CURED - 2018-10-08

1:36 AM

To avoid being targeted by some users as being personal, from now on I will reveal the full list of undeletion / reopening users with additional information on whether these users have answered these PSQs in order to enable other users to decide whether these undeletion / reopening votes are unbiased or not.

For example, this PSQ is reopened by Bill Dubuque, Leucippus, José Carlos Santos, Michael Rozenberg, Scientifica, with one answer from Bill Dubuque.

2:01 AM

@amWhy@ArnaudD.@CarlMummert@Did@Holo@JoséCarlosSantos@paulplusx@TheSimpliFire@us‌er21820@XanderHenderson A few more votes for closure: κ1, κ2, κ3, κ4, κ5,

κ6, κ7, κ8, κ9

For deletion: δ1, δ2, δ3, δ4, δ5,

δ6, δ7, δ8, δ9, δ10

δδ1, δδ2, δδ3

@AlexFrancisco Voted to what I didn't already vote

$\delta\delta?$

2:18 AM

@Holo Thanks!

δδ = duplicate deletion

OHHH, I see

This question is way too broad.

Another question that doesn't belong here

5:09 AM

@AlexFrancisco Flagged for Mod's attention. Let's see.

mm

this is one of the problems with digging up old questions from before the site elucidated its context policy

sat relatively untouched for 7 years before a closure war started over it

@AlexanderGruber True. We need a discussion for that and have to agree on something.

5:29 AM

to those closing for off-topic there, what would be an example of context you would find acceptable to accompany that question?

@AlexanderGruber That question is not only about missing efforts but also about the sheer low quality of the question itself.

@AlexFrancisco is it the low level of the question that makes it low quality?

δ11, a PSQ undeleted by Martin Argerami, Bill Dubuque, GNUSupporter 8964民主女神地下教會.

@AlexanderGruber I guess you're trying to mislead but my perception is that it generates no inspiration given whatever contexts.

@AlexFrancisco i'm not trying to be misleading.

“No alcohol can be made out of pure water.”

5:39 AM

@AlexFrancisco my line of thinking is that while the answer is immediately obvious to me, MSE is for all levels, so that can't be held against it

it includes only the bare question, but it isn't "no effort" in the same way as a copy-paste textbook PSQ is.

@AlexanderGruber That doesn't make sense. It is no-effort because if the asker had just tried a few simple numbers for a,b he/she ought to realize that it is not always true, and then would have asked something like "I noticed that it is not always true that a>b implies a^2>b^2. When exactly is it true?" And I would think it is a good question.

2

@user21820 that's very true, but I think maybe that's a bias of being high level at math

most teachers can tell you that many students don't think to try that at that low of a level

@AlexanderGruber I don't think so. Every student at every level of mathematics has to start with simple things like trying examples. One can't get good at anything (not just mathematics) by not trying anything.

@user21820 i think in an ideal world people would be able to

And to prove my point, I just went to the user's highest-rep SE account, to his highest-rep question there, and see what a lousy question it is!

5:44 AM

a lot of it is the fault of math education that we see stuff like that

Q: How do I see what character set a MySQL database / table / column is?

531

What is the (default) charset for: MySQL database MySQL table MySQL column

sql mysql unicode character-encoding collation

@user21820 i, uh, don't speak SQL so I can't really evaluate that one. lol

(Has been viewed half a million times, though, in fairness-- I guess it must at least be good as a reference?)

@AlexanderGruber Exactly; these lousy questions get upvotes not because they are good questions.

I do agree that math education has a large role to play in getting rid of this incorrect mentality in mathematics.

@user21820 i'll bet you a lot of beginning students have seen that page, though. the a^2>b^2 question.

Hahaha...

TheSimpliFire

6:51 AM

@AlexFrancisco deleted

8:01 AM

@TheSimpliFire Thanks!

@user21820 This question is like a Facebook post and the votes are like the "likes".

A PSQ with three up votes.

@paulplusx Not even a Facebook post. Come on, it's just a tweet on twitter!

2

@user21820 Hahaha true!!

@XanderHenderson Up for deletion.

@CarlMummert I think some close-votes have expired.

8:53 AM

d1, d2, d3, d4.

9:51 AM

@user21820 All deteled.

@AlexFrancisco Thanks!

10:59 AM

d5, d6, d7.

c1, c2, c3.

c4, c5, d8.

d9, d10, d11.

rschwieb

11:41 AM

math.stackexchange.com/q/2946919/29335 No-question big-list dressed up as hopeless reference request.

12:21 PM

@rschwieb Yea a lot of vague questions recently...

@user21820 To point out a phenomenon under censorship, d5 has been undeleted once and d7 twice.

@AlexFrancisco Yup I knew about that already.

@user21820 I'm implementing censorship.

One way to proceed would be to flag for moderator attention if there is a delete/undelete war.

@user21820 That would probably result in PSQs locked but reopened. Plus, undue leniency prevails outside this room…

12:52 PM

@user21820: you're right. So several more close votes are required to reclose this PSQ.

2

Yea, sigh... The review queues are obviously faulty.

Well, when I posted it originally, it only needed one... I am not sure how to unpin the original post from the sidebar.

1:23 PM

PSQ

@CarlMummert Those four closure votes expired, ay… I cannot vote on it again until Oct 21.

SmokeDetector

[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Non-latin link in answer (87): Function whose third derivative is itself. by pjincz on math.SE

1:42 PM

@SmokeDetector A link to a seemingly blog with many math expressions.

PSQ

PSQ2

@user21820 I did flag for mod's attention for this question. And this is the response : declined - flags should only be used to make moderators aware of content that requires their intervention @CarlMummert @AlexFrancisco @amWhy

This was my comment: This "no effort" and "no context" post has been reopened by one of the answerers. Please take appropriate action. I have seen this behavior for multiple posts by the same answerer.

That's honestly quite strange

I'll give it a flag

@RushabhMehta Exactly!

user131753

@paulplusx By appropriate action what did you mean exactly here?

@user21820 Baleeted.

1:57 PM

@user170039 I do believe he was referring to me

@user170039 What I meant was something similar to locking the post and warning the user but again it's upto the mod to decide.

@paulplusx This is a canned reply---moderators should not, in general, be deciding on content. It is annoying when a flag is declined for this reason (rather than getting sorted by the review queue), but it happens.

@RushabhMehta It's actually for the mod :-)

@XanderHenderson Yes, it's really annoying. They are there to take actions to prevent such open/close war from happening, am I wrong?

Among other things, yes.

user131753

@RushabhMehta And? Your point being?

2:07 PM

@user170039 nvm, I was incorrect

user131753

@RushabhMehta I see.

user131753

It's ok.

@user170039 I suppose the confusion was because of certain words, you were referring to "appropriate action" and @RushabhMehta was seeing the word "exactly" in your reply :-)

user131753

@paulplusx I don't think mods generally do this sort of thing unless it becomes too extreme. If it was closed/undeleted/deleted/reopened for say in total 12 times, then probably your flag won't be declined.

user131753

@paulplusx We are past that. Aren't we @RushabhMehta?

2:10 PM

@user170039 Lol yes

@user170039 That might be true, but I felt like this would eventually happen.

user131753

@paulplusx Why so?

@user170039 I have seen this behavior before.

user131753

@paulplusx Maybe. But that doesn't really imply that it will be in this case also. Right?

@user170039 Maybe. But again why take a chance why not prevent it from happening if there is even a slight chance. If I were a mod I would observe the past patterns of the user based on such a claim (like my flag) and then do whatever is required. So if you observe the activity even you might feel that and come to the same prediction.

user131753

2:18 PM

@paulplusx Maybe?

user131753

Ok. Do as you wish.

user131753

Best of luck.

@paulplusx: with my neutrality hat on - the moderators often try to avoid taking sides too much on these, with the thought that the open/close war will tire out naturally. If it goes too long, they will lock the question temporarily, but then half the people think the moderators locked it in the "wrong" state.

2

In case anyone missed my earlier comments it seems quite clear that that 8 year-old question was dug up for deletion in order to intimidate users who vote to undelete - see the discussion there

For open/close wars, because you can only close a question once or reopen it once, it takes more and more users to keep things going. The bigger challenge is with deletion wars, because the same person can vote to delete or undelete over and over

@Bill, in this case I think you may be thinking too personally. The question itself is objectively terrible. It is true that, for some time, there had been a kind of forgiveness extended to older questions, but I think that is not done as much anymore. My own thought is that the more likely reason the question was found is because of the asker.

5

2:28 PM

@CarlMummert I've been target this way in the past by other members of this chatroom (with hard eveidence to back it up). I could have reported one such member to the SE team for sure suspension but - ubnlike some CRUDE members - I believe in trying to reach compromises, so I did not. It is sad that this puerile improiper behavior still persists.

I'm not sure what "target" means - did they all go downvote an answer? Voting to close a question does not seem to be an action about the answers, IMO.

For example, if user X answered 15 PSQs, and someone went through and voted to close all 15 of them as PSQs, that would not qualify as targeted voting under our system, and would not be actionable by the moderators.

3

@CarlMummert Said user deleted all those downvotes when I said that they would be reported if it continued. Surely this would not have occurred if they were not improperly placed. I can forward those records to the SE team for verification if anyone desires such. Said user is one of the most vocal and active members of CRUDE. I have collected stats on these matters for a long time

@BillDubuque I don't know why you feel that you have been targeted but Can you give me few possible reasons why did you re-open that question that had no context and no effort whatsoever, because I can't understand the logic behind that and yes I didn't down-vote you inspite of you answering a PSQ because I thought that it's very old.

There was a thead on meta once about donwoting low quality answers by the same user, here. Provided that the posts are genuinely low quality, it seems that it is also OK.

@paulplusx Please read meta to learn the many different viewpoint on these topocs. To me questions are merely sparks required to motivate teachers to contribute valuable content. The value lies in the answers, not the questions. The primary purpose of the site is to teach mathematics, not to teach how to write questions

2:36 PM

For posts such as this, on which I have not voted, one could argue that the answer is excessively terse, and it would be hard to see why they would be objectively incorrect. It is not a particularly good example of the highest-quality teaching.

3

@CarlMummert This issues I raise above have little to do with any specific question or answer. Rather they have to do with general principles.

I am also speaking to general principles, or at least trying to. In my mind, there is no general principle the prevents voting to close PSQs, nor even downvoting several answers by the same users if the answers are independently reviewed on their own merits rather than based on the user who wrote them.

user131753

@ArtOfCode: Have you recently declined any chat flag from me?

Nope

Quite the opposite

user131753

@ArtOfCode I noticed that.

user131753

2:43 PM

I was merely wondering who declined my recent chat flags regarding a potentially inflammable discussion in an other room.

user131753

Would you mind to take a look at it @ArtOfCode?

@CarlMummert There is a problem when it targets specific users. As I said this has been done in the past (with clear eveidence) by some CRUDE members, and it certainly appears that is being encouraged above by explicitly mentioning names of users who vote opposie on CRUDELY destroyed content, e.g. targeting their old high-voted answers.

@user170039 I'll see what I can do, but chat flag history is terrible

Gotcha, thanks

@ArtOfCode Let's not play favorites, now, in catering to certain individuals repeatedly.

@amWhy I said I'd take a look at some recent flags. How exactly is that favoritism? That's literally my job as a moderator.

2:48 PM

@BillDubuque: my opinion, which I believe is the de facto site policy, is that voting to close a question does not target any of the answers of that question, and that close voters do not even need to review answers when they vote to close the question, because the close is about the question itself, not the answers.

2

@ArtOfCode But since I know you don't do that, it's good to know I can summon you at any point and have you appear in a minute, to investigate any flags that I cast in chat that get declined! Good to know!! Gotcha, thanks!

The "review close" dialog doesn't even show the answers.

@paulplusx Agian, please read meta - they are widelly varying opinions on these matetrs, as there have always been throughout the history of the site (I knopw well since I've been here since the beginning)

@BillDubuque I understand your point and in general it's fine but we are talking about MSE here, and we all know the policies very well. The primary purpose of this site is to see the askers motivation which on paper turns into a quality question automatically with the attempts and the thoughts the asker puts into his/her own question.

I don't know why people are so much excited about answering PSQs. The PSQ answerers are hindering the learning process of the asker. Would you solve questions if I say "here I have 1000 homework questions, solve my homework and mail it to me".

@amWhy If you'd like a second pair of eyes on a declined flag, I'm happy to do it. Within reason.

2:49 PM

@BillDubuque: you have just said "there is a problem when it targets particular users". But I have just said " if user X answered 15 PSQs, and someone went through and voted to close all 15 of them as PSQs, that would not qualify as targeted voting". Seems related to me.

@CarlMummert Please review the earlier discussion. If you don't agree that someting is very fishy then you are clearly highly biased. In any case I do have hard evidence of this in the past and I will not be so forgiving the next time. I will report it to the SE team if it continues

@BillDubuque: could you give a link to the discussion you are looking at?

@CarlMummert Peruse my recent comments starting here

@BillDubuque One of the points of CRUDE is to create transparency. There is no secret cabal here seeking to destroy you (or anyone else). We are very open in our actions here, and anyone is welcome to contribute or discuss. With respect to the one question that you have mentioned, what possible argument is there in favor of keeping it around? It is a terrible question!

4

@XanderHenderson Please think more abstractly, the arguments are not about specific questions but rather about general principles

@XanderHenderson Does "transparency" means unmasking the names of voters of opposite political persuasion so they may be more easily targeted and driven from the site, as have already many of the best teachers?

2:59 PM

I think it is better to just say that a question was "previously undeleted" or "previously reopened", and anyone can look up the history if they are interested. There's not generally a need to post the names on on the chatroom. The fact that a question was reopened or undeleted could easily be missed, though.

2

@CarlMummert That is correct.

@CarlMummert I agree too. I shouldn't have pointed it out like that. Apologies for that @BillDubuque. I'll keep that in mind. Although I favor the closure of that question, there is no doubt about that.

@AlexFrancisco There is no need to include the names of those closing. It is transparently irrelevant to considering a question based on its merit.

2

@AlexanderGruber Well, I just cannot get it. If one feels so self-righteous about their actions, why are they afraid of being revealed?

@AlexFrancisco It doesn't matter. The purpose of this chat is not to target users.

3:06 PM

@AlexFrancisco Let's be frank. Please explain why you dug up that 8 year old question among 17 other very recent questions at the same time you complained about my undeletions. Was it meant to send a message to me or not?

@Alex From my perspective, it makes the post personalized in a way that is not necessary. Of course, if someone posts a list of questions here, they probably think the questions should be closed or deleted, but going beyond that to mention people's names makes it harder for everyone to keep decorum

Indeed, I see reopeners are just as subject to revealing as are close voters, which currently always appear immediately below the closed question. I see no harm, and only symmetry, in revealing reopeners.

3

@AlexanderGruber I won't do like that in the future, but I'm asking a relevant question: Why are they so eager to assert themselves and “guard” PSQs?

@amWhy: they are revealed, of course, if you look at the history of the post.

@CarlMummert In an asymmetric way, though. In a deleted post, deletion voters' name can be seen right below the question body, whereas in an reopened one, people really have to take one more step to look into the revision history to see reopening voters.

2

3:10 PM

Why aren't close voters only named in the history of the post? One could argue, using Bill's logic, that by printing automatically the names of close voters below a closed post, it encourages members of the Anti-CRUDE crusade to target those named.

2

@AlexFrancisco idk, i am sure if you ask Bill he would be happy to discuss his philosophy with you. But that is a separate issue that I'm not attempting to comment on at this moment

To be clear, my point has little to do with that question or my trivial answer there. Rather, I want the CRUDE members to understand that we "teachers" on the other end of the spectrum also have strong convictions. (many of use have been teachinf for many decades). Doing peurile things like that will not change our views. The best way forward is to try to understand each other and reach constructive compromises

@Alex there is a long archive on meta, this may be one place to start. Check the dates on the thread, as well. math.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2052/…

@BillDubuque: what compromise would you suggest?

@BillDubuque You fail to understand, or try to understand those who disagree with you. Compromise is a two-way-street.

2

see, there ya go. all the reading material one could ask for on the topic

user131753

3:13 PM

I think this discussion is getting a bit unproductive now.

@CarlMummert I was agreeing with you until I thought about this: How long can you refrain yourself from not taking names if the behaviour is repeated? Is it ok for someone to have the "professional right of being not pointed out directly" if they continue to violate the policies directly?

2

@paulplusx: is there a policy that prevents someone from voting to reopen?

user131753

Can I suggest all to take a break and come back to the discussion (on this particular topic) when all have cooled down a bit?

Teachers, who maintain quality and decency, should not be conflated with farmers.

@CarlMummert For example, many of the old answers to "PSQs" include good answers that are linked to by many other posts, e.g. I often link to other answers for proofs. There's a highly complex graph of dependencies. If you delete these old threads then the links are destroyed. Moreover the author isn't even notified that his answer has been deleted, so they can't fix it. One needs to be careful about such matters, i.e. not vote robotically from a list

@user170039 SO it is important to look at the "linked questions" list when handling old questions.

3:17 PM

@CarlMummert The policy for reopening as I assume is for those questions which are accidentally(that would be a wrong word though) closed or are in the favour of doubt.

I agree with @user170039 suggestion

user131753

@BillDubuque Sorry but I don't understand your point. Can you explain a bit (and if you prefer not in this room)?

@user170039 It's explained in the paragraph above it.

user131753

@BillDubuque I agree with you. But please let us not continue this here anymore (at least not now). You can come to my room if you want to discuss it with me specifically.

@paulplusx Please excuse my english(used a double negative). I meant "how long can you stop yourself from taking names"

3:21 PM

@Bill Dubuque: It doesn't seem practical to decide whether to close a question based on whether answers for some other question might link to answers to the question being closed. Moreover, there is no straightforward way to even try to list those links. This suggests to me that links to other answers ought to be sparing or of secondary importance to the answer being composed.

@AlexFrancisco I'm not sure who you consider to be a "farmer", but fyi prolific contributors like Andre, Arturo, Brian and I (and others) have been teaching online for decades, going back to newsgroups like sci.math. We taught the same way in non-rep based sites like sci.math. We are not at all motivated by rep. Rather we are motivated by sharing mathematical knowledge. If you think otherwise then you greatly misunderstand us.

@paulplusx: there is no real policy to prevent someone from voting to reopen any question they want to vote to reopen.

@CarlMummert Doesn't that mean reopening a closed PSQ is not against the site's policy.

@CarlMummert Huh? They are on the sidebar in the "linked questons list". One of the major advantages of this site vs. textbooks is the ability to link. If you destroy that then you may as well go back to the dark ages of linearly-limited books

I now stop reacting to farmers that are happy to answer whatever homework questions given to them and thus ultimately make this site flooded with PSQs.

3:25 PM

No one is suggesting that you stop "teaching", Bill Dubuque, only that you teach to eager users you likely neglect when you answer homework questions.

5

@amWhy As I said above, to me the questions serve no purpose but to spark teachers into posting good answers. It;s the answers, not the questions that are of primary value.

@BillDubuque: does "linked questions" also include answers that link to other answers to the current question?

@BillDubuque while that may be a lovely philosophy, MSE does have official requirements for questions to be considered on topic.

2

The description here suggests it contains things linked from the current question

@CarlMummert Yes, it includes links both ways

3:29 PM

@BillDubuque Well, you are underestimating the worth of a question. Remember, the answer exists because there is a question and not the other way around.

@AlexanderGruber As you know well there has always been much debate about the subjective topic of what should be considered "on topic".

@BillDubuque It has become more settled, now. Questions do require context. PSQs are to be closed.

4

@Bill Dubuque: thanks. When I go to the review queue to look at closing questions, that sidebar is gone, however.

I think I am one of the more tolerant moderators when it comes to my definition of context, actually. But whether or not context is required is now a settled issue

3

@AlexanderGruber Of course you are entitled to your own opinions on such subjective matters

@CarlMummert Yes, the SE platform is very poorly designed - as I've often remarked

3:36 PM

This suggests to me that, just like we can't expect someone to review answers when they vote to close, we can't expect them to review links. This makes sense because, apart from the interface, the quality of the question itself is what we want people to look at.

I think I missed your suggestion of a compromise on how to handle new PSQ questions?

Personally, I would rather see fewer of them closed, and more of them improved. But that would require a kind of compromise that I have never seen forthcoming.

This room was placed in timeout for 2 minutes; Catch our breaths.

@CarlMummert But we can strive to work around the site deisgn limitations. Imagine what would occur to a site like Proof Wiki if all the links were removed. Many of us have invested great effort to organize the site with links to proofs, generalizations, specializations, analogies, etc. If you destroy those links by deleting old questions then you are destroying some of the most valuable information the site provides - something that makes the site much richer than linear-limited textbooks.

What's your compromise @BillDubuque. You seem to be merely arguing in favor of your opinion. What are you willing to give up, or lessen your objections to?

7 mins ago, by Carl Mummert

Personally, I would rather see fewer of them closed, and more of them improved. But that would require a kind of compromise that I have never seen forthcoming.

For example, if we were to place old questions into a kind of amnesty from current standards, would that make it possible to raise the standards for new questions, so that poorly written new questions are not as likely to be answered without being improved first?

@amWhy My point is to encourage folks to try to understand each other so that the best constructive solutions can be devised. There seems to be fundamental misunderstandings above (e.g. Alex's comment about rep farming).

3:45 PM

@CarlMummert Everyone wants that but no one can help improve the post if the asker is not interested at all.

I do think we close too many new questions. But it seems that there is never a way to get a compromise that would allow us to do anything other than close them, because if they are not closed they get answered even while we are trying to work with the OP to improve them.

2

@CarlMummert I'm more concerned about the old content (I also close many dupes).

@BillDubuque And you exhibit fundamental misunsderstandings of a significant number of folks who are fed up with PSQ's. Where are you willing to give in, or give a bit?

@amWhy What specifically do you think I misunderstand? I've been around long enough that I think I am well aware of the motley views on these matters

I have to leave for a bit, but I do welcome constructive discussion.

@BillDubuque: so what kind of compromise would work for new questions such as math.stackexchange.com/questions/2938660/…

2

3:51 PM

if I could just interject for a moment to ask those in the room to quit flagging chat comments that you disagree with as offensive, that'd be lovely. Y'all are rattling mods from other SE sites

4

@AlexanderGruber Lol, no wonder there are so many people suddenly sitting in!

user131753

@AlexanderGruber Should I flag your comment as well?

user131753

$\ddot\smile$?

4:02 PM

@CarlMummert The OP has responded to my request to add some context to the question. The system works.

@AsafKaragila: which question? I missed something. Maybe because there is a lot of banging because of some contractors at my house today.

Separately, why does "Search results" always say there are 15 flags but none to review?

I am looking for a question from the past few days where a user was arguing with me about context when I pointed out it was why their posted was downvoted. But apparently it was deleted. Is there any way I can find it based on the fact that I know I commented on it?

@CarlMummert Oh, I thought you would follow the reply thread. The one about (R,+) and (C,+).

Now I remember. I am glad they improved it - I upvoted just now. I think that a number of people who are actually interested in the mathematics would write better posts, or improve them, if they had a chance and knew what we are looking for

At the same time, I wish that each question that has a close vote for context would automatically get a comment, like the auto comments for duplicates. Could a bot do that?

4:19 PM

@CarlMummert As I said, the system works. I think that's something to remember the next time, before voting to delete. Sure, some people you want to avoid as much as possible, but sometimes it's someone you just don't know.

2

@CarlMummert Wow, that's a nice idea! Although one can argue that the asker would see the comment right from the system after the post is put on hold.

@Asaf you are right

Glad that we all have an agreement on that. :)

help vampire

@paulplusx: sure, but seeing it sooner might help nudge them. Also, if the question isn't closed, the OP would see the comment anyway - they won't see close votes without enough rep, IIRC?

4:24 PM

@CarlMummert I'm pretty sure that there can be a StackApp script that can do that.

@RushabhMehta Just to let you know, there is a limited consensus on avoiding that kind of term, even if it is accurate.

@RushabhMehta: There is idownvotedbecau.se to replace it.

Lol.

Not that I use it though.

@CarlMummert You are absolutely correct. That would even avoid discouraging "put on hold"/ down-votes (if the asker interprets it like that). Btw this should be put on meta as a feature request. Not only is this beneficial to the user but also it would save the time of many other users trying to comment the same thing over multiple posts.

@CarlMummert That is a good idea but is not sufficient. What we need is a consensus that people don't go and spoon-feed full solutions to the asker, which completely circumvents the close-question process.

@user21820 Yeah because that would confuse the asker. They will have a solution and a comment asking them to improve their post at the same time.

@paulplusx Actually it won't confuse most askers, who know that this is how to get their homework done for them.

4:29 PM

@user21820 They are beyond help, no matter how much you try to push them out of their comfort zone, they won't respond to you. I am talking about genuinely motivated people who are actually lost.

@paulplusx: at the moment they may also have that, if I write a comment about closing while someone else writes an answer.

@paulplusx Genuinely motivated people invariably respond saying "oh okay I will keep that in mind for future questions" and everything is settled.

And we've had this discussion before, but I think some people fail to realize that different online communities have different guidelines, so people should not expect to receive the same response on Math SE as they get on Yahoo Answers or reddit/homework.

When I go to "Ask a question", there is a "How to ask" sidebar. Is that something we control on this site?

@CarlMummert Good question. I have actually invested a fair amount of thought on to how to handle "abstract dupes" (per my meta question) for induction problems, esp. those that are special cases of certain methods (e.g. telescopic induction). When time frees up I hope to discuss this and other abstract dupe classes on meta.

@BillDubuque: how in particular would that affect a new question such as math.stackexchange.com/questions/2938660/…

Here we have a PSQ, which is also undoubtedly a duplicate, with several answers.

4:47 PM

@CarlMummert I'm not sure what your point is. Obviously if we have some good abstract dupes then we can close it as a dupe before answers accumulate

Here is another PSQ just posted - math.stackexchange.com/questions/2946635/…

I am asking what kind of compromise you would propose for these questions, in lieu of having them quickly closed?

@CarlMummert It is mentioned on meta that this was modified (by Shog9) together with math.stackexchange.com/questions/ask/advice after this discussion on meta: Show “how to ask” advice before a new user asks a question

@MartinSleziak: thanks!

@CarlMummert If they are dupes I don't have any problems closing them as such (and I often do so). Sometimes these dupe decisions are delicate so they need to be handled case-by-case by someone who knows the topic well (e.g. sometimes I reverse dupe closures because someone who didn't understand subtleties pushed it into the queue and others voted robotically)

I don't think moderators can edit this part. But it is clear from that discussion that SE employees can (and that it was modified at least once after some input from users of this site).

4:52 PM

What if they are not dupes, just new context-free questions?

What I am saying is: if you object to seeing lots of PSQ problems closed, for whatever reason, and you want to work towards a compromise, what kind of compromise would you propose? What would you be willing to change in your use of the site, if others were to change the way that they use the close/delete system?

I have a homework task. Thanks in advance for doing it for me.

@user21820: math.stackexchange.com/questions/273377/…

@CarlMummert As I said above, my primary concern is with the older questions, where there is already a large network of links that may be destroyed. Please try not to delete these questions if they have crucial links

@Bill Dubuque: you are asking others to change their behavior about older questions. That is half of a compromise - what would you be willing to change in return?

3

@CarlMummert I have already been forced to make extreme compromises - I cannot answer many questions that provide great opportunities to teach. Other teachers left rather than surrender their **freedom of teach**(ing)

4:57 PM

Separately, we would need to work out what "older" means. I am quite serious - I would be glad to have a compromise that saves some older questions, if it allows the site to improve with regard to new questions.

Would you refrain from answering new PSQs that are not closed?

2

BTW there are a few posts on meta which seem related to recent discussion here in chat - although to me it does not seem that the discussion reached a clear-cut consensus. Historical lock was suggested as a possible solution: Is it good practice to analyse past questions by today standards? and Why close old questions with accepted answers using the “no context” reason? (and some other posts).

For the record, I have no problem with historical locks, but we need to ensure that there is someplace that answers can still be placed - which may require editing in some context, or placing a new question, or somesuch, and I am more than happy to help with that. Maybe we could devote a meta thread to improving old questions that are worthy of such (have good answers) - vs destroying them

@Martin I had the sense that for a while we did leave older questions more untouched, based on the idea that different standards were in force. This seems to have changed in the past year, I think

I agree that trying to preserve old question which are linked from many other post, from other sites (e.g., from Wikipedia and other external sources) would be a good thing to do. I am not sure how exactly to achieve that. (Maybe something along these lines could be a reasonable question to post on meta - to see what others think about that.)

@Bill - I would be glad to voluntarily avoid voting to close old questions for lack of context (say old means more than one year old) if would be willing to voluntarily not write answers for new PSQ posts. How would you propose modifying that proposal to reach a compromise that we could both accept?

5:05 PM

As you can see, there were some efforts to improve some questions in this room. Or at least repost an improved version, if possible.

I don't see the point - crude folks are already deleting new PSQ threads whether they have answers or not.

I think that there would be less desire to close and delete them quickly, if they were not answered before they were improved. In order to motivate people to improve their posts, I would say we need to avoid posting answers until the posts are improved.

6

But I take it that you won't take my offer. Is there any counteroffer you would propose, to work towards a compromise? I'm looking to make some progress here, rather than going around in circles.

@BillDubuque Let me know anytime, if you'd like to pick up the discussion again. If both sides are willing to change the way they use the site, I do think there is a room for a compromise that could lead to better questions and good answers for those questions. I am going to have to leave the room soon.

@MartinSleziak But the problem is that close votes often come too quickly and they are often robotic - esp. when lists are offered as in this room. One of the reasons I post answers is that case is that there are already many poor (or wrong) answers, and I can't bear the thought that the readers are being misled by low quality answers.

What do you want me to do? LEAVE? Then they'll keep being wrong!

@CarlMummert Not sure if you're just kidding, but I do very seriously care about teaching mathematics. I've devoted huge chucks of my life to doing so. I do realize that some folks care more about earning rep. The site would be much better without gamification

5:16 PM

If there was an agreement not to post answers until the question was improved, say after one close vote has been made, then it might not be as important to people on this channel to close the questions quickly.

@CarlMummert How do you propose to get everyone to agree to that?

@BillDubuque If you're saying that in many instances there was enough time to post several answer to a PSQ, then this seems to me as an argument that PSQs are not closed quickly enough.

2

@CarlMummert Haha how about this?

I don't think we can get everyone to agree to anything. But if we develop a consensus among a number of users that both early closing and early answering should be avoided, then we can move the average situation even if not every question. There's nothing we can do that would handle every question.

@user21820 what th...?

5:21 PM

In particular, if we had a good consensus on meta then a group of users together with the mods would be able to help move the behavior somewhat for a small number of holdouts.

@MartinSleziak No, because that presumes that I share the same views about PSQ closure - which I most certainly do not. As I said above, to me questions are merely sparks that motivate teachers to add valuable site content

@CarlMummert I don't see a reason to avoid early closing, because then the asker will have to improve the post first, which pushes it onto the reopen queue. I have nothing against avoiding early deletion if there are no existing full solution answers.

3

@user21820: this is why it would be a compromise. Early closing pushes some people to answer too quickly, which pushes others to close more quickly, etc.

I don't think it is possible to change one without the other.

@Holo If you search around on the internet, you will find this user calling himself king and also claiming to have a 1-page proof of Fermat's last theorem. Of course, you can check for yourself that it is not sense.

Anyway, I need to go now. Have a good afternoon!

5:24 PM

@user21820 the internet can be very weird at times if you know what to search

Doesn't answer the question.

@CarlMummert Let us analyze this mathematically. At equilibrium, closure of bad questions without deletion does not at all reduce the rate of good questions that eventually stay on the site, because the closed questions go into the reopen queue automatically once it is edited. In fact, early closing helps to reduce full solution answers and hence reduce deletion, because some people including myself will not delete closed questions with no answers from new users.

@CarlMummert I don't think there is a good solution without further support from the software platform. There are going to be rep/badge hunters placing low quality answers, which will motivate teachers to place better answers for fear that the asker will be greatly misled

Furthermore, I frequently vote to reopen questions that have context/effort added, and I am very lenient as others can verify.

@BillDubuque If you are concerned with teaching, as I am, then I think you'll agree that poor questions are more likely to reward rep-farmers. Good questions on the other hand take time to think through and answer well. So there is ample reason to close poor questions quickly, so that all the good teachers here can focus on the good questions. There are a ton of good questions that have not been answered, more than enough for all the good teachers; have a look:

math.stackexchange.com/unanswered/tagged/?tab=votes

225,781 questions with no upvoted or accepted answers.

I bet all the good teachers will never come close to finishing all the good questions in that list.

@user21820 That may be true, but I pay no attention to rep. It is the root of most evil on this site, My sole concern is dissemination of mathematical knowledge,

Maybe this viewpoint is not so easy to understand by younger folks who were brought up on rep-base gamified systems. We old timers have been doing this for many decades in non-rep non-gamified systems such as usenet newsgroups like sci.math. We don't need rep or badges to motivate us, and we don't pay attention to any of that.

5:39 PM

@BillDubuque If you think the rep system is bad, you necessarily have to pay attention to how to mitigate it, because for sure you are not going to get the SE staff to remove gamification; it is ingrained into the site ideology. That is precisely why I think closing quickly before any full answers is the best mitigation method we have so far. I have nothing against good hints either, as long as they are appropriate for the amount of effort the asker put in (because I do not condone laziness).

@CarlMummert I've been away quite a bit this morning, but I think this bears comment: I think that a policy of fast-to-close but slow-to-delete is appropriate. Ideally, a poor question is very quickly closed, interested parties work to improve the question, then it is reopened. If the asker is honestly motivated, then improving their question should not be a problem, and reopening should occur.

2

Otherwise, the question is never improved, and eventually gets Roomba'd, since the swift closure prevents answers.

The point to get across to new users is that having a question put on hold is not a bad thing; it is just a way of ensuring that the question is clear before it attracts off-topic answers.

I mean, how many times have we seen a very unclear question answered, only for the question to be edited so that the answer no longer makes sense?

@XanderHenderson Exactly my point. It is obviously the intended process, so users should not subvert it by providing full solutions and hence nullifying the motivation for the asker to bother to improve their post. Unfortunately, if users provide full solutions, the gamification system rewards them, and they continue to do so, maintaining the problem in a vicious circle.

@user21820 Why do you worry about rep farmers? I realize that for some folks there are connections between ego and rep, but I presume that is not the case for anyone who is confident in their mathematical abilities. Does it bother you that a rep farmer has rep higher than you do? Please help me to understand precisely what your concern is about some random number on a website.

@BillDubuque I don't care about people's actual rep. I care about cheating. Rep-farmers are bringing the cheating culture right into Math SE.

@user21820 What is the "cheating culture" and how is it related to rep farming?

5:46 PM

@BillDubuque You should know; students just post their graded assignments online and get people to do it for them. In the early years Math SE didn't have this problem, but once it started gaining the reputation for providing full solutions, every semester sees a whole horde of cheaters come here, and a whole horde of rep-farmers attending to their every whim.

Actually I do not think that it matters whether fast guns are motivated by reputation, by badges, by showing off how fast they can type or by something completely else (it might even be very noble motivations) - if their activity is detrimental to the overall quality of the site.

5

I only see one party here willing to compromise, if the other party does as well. Compromise is compromise. Don't claim to be seeking diaglogue for a compromise, when you define compromise as "everyone agreeing with you and doing things as you think all ought to be done." I think Carl Mummert made a very big step in trying to seriously negotiate, but I've seen absolutely no concession, or hypothetical concession, offered on your part.

2

@MartinSleziak Right, and cheating plays a part. If this site turns into a copy of reddit.com/r/cheatatmathhomework, I'm sure we all agree that the site quality will go down, not just the mean but the median!

@CarlMummert I see the problem. I have a solution but many would find it too cruel. My solution is implementing an automatic answer hiding system if a post has close votes. Also, momentarily auto-downvoting the hidden answer to discourage the answerer and once the question is improved and there are no close-votes left, unhide the answers and remove the down-votes automatically.

This would really help with PSQs. I know it seems cruel but if it's according to the policy, it is fine. What do you guys think of this? If there is a no PSQ policy then this automation is required very badly.

@BillDubuque Just a passerby's comment: between your comments, I get a sense that either you've ignored the comments of many people, whether it be on meta or elsewhere, or that you're a "new user" and this is your first rodeo.

2

5:51 PM

But cheaters can easily add context etc as need be. What bothers me (and many others) is that many folks use potential cheating as an excuse to filter out question that they don't like for other reasons (too elementary or too applied or too fooundational/philisophical or abstract nonsense, etc)

Not to mention that nowadays if an instructor doesn't know how to deal with potentioal internet homweork cheating then they are way behind the times

@BillDubuque You misunderstand my stand. When we see a question with zero effort or context, it is not an excuse but sufficient reason to close quickly according to site guidelines. It so happens that this is in line with my view about preventing cheating, but does not mean that all cheating will be prevented.

You raised the issue of cheating, not I. Ditto for rep farmers

It also so happens that 99% of all cheaters post PSQs as of now. If by enforcing a no-PSQ policy we make all the cheaters post good questions, then we have already made them cheat less, by definition of context and effort.

@user21820 I know many self learners who would greatly be offended by your cheating accusations.

@BillDubuque and how is this adding to the conversation, other than pointing fingers?

2

5:56 PM

If I recall correctly, from the very beginning of Math SE the downvote button has always said "This question does not show any research effort; it is unclear or not useful". This implies that effort has always been a part of the site requirements.

@BillDubuque Your statement is a basic logical fallacy. I said something about cheaters, and not about PSQ posters.

@user21820 Please read meta if you wish to learn about the diverse opinions on such matters.

@BillDubuque Please read meta yourself. I already read it.

@user21820 As I said, I have no interest in rep, cheating etc so I am happy to drop those topics that you raised

@BillDubuque Then I'm also happy to drop the issues you bring up here.

@BillDubuque I don't get what you mean by diverse opinions. Most of the people sharing your opinions seem to have much less approved messages than those by others

6:00 PM

@RushabhMehta Ah, the wisdon of the masses, If one believes in that then one would thinks that mathematical beauty consists of batman and W shaped curves!

@BillDubuque Compromise, and conversations for that matter, start by opening your ears and listening to what others have to say.

@BillDubuque unfortunately for you, the way stackexchange works is consensus by the masses

@BillDubuque I do believe you're fighting a moot point

@RushabhMehta It works the way we make it work. We can be wise if we choose to be

@BillDubuque That's quite the degenerate argument. Should we have no agreed upon rules at all, since there's always one person who doesn't agree?

2

I see this going really no where; despite many people's sincere efforts to understand and compromise. But we need all parties willing to concede an inch or two, here and there, to succeed. I'd like to wrap up this discussion, as this room is not designed to be a forum for primarily one user who cannot stay on point, or seriously entertain the possibility of compromise. So, I will be putting this room in a time out in a few minutes.

3

6:02 PM

@RushabhMehta On a general mathematical site like this there are always going to be diverse opinions on such subjective matters.

@BillDubuque I have the solution for you. Set up your own website and run it exactly the way you want to make it work, and tell everyone to go there and leave Mathe SE behind. You can make a wisdom-filled website that does not have the same problems that Math SE does.

2

@BillDubuque Of course, does that imply we can have no consensus?

We can agree tomorrow for another try, 45 minutes max; but those who speak must be serious about compromise, and bring a concession to the table, else it's just the same old repetition of a few years of meta dialogue.

That'd be pretty stupid

@BillDubuque Your argument is degenerate, and you know it. You just don't want to concede to a compromise, and that's your loss, not ours

@RushabhMehta Best of luck in your mathematical studies.

6:05 PM

This room was placed in timeout for 3 minutes; Enough no longer constructive dialogue.

2

Don't see how this answer really adds anything...

Close & delete?

6:52 PM

@AlexFrancisco while it was said already by another mod, let me reiterate, don't keep including the user names. That is not up for discussion. If you keep doing this, there will be consequence.

I'd like to ask that naming "The members of CRUDE" be no longer up for discussion nor reference, because: (1) There is no membership chart, and users here vary widely on how they vote, whether they vote, how often they vote, and their positions. To name "The members of CRUDE, and or "The most active members of CRUDE" is equivalent to trying to imply judgements that follow that name about any and all members who are "active" on CRUDE.

People can be, and are often "named" by users, in a passive aggressive manner, "aa very active member of CRUDE, very "vocal", blah blah blah, in which case the allegations, the "blah", were utterly false. In such a case, the judgements describing them should be subject to consequences as quickly and readily as users whose usernames are used. Innuendo and fabrication is just has harmful as name-calling

A: Matrix semi-definite positive

I think I agree with that @amWhy

TheSimpliFire

7:19 PM

@quid should I flag this answer (which is accepted)?

4

Yes, your answer and working are perfectly correct.

I asked you a question on this a few months ago:

3

Q: Should answering that someone's attempt is correct be posted as a comment?

In my opinion, if someone's attempt at a problem is correct then confirming this should be done as commentary. Obviously if the attempt is flawed, saying what is wrong/hinting at the correct path can be posted as an answer. The definition of 'Answer' is 'a correct response to a question', and re...

discussion comment answers flagging solution-verification

7:35 PM

@TheSimpliFire there is a new meta answer about that.

I meant to say something there.

I'm out of stars for chat. :(

@amWhy Moral star.

@XanderHenderson can you run out of stars? how many are there?

TheSimpliFire

@quid you mean this one?

However I would prefer the newbie answer to the accepted one.

I think there are better ways to handle this. One could encourage OP to turn the proof-verification question into a self-answered question. If OP is not around anymore somebody else could do it; if the proof is so flawless that there is nothing to say, it's just a copy-paste. (That this happened could be briefly documented.) — quid ♦ 1 min ago

@TheSimpliFire yes, see above ^^

But as said I would not go around the site seeking out such answers. Yet, I would try to curb it if somebody wants to go on a mission to give many such answers.

8:40 PM

Hello, folks. If and when you see a phenomenal question that could use a nice bounty, keep me posted (withing reason, and in the next couple of days).

*/within

8:59 PM

No, I'm not on a spending free, just looking for good candidates, given my fortune:

Just have small change to spend.

Well, this is one way of putting it @amWhy , I will let you know if I see one