, when they should really leave it for others to decide who are sure. Although it might be difficult to start specific discussions without making it a public shaming, especially with those people who are not active in chat / on meta.
 
I'm not sure how visible the stats are to people with lower rep, but the links in chat and meta give me the names
 
Personally I would prefer if people started to keep an eye on the stuff they voted to close. Like a "Reminder to close voters", but that you should check back at least once 24 hours later to see if something happened and the OP has taken your or others advice, which should definitely be given when VTC'ing
 
I don't think that's likely to happen with our most prolific closers
I'd potentially like to see the reopen queue more active, though that's automatically populated if the question is edited
 
9:24 AM
@Separatrix Which links give you the names? For example the queries that king referred to have to be adapted a bit. (Although the first few names are pretty obvious, but I don't know how he counted me for example - I don't have the 3k for as long as others.)
 
The first is overall from the queue, which isn't perfect as those with rep can vtc directly from the question
The second is for this calendar year but shows only close votes
Or rather, only successful close votes on undeleted questions
 
The first shows reviews, not necessarily close votes. I can also vote to leave open. The second needs adapation because it doesn't show me. The minimum rep to be considered for the queue is 10k, but it needs to only be 3k.
Those values are pretty far from what king actually used for his analysis. Especially because the first is also overall, while he focuses on this year.
 
So he's used the second one, I'm just rerunning it counting users from 3k though
Not sure if that link will work, I've not tried this before but it's now got you in the results
However it still shows the same few users with massively more close votes than the general population
 
9:41 AM
@Separatrix Yeah, but I am not sure if that is already the result for the different groups he mentioned here. I mean, the name for the highest "group of 1" is pretty obvious and there are only 3 people available with enough votes for the "group of 2"
But for the rest of the analysis I don't see how we could assume more than "Yeah, you're voting to close a lot of stuff". And that's not inherently a bad thing.
 
There are a small number of users at the upper end of the scale who were excluded from the previous result
Yeah, not inherently bad without specific user analysis
 
Voting to close a lot of stuff without any guidance for the user would be a bad thing. But when leaving useful comments I think it's okay. The rest of the community can then decide whether they are right or not
Being active is not a crime.
 
Being very active is also not a crime
After all, in the period shown, it's only 3 close votes a day
Just a lot more than the rest of us are doing
 
Yeah, after all the idea of SE is community self-moderation after all. And some people are just more active than others. If people want to see the current close/reopen vote behaviour changed the easiest thing to do is to start a few discussions and actively review stuff accordingly, writing comments to show this way to other users, ...
@Separatrix But that's again not keeping in mind how long a user has the privilege. Again as an example I have my privilege for maybe half the year, so my counts should be higher. I have over 900 helpful flags for example, a lot of which were pre-2k question closure flags.
 
That's some enthusiastic flagging. I hit high rep fairly quickly due to a couple of early answers and was always nervous of the queues for that reason.
 
9:52 AM
Not even half a year, my first close review is from September. I spent quite a long time under the 3k.
 
I got my first gold badge and access to queues within a week. Still in beta at that point though
 
There are a lot of problems I see with these discussions that could alienate some our most active users and not too many problems with the voting behaviour in general - from some users I would prefer more comments when VTCing and I would love to see the reopen queue being used more actively.
4
@Separatrix It took me about 8 months to get to the close/reopen queues.
Gold badge maybe half a year or so.
 
What you need is a couple of good Santa questions to come up early on
I think it helps not being christian so I can be cynical about Santa without treading on childhood memories
 
Ah, I've read those. Some were pretty good.
 
I may have spammed the gold badges a little, it seems I'm something of a populist
 
9:57 AM
It's kind of sad that the special reopen room didn't work out quite the way it was intended.
@Separatrix You have 8 answers over 100 votes, impressive
 
and something close to 10% of all populist badges on the stack
 
The only really rare badge I can throw in is Archaeologist. I currently am the only one with that badge.
Most of my badges are activity related instead of content related, such as Marshal and Copy Editor.
 
Good solid community badges those
Awarded for making the stack a better place :)
 
(That also makes me quite a bit biased when it comes to these discussions - I am quite often part of the "close fast, reopen fast" front, which many think is just a "close fast, reopen never" front.)
 
It often is reopen never, but the close fast is important for those
 
10:03 AM
@Separatrix Thanks, but they are not about the content and the content is why people are here after all. I am just better suited to editing sutff than writing it myself.
 
Content needs moderators and editors as well as authors
I appreciate that some people are very active on the moderation front. We note that some are significantly more active that the rest and hope that this work done with due care and attention but I don't feel it's necessary to check up on this any further.
6
 
@Separatrix My line of thinking is very similar. I don't think we need to specifically investigate users. But maybe we need some Meta discussions about preferred moderation behaviour, such as the "Reminder to Close-Voters" and similar posts for reopening. They could be made featured posts so that they are visible on the Main Site.
 
10:58 AM
Hmmmmmmm.
So, shall we begin?
 
 
3 hours later…
2:10 PM
Hmm, you know how the price of technology eventually comes down? I wonder what it would cost to make the $20 million dollar man now, and if I could get the leg modifications for less that $25,000?
 
@AndyD273 Isn't that what it costs to see a doctor for a cold in the US?
4
 
@Separatrix Here is the query I used to count close and opens data.stackexchange.com/worldbuilding/query/768427/…
Note the parameter doesn't work, you have to edit to change the start time variable at the top of the page
 
2:27 PM
@kingledion I don't know about naming people in the answer it'self, BUT you could post the link to the query you used to get the data in your answer and let people figure it out on their own...
 
@AndyD273 It's in the line above yours
 
@Separatrix "In the answer"
I'm not going to edit his answer for him.
 
He's put two answers in, the link is in the other one
 
Ah, I didn't scroll down that far. Just read the top 2
And apparently he doesn't have his final version in that answer either
 
It doesn't show anything really different, the missed people are further down the scale
 
3:05 PM
@AndyD273? Did you read it?
nuclear explosion goes off in the background, followed by the Soviet anthem playing in the background
 
@FutureHistorian Sorry, it's on my list, I just have a project I'm really hoping to finish today
And coworkers keep trying to distract me with low priority nuisance problems...
 
I'll get to it
 
In an unrelated note: although the Soviets were authorised to nuke the Americans in the event of an invasion, would some officers be reluctant to do so?
Just asking how many officers would actually launch those tactical nukes vs those that wait a while before doing so.
@Separatrix? Is it too broad to ask about the possibility that any of the missile sites in Cuba could survive the initial air strikes by the Americans?
Because just in case, I am going to post it on the proposed questions thing on Meta.
 
@FutureHistorian If you post a question to the sandbox be sure to wait at least 24 hours to get feedback this time.
 
3:22 PM
@FutureHistorian The Russians were betting they would and the Americans were hoping they wouldn't. The actual outcome is a total unknown.
 
@FutureHistorian It depends on how much hard data we have on the sites. If there isn't a lot, it's probably too broad/opinion based, because you essentially have to guess to answer, if we've got a lot, it's more likely to be ok.
 
Oh.
NOTE: Is it fine if I mention the names of the missile sites?
 
@FutureHistorian If you're wanting feedback on the question why don't you ask those questions at the bottom of your post in the sandbox.
 
I will.
Done!
 
3:49 PM
0
A: Sandbox for Proposed Questions

Future HistorianCuban Missile War: How probable/improbable is it that any of the missile sites in Cuba at the time of the Cuban Missile Crisis could survive American air strikes? So to clarify on things, this is related to the Cuban Missile War situation I am working on in the site's Universe Factory blog, so ...

 
@FutureHistorian I've given you a lot of feedback.
 
Thank you!
Oh and NOTE: I just wanted to know if any of the sites could survive the initial air strikes before American troops could land.
As in: would the 82nd and 101st + US Marines in Guantanamo Bay need to destroy the remaining silos in addition to overthrowing Fidel Castro?
 
4:08 PM
@MichaelK: New and exciting question about Ludicrous Leg Man: Would it be possible for him to reach escape velocity not by jumping, but by kicking the floor so fast the ensuing explosion hurls him out of the atmosphere?
 
@JoeBloggs What's the difference between jumping and kicking the floor?
 
@JoeBloggs Does his powers apply to surviving the explosion? Because that's not directly related to his legs?
 
@Gryphon? In the blog series, should each part of the Cuban Missile War series be one day of the war up until MAD?
 
If you want. Do whatever you'd like, I'm not the one writing the stories.
 
@FutureHistorian The point of nukes is as a deterrent. The threat being a massive retaliation to any attack. An attack on the nuclear sites is exactly the sort of act that needs to result in a retaliatory strike for nukes to have any value.
 
4:14 PM
In other words: they need to launch before the silos are blown to pieces by the Americans, correct?
Well, I do have something. Perhaps the Soviet commanders in Cuba decide to wait for further orders from Moscow rather than launch immediately?
 
@FutureHistorian They would probably have orders to launch if US bombers entered Cuban airspace.
 
So, their reluctance costs them most of the silos, while the Americans move in to destroy the remaining silos by ground troops, so when the Soviet officers realise what is happening......thousands of US forces and thousands of Cuban civilians in Havana, plus Guantanamo Bay are vapourised in an instant, and then they get the order to launch from Moscow in the confusion, as reports come from Europe that Germany is in the middle of a tactical nuclear exchange.
@sphennings. The Americans are attacking with conventional weapons, not nuclear ones (yet).
 
Remember the point of nukes is to be able to say "Don't make me use this" If you don't have nukes you can't make that threat.
 
As in: the B-47s will move in ONLY if the tactical nukes are used/OPLAN 316 fails horribly.
Well, that is what the air strikes are for @sphennings. Take out the threat (or at least cripple it) and you can invade Cuba.
 
@FutureHistorian Since the obvious response to an attack on Cuban nuclear sites would be to nuke the US why wouldn't the US use nukes to ensure the destruction of the sites.
 
4:21 PM
@sphennings. They would, but not yet.
 
@FutureHistorian Why?
 
I am waiting for the Soviets/Cubans to nuke the 82nd and 101st Airborne Divisions + Guantanamo Bay and the marines there.
That was Plan B for the Americans.
 
@FutureHistorian In most nuclear scenarios one of the highest priority targets are the enemies nuclear assets. Taking them out is an act of defense. This is why submarines are an important part of the nuclear arsenal. They cannot be taken out by an initial barrage guaranteeing that there will be a nuclear response.
@FutureHistorian Perhaps this article would give you an idea of the strike options that JFK was considering.
 
4:38 PM
@sphennings semantics, I guess.
@kingledion your maths formatting didn’t work, btw.
 
4:55 PM
@sphennings What are you talking about? I do a lot of math formatting....
 
@kingledion I think you meant to ping Joe Bloggs.
 
Oh snap
I'm all messed up
 
5:28 PM
O_O
@sphennings? So, when do they launch if the missile sites in Cuba are out of the picture?
Well, most of them anyway.
 
5:50 PM
When does who launch what missiles at whom?
 
When do the Soviets launch at CONUS if the majority of the missiles sites in Cuba are out of the picture?
 
Probably as soon as they suspect that the US attacking them is inevitable so that they can take out as many nuclear assets before they have a chance to be used. In nuclear war a preemptive attack is an act of defense.
 
@sphennings. Whether they would follow that order is another story, though.
 
@FutureHistorian Remember when I said "If you post a question to the sandbox be sure to wait at least 24 hours to get feedback this time."?
 
O_O
reads the chat log
 
6:01 PM
Perhaps it would be a good idea to see if your edits addressed the suggestions that were made before posting the question.
 
Well, I did, @sphennings.
Just in case, though.....
0
Q: If the US launched air strikes against Cuba during the Cuban Missile Crisis, would any Soviet missile sites be able to survive?

Future HistorianSo, this is a question I wanted to ask in relation to the blog post I made introducing the Cuban Missile War series of blog posts, which is the result of the Cold War escalating into World War III during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Here is the link, though to summarise, the point of divergence is t...

 
@FutureHistorian I saw...
That's why I'm mentioning it to you again.
 
Oh.
Well, just checking.
 
You've done this before. Which is why I brought it up before suggesting that you post a question to the sandbox.
 
Remind me to check the logs before I post the question next time.
gulps
 
6:04 PM
I'm pretty sure last time your question was closed. This time I think your question isn't in danger of being closed, just hard to read.
 
Oh, that makes sense.
 
@FutureHistorian You shouldn't expect others to remind you of things they warned you about when they initially told you about them because they remembered you ignoring that advice before.
 
@FutureHistorian Part of the point of the sandbox is that it can be an iterative process. You post a question, get feedback, make edits, get feedback on the edits, perhaps more edits.
 
Oh........
 
And a bit of patience couldn't hurt. I didn't even manage to have a look at your draft before you posted it on the main site.
 
6:05 PM
O_O
Bloody hell, why do I have to be so (im)patient?!
 
And another part of patience is to check your links before posting. Under the writing box you see a preview of the result after all.
 
@FutureHistorian Your enthusiastic that's a good thing. But you could do with knowing when to slow down just a bit.
Especially if you're wanting people to continue to offer to help improve your questions it would be good to wait until they say that it's good enough to post before posting it.
3
 
Oh.
Well, that is -1 on the upvotes.
O_O
 
@FutureHistorian I'm still willing to work with you, but my patience is running low.
 
This will end well. /s
 
6:14 PM
@FutureHistorian Everyone makes mistakes. The important thing is to learn from them. You can still edit the question. If the downvote is because the question is unclear perhaps that is something you can fix.
 
@Gryphon? Sorry about that. UK English, you know.
:P
In other news, someone looks to be unaware that the Americans had 100 tactical nukes aimed at them by the Soviets that they knew nothing about at the time.
@Bellerophon? You think Sphennings has a point?
As in: could he be right about the whole......nuclear retaliation immediately after those air strikes are launched?
 
6:30 PM
Possibly. It is certainly a tactic that they might use.
 
6:40 PM
@FutureHistorian Since the question is posted you should clean up your sandbox post.
 
Done!
:P
 
@FutureHistorian You forgot to add the link to the community wiki
 
@FutureHistorian Here
 
@FutureHistorian Did you read the instructions?
 
6:46 PM
Just now.
:P
 
I'm sorry if this comes off as berrating but you asked where the instructions were, you were told, then you read them only after you did the thing you were asking about.
Try to take a second to breath and collect yourself before choosing to act.
Pick some actions in particular that you want to be more deliberate about to focus on.
The more specific your goals are the easier it will be to track your success with them.
 
7:01 PM
@Secespitus yo, did we have something on expanding life expectancy by getting the heart to beat slower?
 
@dot_Sp0T Can't remember anything, give me a second
 
@Secespitus you're amazing!! I got the idea from a quizshow on ARD, in case you're watching^^
 
Couldn't find anything.
I am nearly never watching TV.
 
Poor you, I enjoy quizshows
But then it was my searches being inconclusive and your superior searches as well. Will write up something within the hour!
Aside from the oxygen our blood transports, are there other things that are near capacity?
I mean from my understanding nutrient transport of blood is not anywhere near capacity compared to oxygen transport
 
Wasn't there something about increasing oxygen transport by using something different than Hämoglobin?
 
7:11 PM
Certain concentration gradients between the blood and cells rely on levels of substances that need to stay constant. Changing heart beat might affect them.
 
I can increase oxygen by replacing our hemoglobin with that of a certain kind of worm.
 
@dot_Sp0T This question on Biology might interest you.
 
it's not much but I was wondering if I could add another 10-20 years
 
@dot_Sp0T Also This
 
@sphennings yeah I know these tables. They are what made me think of the increased lifespan when hearing about the better hemoglobin
So I'll put it oud I guess
I guess I'll ask how much I could decrease the heartrate based on the better hemoglobin; that should allow for answers countering with nutrients, etc. if that's really a thing
 
7:21 PM
@dot_Sp0T It seems like heart rate and lifespan are probably both just correlated with mass.
Larger creatures live longer and have slower heart rates. Not slower heart rate causes a longer lifespan.
 
@sphennings you're welcome to write up an answer like that
 
I know for a fact that as the heart rate approaches 0 the expected lifespan also approaches 0.
3
 
Also I would likely flag that last one as 'not an answer'
 
@dot_Sp0T That's more of the snide comment that every question inevitably gathers.
 
@sphennings as long as it's not posted as an answer this is fine
@Secespitus would you have the capacity to help me find data on this in the language of the Commonwealth? :)
nvm the article is good
 
7:29 PM
@dot_Sp0T You want to give german information to the outside world you traitor?!? How dare you?!
 
No, there's a mention of the Unternehmung this scientist founded. And it's got an english website so I gather I'll find data there
 
Okay, good luck
 
8:00 PM
Apparently you folks like it
 
@sphennings I think you should add more information and/or evidence to the answer. At the moment I would say it is borderline recommend for deletion.
 
@Bellerophon Which answer?
 
The one on @dot_Sp0T's question.
 
@Bellerophon I'm editing it as we speak.
 
8:26 PM
2
Q: Help me get on to Area 51

kingledionI got an Area 51 account on Oct 22 last year, but since Feb 25 this year, I haven't been able to log in. When I attempt to log in I see an error like: Unable to log in with your OpenID provider: An unexpected error occurred while logging in. It's not you, it's us. This is our fault. ...

 
@dot_Sp0T I've cited a paper you might find interesting.
 
8:55 PM
If someone edits a post I can ping them even if it doesn't autocomplete, right?
 
@Secespitus I don't know. Edit one of my posts and we can test this.
 
@sphennings I added a few blank lines here
 
@Secespitus I've commented.
 
@sphennings Works. Thanks
 
Did you get a ping?
 
9:00 PM
Yes. It didn't autocomplete, right?
 
Yes
 
Great
 
That's either a bug or a useful feature to add.
Definitely an oversight.
 
Apparently it's intended. At least people are aware of it. See here: "Additionally, only users who have commented on the post are ever populated into the list. Editors and other users from the post's history will never appear there, even if they are able to be notified by typing manually."
 

« first day (1178 days earlier)      last day (469 days later) »