« first day (2332 days earlier)      last day (22 days later) » 

5:58 AM
Several answers on Meta Stack Exchange mention that moderators were made aware of this upcoming change beforehand:
7
A: New Reputation Calculation - was the community asked?

JC007BWe informed site moderators of the change a few weeks ago, collected their input, and responded to it. We trust our moderators as representatives of their communities. We didn't solicit feedback from the wider community on this change. We have a robust roadmap and we are selective in asking the...

55
A: New Reputation Calculation - was the community asked?

Sonic the Reinstate Monica-hogNo, there was no such discussion raised by the SE team to normal community members. There was a consultation made to moderators only in the private moderator Team. This was leaked to the public here in a now-deleted and redacted question. (Someone managed to archive it to WayBackMachine before i...

From some comments I gather that only some mods knew about this change:
I'm a site moderator and didn't know about this. Maybe I missed something. When did you inform me? — Double AA 8 hours ago
@EmC so the OP meant "We informed some site moderators who frequent the dedicated moderator Team and Chatroom of the changes..." If they really wanted to inform the site mods they could have used a push mod notification or dropped a notice to check out the Team in the per site mod chat rooms. — Double AA 7 hours ago
It also seems that some MO users are not really happy about this change:
(Anyone else kind of feel that answers are worth more than questions, when it comes to MO? Not that I would push very strongly for this, but the tone/claims in stackoverflow.blog/2019/11/13/… grate slightly) — Yemon Choi 9 hours ago
@ToddTrimble Since you happen to be here - I just wanted to ask whether the MO mods knew about this change. (From the information above I see that at least some mods were informed about this in advance.)
 
 
1 hour later…
7:29 AM
@YemonChoi Since you've mentioned that you disagree with the change from +5 to +10, I'll just point out that (according to the above posts) the mods have been informed about this change a few weeks ago.
Although it is not clear whether all mods (including the MO mods) knew about this.
I see that when this was discussed on MathOverflow Meta back in 2013, quid also expressed some reservations about such change.
I am against changing back. An issue got raised by @StefanKohl. One might consider more subtle models of point distribution according to votes, which then might be better, but just as is I think the current way of distributing is relatively better than the one we had. Yes, really good questions are important, but more often than not detailed and coherent (mathematical) question do not get that many votes regardless, at least if they are somewhat specialised. By contrast, some general interest question that are not even that well-thought out get many votes. — user9072 Oct 18 '13 at 10:35
And some other raised objections to this, too:
I agree with @quid. On MO 1.0, there were many users who got to 3000 rep by just asking semi-soft questions. This I think led to many open-close wars on soft questions. I think we see less now because of that. In fact the +10 encouraged people to ask very soft questions to try and get rep before somebody forced them to make the question CW. Of course rep is silly but the point is 3000 rep gives the power to open and close questions and if people get this power without every answering a question, this can lead to a change in the nature of the site. — Benjamin Steinberg Oct 18 '13 at 14:46
 
 
5 hours later…
12:02 PM
@MartinSleziak I didn't know myself, and (obviously) there was no discussion between us mods.
 
Thanks for the response!
By obviously you mean that if there were discussion among the MO moderators, then you would know?
 
12:45 PM
@MartinSleziak Yes, that's what I meant.
 
 
3 hours later…
4:00 PM
Hi there! Is there anyone here with some familiarity with SFT compactness theorems? I'm trying to get some intuition about it but the paper of Bourgeois, Eliashberg, Hofer, Wysocki and Zehnder is hard to digest :(
 
 
2 hours later…
6:16 PM
@MartinSleziak Moderators were informed in advance, but with a channel that does not give explicit notifications, so it's not unlikely that MO mods didn't notice it.
(Frankly, I noticed it basically by chance)
FWIW I am in favor of the change
 

« first day (2332 days earlier)      last day (22 days later) »