@BillDubuque By far, most of my votes to close and to delete a post are about recent posts, but sometimes I take a look at old posts. There are lots of old PSQs that should be closed or deleted. But I am not targeting any individual user.

@JoséCarlosSantos I don't understand your issue with 7. The OP was clearly engaging with the comments, and added in what they tried after they were asked to. It was originally a PSQ, but was edited to show a reasonable attempt.

@user1729 Since the statement is so simple and since the OP was given a good and reasonable hint (check all cases), I think that this was a display of lazyness. But I do agree that there was effort from the OP. If the question gets undeleted, I will not try to delete it again.

So your reason is "the question is too simple"?!

@user1729 Question 7, as it is currently written, is not a good question. It is a problem statement together with the phrase "I tried [stuff]," where [stuff] is not described, but not actually done in the question. That question should be deleted.

Yes, there is additional context provided in the comments. However, one should not have to read the comments to get that context. It is possible that the question could be molded into a good question if someone were to edit that context into the question. If you think that the question is worth preserving, perhaps it is worth your time to make those edits?

@JoséCarlosSantos It looks a lot like targeted voting. And the target was one of your biggest critics here, e.g. she wrote: "I'm also getting ticked off with Jose Carlos Santos and his apparent attraction to answering such poor questions" and "Argh!!! Frustrated more with the answerer than even the asker [...] I wrote a comment to Jose (the answerer), but I don't know how long it will last, because rep-hounds seem to be the biggest babies to flag, or come to meta to whine." among many other critiques.

Why are your fishing through 5-year-old questions when many of the questions you currently answer have exactly the same deficits of those old questions? Why haven't you voted to delete any of those?

You are relatively new so likely have little knowledge of the site policies way back then. Consider an analogy. Suppose in the future some users are so fed up with hastily composed run-of-the-mill FGITW rep-hunting answers that they create a room like this to downvote and delete them. Maybe their quality standards require that answers not only be correct but also contain significant insight into the problem solving process (rare for FGITW answers due to time constraints).

Likely this would result in the deletion of many of your answers. What would you think about that? Would it be fair? Would it be good for the site?

@BillDubuque The remark about the change of policies around here makes sense. But I have no idea about what you have in mind when you mention questions to which I answer which are as bad the ones that I vote to close. Yes, for a long time, I used to answer to near everything, but I have not done that for quite a while (or so I hope).

@JoséCarlosSantos In my opinion many of the recent questions you answer do not meet the policies of many in this this room and share the same deficits as those your are proposing for deletion. Have you ever voted to delete any question you answered?

Or do you apply those policies only to other users?

I also apply them to me.

Where did you do so?

@BillDubuque Didn't you see that my previous answer was a link?

No, the change in color is barely visible on my screen (poor UI design)

There are many more like that. Why don't I see them in your proposed questions for deletion? Don't you agree that it looks fishy that instead I see lists of many very-old questions by someone who was highly critical of you?

I hope that there aren't many more like that. Anyway, you asked whether I have ever voted to delete any question that I answered to and I proved that I did (by the way, there are others).

@JoséCarlosSantos But I suspect that accounts for only an infinitesimal percentage of those. My points still stand.

@BillDubuque I try to apply to me the same criteria that I apply to others. If I fail, I am sorry.

So exactly how did you stumble upon all those old questions with highly-voted answers by one of your biggest critics?

I was after old PSQs, that's all. And I wouldn't call an answer with 4 upvotes (I mean the last one that I linked yesterday) a highly-voted answer. If you think that my behaviour is inappropriate, what you should do is to inform the moderators. I am leaving this discussion.

@JoséCarlosSantos Your most recent list had 3 out 4 questions containing her posts (geeting bolder eh?). I looked further back and all of your recent lists of 4 posts have one or two of her (very old) answers, many with highly voted answers, e.g. this 6-year-old answer with 14 upvotes. Do you seriously expect me to believe this is pure coinicdence?

For the record, prior was from this comment.

For record preservation: 3 of 4 questions in Jose's most recent list have her answers, including this 2014 answer with 10 upvotes, and this 2014 answer with 9 upvotes.

But he didn't mention those above - instead he chose the 3rd answer with 4 upvotes.

@user1729 It is also a duplicate of this question, which is better phrased. I find the non-accepted answer to be more useful, too (neither of the answer to the deleted question are, in my opinion, all that great).

One reopen vote missing here ...

@MartinR I must admit that I am confused... why is the question not a duplicate?

It is also odd me that it is tagged algebra-precalculus, given that the question appears to be about a derivative... or am I missing something?

@XanderHenderson I argued here:

It has been reopened.

@XanderHenderson OK, thanks.