PSQ

close this PSQ

close this PSQ

@ParamanandSingh Both this and the previous request have been closed.

Thanks for leaving the improvement comments.

this deleted answer shows that many users do respect the EoQS when they are notified of it.

Also I have seen a few suspensions for low quality contributions which implies the EoQS being enforced (at least I guess so). We can hope for some perceptible change in behavior of users soon.

@ParamanandSingh Keeping supreme track of this at the moment. I have no problem if users change.

PSQ

Interesting post so it's a PSQ, but the attempt is : here is what I need to do, but apparently I can't do it. Help me!

Can delete

Downvote and delete , or delete answer

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Repeating characters in body (67): Propositional Function Exercise by EUEU on math.SE

PSQ

PSQ

@TeresaLisbon I EoQS'ed the answerer. Seems to have worked.

I EoQSed someone and downvoted the answer. Answerer claimed that my downvote was against the site standards... Was I in the wrong?

PSQ to close

@supinf No, I don't think you were in the wrong for two reasons: (1) I don't think there are "site standards" regarding voting - voting is inherently opinion-based (just don't do anything silly like downvote all their other answers). (2) When down-voting an answer, the condition is "This answer is not useful", and an answer going against the EoQS is not useful for that reason.

@user1729 thanks. There is this, but it doesn't convince me that I was wrong.

@XanderHenderson thanks for the support.

@XanderHenderson When downvoting, it is recommended that you give the reason why, am I correct?

@soupless That is entirely up to the downvoter.

Oh, okay. Thank you.

Voting is intentionally anonymous. If we insisted that every downvoter gave a reason, we would be violating that anonymity.

@supinf I think their comment that "You may not know that the "standards for the site" have gone back and forth on this issue a number of times over that time" is interesting, but needs backed up. I have been here for basically as long as that user (~600 users joined between us), and after about 2012/2013 I think the standards have been pretty consistent.

Maybe expectations were different from reality for a while, but that question falls below those expectations. But we're both working from memory, which is why I think it is interesting.

@soupless You can find many discussions on related topics on meta. Such as: In praise of silence, Downvoting for no stated reason is abusive, etc.

@MartinSleziak Thank you for sending discussion pages.

PSQ to close

PSQ2 to close.

DA, DB, DC, DD, DE, DF, DG, DH

@RRL: DA to DH all gone.

C/D

close this PSQ

@ParamanandSingh: Thanks.

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Repeating characters in answer (80): Two dice problem "Two dice are repeatedly thrown until ..." by Mathway User on math.SE

@supinf Thanks, yes, that's how I'd like it to work. Besides, I'd flagged : turns out all (with the exception of inactive users) users above , say, 60K have been EoQSed. So we are in great shape regarding flagging these users directly. However, regarding the user who did reply : I'm happy that you EoQSed them, because that's the first time I'm seeing this.

@supinf Another small thing : keep track of users who you've already flagged, and let us know via the chatroom and indications who you've flagged by putting the relevant post up : not in the interest of targeting, BUT (1) for flagging so that they aren't EoQSed on multiple occasions and (2) to follow up on rude responses. The work is faster, more efficient, robust and ultimately saves conversation fatigue.