This Marshal Badge is calling my name, but the the problem is that whenever I go looking for comments to flag, they are so trivial it's not even worth flagging. Plus, I don't really feel like flooding the mods with petty, insignificant, flags for comments no one will ever see again anyway.

#firstsffproblems

Mods love handling flags, it gets there stats down so they can keep the power to themselves and not require new mods.

wut

what stats and why do they need to be down?

Flag handling stats, when they get above a certain number suggest the need for more help

So you are saying we could force an election if we flag all the things?

I do need that "vote for someone" badge...

@amflare oh, don't worry

last time I did that Shog got called in to make my flags mark themselves automatically helpful

@Mithrandir *flags everything on lit.se*

@Mithrandir hahahahaha

that's why +1 comments automatically nuke :D

thats amazing

@amflare go ahead, I'm ready

@amflare the mod stats and they don't need to be down

it turns out I don't have a lit.se account, so you are safe for now

(dun dun dun)

easy enough to create one ;)

lol, I already have like 45 101 accounts

I've got an account on every singe site on the network.

And flags on 170+ plus of them, counting per-site metas.

</brag>

o_O

@Mithrandir You seem to have misspelt "I need a life" ;)

And that's coming from the guy with 2.1k FPs

i don't have a life

Have you seen a doctor about that?

nah

@Edlothiad If I added mine cross the network I'd probably have about that

Pfft, cross network is easy...

That's like DVK saying cross network he's got more rep than Valorum

@Edlothiad cross network reviews are meh

mostly because SO is stupid and doesn't like you reviewing anything

"I have 100000 thousand available reviews per day and got 10"

"I have 30 available and got 10"

@amflare So would love me reviewing. There's only one master

"I have 3 available and got 10"

@amflare i can't review on SO :P

curious, @Edlo, d'you have a perfect candidate score?

@Mithrandir I did it for like 2 days and got dinged by a bunch of audits, so I was like "screw this noise" and moved on with my life

@Mithrandir Nope missing 1, candidate score doesn't mean anything

candidate score is one of the best measures

@Edlothiad Thats not strictly true

@Mithrandir Of one? How long you've been on the site?

Its a good base line.

@amflare For how long one has spent on the site

Sure a guy with 20k is worth more than a guy with 10 rep. And a guy with a few reviews is better than a guy with none, and a guy who's handled some flags is better than a guy who hasn't. But CS 40 is not necessarily better than one of 20 who has shown great promise in all the aspects.

I also went from a candidate score of 24 to 39 in like 3 months, not hard

@amflare Shade was thrown.

@Edlothiad for how active a role you've taken in moderating the site.

@Mithrandir Candidate score is one measure, yes.

@Edlothiad thus our point (mine at least), its easy enough that if you havn't gotten it and you are still running, I can more or less write you off as not being committed enough

Or ignorant of how the site works

Pfft, it's a minor measure.

@Möoz Indeed. There are others as well.

But the whole reason it was created was because people were voting based on rep, and that was... not good.

It was created to be a better indication at a single glance of your commitment to the site.

Of course, you still need to consider each candidate carefully, and not vote based on a few numbers.

"People before voting based on rep"?

oh were, not ere

@Mithrandir That again, is a problem in itself. It creates an 'at-a-glance' look at people. Just another metric, meaningless on its own (as in rep), which has been given a huge focus, thereby detracting from any other considerations of each candidate, like their past history, their actual activeness, their attitude, etc (things you can't 'measure').

@Möoz I think though, it presents a lesser evil then the at-a-glance that rep inherently was.

@amflare That's true, but far from the best measure. IMO.

Obviously, those of us who are active can see it for what it is and correct for it, but it at least guides the masses to a certain extent.

@Möoz I fully agree

@Möoz Of course.

But it is a non-insignificant 'at-a-glance' overview, which, unfortunately, is all some people actually do before voting.

In fact, I have a candidate score of 39/40, does that make me a great candidate? I think that most 'mass-voters' would think so.

I'm not endorsing voting based on candidate score at all.

In completely unrelated news, does anyone know if mass voting trips the various alarms if I'm not voting for a specific person?

not allowed to tell you anything about that, sorry

@Mithrandir for real?

@Mithrandir Yupp. Which is why giving any sort of 'at-a-glance' measure is ineffective. Let people do their research, don't show them something and expect them to do something else.

@amflare yeah, for real

@Möoz If it didn't exist, people would vote based on rep like they used to, which would be even worse.

I supposed that not entirely unexpected

Voting stuff is a tightly-guarded secret ;)

hmph

well, worst case scenario, I get perma-banned.

Bants!

Nah they get reversed for one time offenses.

I've triggered it a couple of times

hey, I know someone who was banned network-wide for ten years and now has a diamond

@Mithrandir wut? SO isn't even 10 years old

how is this possible