I wonder if this answer will be magically edited and undeleted in a few minutes...

math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/28376/… Should we rate limit answerers?

@ZacharySelk I really like this, as I think it will not only improve the quality of answers, it will also increase the quality of questions, because fewer PSQ posters will be positively reinforced with answers (given rate limits, answerers will likely become pickier about what they answer).

@XanderHenderson On the linked meta (SE) post about "triage", by Shog9, I commented with a link to your post, hoping they might want to or like to or consider your meta proposal/and/or the expansion of "triage" to MSE.

@ZacharySelk Also, "capping" will become more of a "feat" on any given day: Assuming 6 answers per day, one would need to average +3 score on those six posts to cap, (compared to users who currently post more than two dozen answers, until they cap for the day.

I wonder how long this "Greek" question will last.

Now I need to figure out how to request deletion of the "ditsy-non-question" tag I created for the question linked immediately above!

Open for deletion: math.stackexchange.com/questions/2760536/…

@Did re: math.stackexchange.com/q/2769306/290189; I flagged for tag deletion. It seems you edited twice, the deleted question. First to roll back the OP' post to it's upon deletion form, then to reinstate the OP's post deletion form of the question. Not clear what the intent of the edits were, save perhaps for the removal of my questionable tag.

Actually, @Did The OP is playing games with edits. I rolled back to their "deleted version" and changed my improper flag, but the OP managed to replace the question, as though an edit from me. I don't know how users can do that, unless its a bug about the timelimit allowed for editing?

@amWhy The first rollback was a mistake, which I then tried to cancel. Sorry about the noise.

@Did No problem... Mainly, the confusion for me arose wrt the OP's persistent editing since the deletion of the post.

@XanderHenderson Did you flag the post? I'm not sure what to do, myself. I think it's quite rude when a user deletes a question after receiving answers but that question might ultimately be doomed for deletion anyway.

Perhaps, a flag would be warranted just to draw the user to the attention of the moderators? - Not for undeletion, though?

@MarkMcClure I didn't flag the post. As I see it, the question needed to be deleted, so the correct outcome was achieved

my usual philosophy is to assume good-faith until there is good evidence to the contrary

in this case, it is also possible that the original questioner saw the downvotes and vote-to-close, and decided to delete the question because they were losing rep, or because they realized that it was a poor question.

@MarkMcClure I don't think that it is unreasonable to flag it. I just don't feel strongly enough to bother, and am willing to provisionally give the poster the benefit of the doubt.

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Blacklisted user: Another extension of prime number theorem? by Rolling Stones on math.SE

What do y'all think of this question?

(it just came across the reopen queue)

personally, I think that it should remain closed, but that there is a pretty good answer that argues against deletion

@XanderHenderson I commented below a discussion by Shog9, in meta.SE, about the discussion here on MSE (meta) (your question) concerning some sort of "on hold" or "triage" status for new posts, and its implementation possibilities on MSE, referencing, as well, John Ma's link to mixedmath's post about site improvement. I just also, @ZacharySelk left a comment there for shog9 in hopes of feedback for your meta post today (another great idea).

@amWhy I saw that. Thank you.

Oh, no. I hadn't seen the newest comments.

Which will be deleted in 24 hours. ;)

I just figured that the more we can gauge what is "doable" vs. what is "ideal/not yet implementable (or not yet attempted anywhere on SE), the better place we'll be in to move forward. Given the weekend, I want to give Shog9 a chance to review the discussions, (so he's up to speed), and/or offer suggestions, limitations, encouragement, or the worst alternative, smothering.

@XanderHenderson I added two comments for Shog9 today, one linking to Zach's post, and another promising that I'll return to delete my comments on his 2014 post about triage.

My gut feeling is that some sort of "triage" (question pergatory?) at this time seems closest to being implementable (provided the will of the community). But I think Zach brings up a great point about limiting answer rates on sites that have grown beyond "this that and the other thresholds", such as SO, MSE have, and worthy of considering as a network wide option for qualifying sites. It depends to a large degree on whether SE comes down on "quantity" or "quality", but as I suggest...

quantity is crucial for newer sites, smaller sites (and of course quality matters next). But SE, at the start, had not anticipated the growth of sites like SO nor MSE. Hence, it's worth considering that at some point in time, when some "quantity" threshold is met by a site (# of answers), that there is a shift to an emphasis on quality over quantity; this may also depend on numbers of users. Might be worth an Meta.SE post, on its own, @ZacharySelk

Okay, I should probably shut up for a few minutes!! :-)

PSQ, here, here 2, and here 3.

Deletion: one, two, three