English Language & Usage: Multi-Layered Discourse Room - 2014-08-15 (page 1 of 5)

« first day (1373 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (3540 days later) »

12:00 AM

Hok as prison is not not in my vocabulary either.

There is a debtors prison

Sure.

There is a prison for everyone, somewhere.

@Cerberus Including your own body, if you were Robin Williams with terminal Parkinson’s disease.

Financial criminals are kept separate

@RegDwigнt I believe you have inverted the transaction’s direction.

Why is there no vandalism flag?

12:08 AM

How do you connect fishmonger to giving a hint? With Arrowfar @tchrist

This is a serious question.

I feel that “not an answer” is inappropriate for vandalism.

Traditionally, the spam flag has been used for that.

What the halibut am I supposed to call it, offensive?

I find it offensive that lusers vandalize our site.

It doesn’t flounder matter if it is not some sort of commercial solicitation.

It is still crap, and it is a crap of a different calibre than merely “Not an answer.”

Give us a fishitz flag, and I shall be happy. For a little while.

user116848

You are not talking about pasting images here, right?

I am not talking about pasting images here.

user116848

phew

I am talking about idiots who submit answers that are like this:

> asrghj3po68uerg^TQERG$ G AWER !L$%H )ASF AL! $T FA

user116848

12:12 AM

Oh, that

That is vandalism.

user116848

:D

It is not not an answer any more so than spam is not an answer.

It is trash.

Spam is trash.

Therefore it is spam.

QEDone.

It should be subject to the same 6-votes-and-it’s-dead algorithm that spam and offensive flags are.

It should not have to be run through the bloody Low Quality Review Queue!!

Because that requires three 20k users to delete it.

And it should not require that.

Anybody knows that that crap is crap.

And it should be dealt with the way other crap is dealt with.

Indeed, this is how it always has been done before.

Now Somebody has decided it should not work the way it always worked before anymore.

And that Somebody knows very well who that Somebody is.

I saw no notice of a policy change on meta.

Time to set a fire under somebody.

Vandalism must be destroyed.

I will not budge from this position.

Because the counter proposition is untenable.

Who is somebody?

Somebody with a diamond.

12:18 AM

New?

I cannot say.

Fortunately, I have over one thousand five hundred helpful flags to mine for proof that this is contrary to previous practice.

Which I shall perforce do.

Don't they have a probationary period of six months?

The “who” does not matter publically.

I do not believe one should focus on the “who”.

I feel that one should focus on the policy.

In fact, I have found some already.

Trying to change or question policy gets very political.

@tchrist Um, I'm sure...

12:22 AM

The problem is that Somebody has decided to change the policy WITHOUT DISCUSSING THIS NOR EVEN NOTIFYING US.

Oh good, a 10k user. Now I can provide proof.

I flagged this as spam.

On July 27th.

My flag was accepted as valid.

@tchrist I read spam as "messages that the sender knows (or ought to know) you do not want to receive".

@Cerberus As do I.

Somebody has decided that it only counts for advertising.

user image

If that is not spam, then it is vandalism.

But is NOT “Not an answer.”

user116848

@Cerberus Howdy Cerbs :)

Which is what I just got my wrist slapped for.

Hilarious.

It is not an answer, that much is true.

12:25 AM

So in the space of a few days, the policy has changed, and nobody said anything.

@Arrowfar Howdy!

I resent this.

@Cerberus Ah, but that Spam flag was accepted as helpful/valid/true.

Now compare this one:

@tchrist The best way to deal with policy changes is to not know about them. The second best way is to pretend to not know about them.

Lol

This was also accepted as correct for being called a spammage:

english.stackexchange.com/posts/188479/revisions

user image

This is certainly to be expected, and is fine.

Now comes the outrageously secret policy change....

12:28 AM

Bring it up on meta

english.stackexchange.com/questions/41096/…

That is no different than the previous two.

And?

But don't put yourself through mega stress

user image

user image

I cannot reconcile the disparate treatment of those three spam flags.

The first two were accepted, the second was rejected. All were vandalism.

I respectfully believe that this flag was not handled correctly.

Call the policy makers into the chat room

12:31 AM

Odd. Declined by whom?

I prefer not to say.

I agree: I would call that spam.

But you can figure it out, Cerb.

I can guess.

Look at the part I chopped off from the link.

I can only guess as well.

And I do not want this to be personal.

12:32 AM

Part you chopped off?

I believe that we have always called such things spam, not not an answers.

Probably.

But in the end it matters little.

Because mods don't care

@Cerberus Here. I did not care to reveal the rest of it in public, but as a 10k user you can read it.

I do not want it to be personal. I want it to be policy.

Either something has changed, or something has been misunderstood, or both.

Meta is the place to ask

12:34 AM

There may be even be more than one of each of those two categories.

Oh, that was not my guess.

It would not have been mine either.

I'm sure it's just a personal decision.

And I truly do not wish any friction with our volunteer team of janitors.

I just want the policy made clear.

Clarity is important.

12:36 AM

There are distinct advantages to the spam/offensive flag.

The most important.

It allows six untrusted users to gang up on vandalism and delete it.

Rather than requiring three trusted ones.

The ratio of <20k to >20k is immense.

Am I trusted in here?

And therefore, it is much more effectively dealt with that way.

@skullpatrol “Trusted User” is an SE codephrase for > 20k reps.

It has nothing to do with actual trust.

I said in here pal :-)

12:40 AM

@skullpatrol No, your aggregate reps on all sites does not reach 10k.

And therefore you do not count as a Trusted User for chat flagging purposes.

Thanks for the info.

Once the sum of the reps of all your SE accounts everywhere hits 10k, then you get to see potty-mouth flags of blue.

Thanks, but no thanks.

It’s for the most part more trouble than it’s worth.

You see, you do not just see the flags in this room.

You see them EVERYWHERE.

And you are asked to vote on whether they are valid or invalid.

You virtually never have the context.

@tchrist Maybe it is a mistake. Mistakes do happen.

12:45 AM

I almost always vote for invalid. I only vote for valid stuff that is clearly offensive without any further context required.

@JasperLoy I think that is probably true.

Now that I realize it was not some alien übermod enforcing some new SE-wide policy that they didn’t tell us about, it bothers me less.

I don't like reading backwards through the transcript for that kinda stuff.

@skullpatrol Nobody does!

Plus, you won’t have time.

If you want your vote to count, you must be very very fast.

There is no time to investigate.

Sounds like a linching mob

I don’t know what my aggregate valid/invalid count is, but I am absolutely sure I have invalidated many more than I have validated.

@skullpatrol This is the problem, yes.

Another reason to give the benefit of the doubt.

Of course, just because I am absolutely sure does not mean I am right.

Whenever I’ve been wrong about things before, I’ve thought otherwise.

I have been linched a couple of times :)

12:49 AM

So thinking you are right is some evidence to the contrary.

Unfortunately.

I was once banned for a complete nothing, but fortunately there was a genial übermod in the room who immediately and completely quietly reversed it as nonsense.

It was like a 20-second ban. :)

Since they were here and had the context.

But the random lynchers did not, and hopped on it without knowing anything.

I hate it when I do that when I am trying to be so careful.

I should be lynched for my spelling of lynch :(

I made no passive-aggressive autocorrection.

It purely by accident just came out the other way when I typed it. :)

Spell check was screaming at me too

I have other news.

It is a matter of public record, but may be controversial.

What news?

12:55 AM

Our river horse has taken a monthlong holiday in the tropics.

chat.stackexchange.com/users/123166/george-pompidou

I guess he was all wet and needed to dry out.

Hmm, 30 days, what did he say? Gay, prostitution, etc?

I literally cannot say, because I cannot know.

Well, he did say many things, but I think 30 days is too much.

Anything I could say would necessarily be unconstructive speculation potentially based upon figmentational delusions of my own instead of on reality.

OMG

::

12:58 AM

The prostitute message is still in the transcript.

@skullpatrol There’s a code point for that, you know.

This :: was a typo

The gay message has been deleted.

The most likely scenario is that the entire moderation team discussed the matter privately amongst themselves after examining patterns of behavior to which we are not necessarily privy, and which in certain cases, we certainly are not.

« first day (1373 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (3540 days later) »

Transcript for

Aug '1415

English Language & Usage: Multi-Layer…

Not for the faint of heart or those easily triggered by Englis...

phrase-requests pronunciation single-word-requests synonyms

join this room
about this room

00:00

06:00

12:00

18:00

all times are UTC

site design / logo © 2024 Stack Exchange Inc; legal

mobile