Have badge hammer powers been suspended? I recently cast a close vote on a post which had ring-theory and abstract-algebra, and it did not close. Later it was clarified, and I forgot to retract my close vote, and a mod finished the job. Now my re-open vote doesn't hammer it open (but maybe that is expected since it was closed by a mod?) At any rate, I'm surprised my initial vote didn't close it, since I have the gold badge for both tags that have been on since the initial post.
@rschwieb The golden hammer only allows to single-handedly close a question as a duplicate (or to reopen one that had been closed as a duplicate). It does not give you special powers for other closing reasons.
@MartinR I guess that has never occurred to me! I must duplicate a lot more than I close... which makes sense, working in my own tags... Thanks for explaining
@Peter I feel sorry for anyone who needs HATS to celebrate a good year! ;D
@MartinR Sad, sad, sad. Like rep-hunters need added incentive?? Unless the hat awarded is a dunce cap! ;D Is there a hat for voting to delete a certain number of PSQ's?? If not, there should be.
@Peter I agree, and I think it reflects just how out of touch SE staff and managers are, and to some extent, is rather insulting to users across all sites, it's like them offering candy to pacify us.
In fact, there is one user among us who uses winter bash as another means to dominate on leaderboards. I feel sorry for users like him, who measure their success only be where they stand in leader-boards: reviews, rep, hats, ad infinitum.
Yikes, at this time of day: and for four hours to come (after classes for most American students), the worst of the worst questions pop up, so many PSQ's (not to mention the rep gluttons scavenging for more rep from LHF. For my own sanity, sometimes, I need to stop looking at the main page.
@rschwieb As far as I can tell, the question is currently in the same state that it was in when it was mod-hammered. I am not going to overrule another moderator in an area of mathematics where I am less than expert, but maybe @AlexanderGruber might like to have another look at it?
@XanderHenderson Edits 4, 5, 6 and 7 addressed all the lack of clarity that anyone questioned: if the ideal had to be noonzero, if it referred to the subring generated by the ideal and $1$ instead of the ideal generated by them both, and that the ring was assumed to be not commutative. I voted to close way back on revision 1. I think my lingering vote may have fooled him into a premature action. What do you see that the OP failed to address yet?
It seems completely answerable now, and in fact one of the reasons I'd like to reopen is that I have a briefer solution than the ones mentioned.
@XanderHenderson If you'd like me to try to contact him directly, what's the preferred channel in this case? flag?
@amWhy imo its a problem that an upvote gives much more reputation than a downvote. If you get 9 downvotes but 2 upvotes, your question is probably very bad, but you get positive reputation
Not only PSQ questions ; countless old posts being in no way suitable for this site , opinion-based and/or unclear , could receive positive record scores . Considering the consequences (privileges coming from the increasing reputation) the poisoning of this site seems unavoidable. I admit I have no idea either for a suitable solution. But what made me also sad and angry was the completely useless change of the layout, the old one was much better.
@supinf There are only two ways to avoid this : auto-deletion at some score or - the better way to my opinion - less hesitations to delete really bad questions also if they are answered (in which case users tend not to react since they fear consequences).
Regarding reopening, I am not going to take an action which overrides the action of another moderator without first having the chance to discuss it with that moderator. Especially when it is regarding something that I know very little about (I don't work in algebra, and have no idea, for example, what an Artin ring is, or why anyone would care).
It is not that I disagree with you---I just don't know enough to make a reasonable decision.
Also, before it comes up, I trust your judgement, and would probably reopen the question if it had been closed by someone other than a moderator.
On the other hand, it looks like the question already has four reopen votes, so perhaps I am not out of line if I add a fifth. Or maybe I would be. I think that I would prefer to wait.
@MattSamuel That's not a legitimate reason. No answer is upvoted, and besides, any answerer answering a psq does so at the risk of the deletion of the entire post.
@MattSamuel The author itself deleted it, quite rude if one has received multiple answers. On the other hand , the author solved the question, it was actually not a question anymore. Why did the users answer then ? Was this before an edit I do not know ?
@MattSamuel Ahh, I see it was the asker who deleted the after having received answers. I have voted to undelete, and rolled back to your most recent edit (since the asker removed the question from the post, after you edited last).
@AlexanderGruber I think that occasionally happens to all of us. By the way, do moderators have to field review audits?? Just curious.
@Peter The answers came in long before the OP claimed to have "solved" the problem. The OP only changed the post after having received three answers to remove the original question altogether, and answer their question, given the answers provided.
@XanderHenderson Wow! Well, most mods have reviewed prior to becoming a mod, so you must already know how posts chosen in audits many not be good choiced. I'd have to elect the audits in the Reopen-review-queue as the the worst, overall. Some are fine, but some are PSQ's with lots of upvotes and answers.
@XanderHenderson They are soooooooo so obvious to pick out, only and always expecting users to reject. But unlike all other review queues, they never propose good suggested edits, for which the audit response should be accept.
