« first day (11 days earlier)      last day (96 days later) » 
00:00 - 03:0003:00 - 00:00

3:00 AM
But I think a wiki page couldn't hurt.
I am for it.
I have always wanted more of an explanation of chat functions in chat. I even searched for it on occasion, when I was new.
Great. So we've accomplished something! A few of us like the idea of a wiki page.
@hichris123 That is something, but most of the stuff people don't know isn't in there.
@Mahnax - It can be beneficial to take a look at traditions through fresh eyes from time to time. Daniel Snyder is learning about that now. :)
3:02 AM
Where did you find that anyway?
Ah, the small faq link at the bottom.
@phenry I heard about that. It's about time.
It isn't exactly clear that that link is about chat, not the whole site. But, oh well.
I am very interested to hear about what other users have to say about Theodore's experiences and suggestion.
3:23 AM
Well, @Mahnax wanted to know if there was corroboration for @TheodoreBroda's impressions of chat. I am here to corroborate them.
4:26 AM
I completed my aforementioned meta post regarding the discussion on how to improve the experience for new chat users; you can find it here.
@Mahnax @medica @phenry @Cerberus @tchrist If you have anything more you would like to add to the discussion, or if you would like to formalize your most important points as a permanent answer to the meta question, please add an answer to the meta question, whose link is above.
OK noted.
@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 Thank you. I am sad that you experienced similar problems; hopefully they can be fixed easily, which I think they can. Please add your thoughts to the new meta question on the topic.
@TheodoreBroda Well, the relevant chat messages were moved to the other room, but in a nutshell, I wouldn't go so far as to characterize my experience as "problems".
But I'll say no more here, for fear of waking the Balrog.
@TheodoreBroda There are some good points in your post, but especially the part reeking of censorship and policing is not something I can support. I saddens me to vote down anything you typed.
@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 screech
@Cerberus Sorry about my earlier rant; I can be animated at times. I know we have diverging opinions on this issue, but I'm sure it will soon be resolved. What I said about @RegDwight earlier wasn't quite fair. Hopefully, the discussion on meta will be more civil; I'll try not to name-call.
@Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 I'll go view your post in context now.
4:42 AM
@TheodoreBroda I don't recall an actual rant.
Just your negative experiences.
2 hours later…
7:03 AM
At approximately 22:00 in this chat last night, tchrist stated: “…the thing people are forgetting is that SE really is a meritocracy, and those who have done the most work are garlanded with more privileges. Just in terms of edits alone, Reg has done more visible work on the site than everyone else put together. Open discussion: Why do only 3 out of 9 candidates in this election appear on the list of editors above? IM!HO, the three who do appear there merit special mention — and thanks."
What he refused to do was post information that might actually make the other candidates appear industrious/meritorious. So, following his advice, I have constructed a list of review chores (those activities which can be performed by anyone.) I have looked at the all time pages of the 6 listed reviews. If a candidate's name appeared on the first page, I included it.
Review close votes: #1 tchrist, (2280), #5 Matt Ellen (1445) #7 medica (1386), #18: phenry (682), #19 MrHen (617)
Review first posts: #1 RegDwight (1308), #2 medica (1291)
Review late answers: #1 RegDwight (1131), #2 medica (544)
Low quality posts: #1 tchrist (1639) #2 RegDwight (1326), #3 medica (1296)
Reopen votes: #1 RegDwight (555), #4 medica (254), #9 MrHen 115
Suggested edits: #1 RegDwight (1019), #2 Andrew Leach (636), #9 medica (327)
In addition, helpful flags matter. For the candidates: Andrew Leach: 802, Matt Ellen: 735, medica: 703, MrHen: 196, oerkelens: 79, FracturedRetina: 37, Manhax: 33, phenry:23, YoichiOichi: 1
This was posted to attempt to balance tchrist's comment with facts.
If any other candidate wants to post a similar comparison omitted here, please do.
7:26 AM
"facts"? What a rare creature that is.
indeed, difficult to interpret.
I want to know why none of the candidates is offering to put into at least the profiles of users the option of the user to indicate whether or not the user is a native English speaker.
would you like me to address your question to all the candidates? I know my user profile states I am from the US.
I'd think that would be helpful to a non-native English speaker OP when their question is being answered. So many answerers are definite in their "correct" or "non-correct" evaluations. Having evaluations of that sort from native English speakers would probably be better than from non-native English speakers.
However this was discussed before and, though few seemed to mind it, there seemed to be a consensus that it could not be enforced, and also, people could dissemble.
7:29 AM
@medica Yes, I would.
@medica It doesn't have to be mandatory, merely encourage and with an automatic prompt: E.g. choices could be AmE, BrE, fill-in-yourself, non-native English speaker, blank.
I will do so. It will be my pleasure. Shall I phrase it as you want to know (more politely of course) if we think a user's profile should contain their native language or their ... got it.
would you like to ask the candidates anything else?
@medica Right. It shouldn't be mandatory, merely convenient.
will do.
Oh, there was a 2nd issue too. But I'll leave that to a later day.
7:32 AM
I've seen arguments among native English speakers over usage, when the problem was merely that of AmE vs BrE (or something similar).
Having that info in the profile, or even automatically generated in the Answer, would probably reduce those problems.
ahh. how would you phrase that question?
Also, I've been seen answer posts by non-native English speakers saying something like "to my ear" on whether something is "correct" or not. I'm rolling my eyes when I see that.
That's actually an excellent observation, and a helpful eye exercise.
But how would we incorporate that into the information about the user?
@medica Like, in my profile I currently indicate that I'm located in USA. Which indicates that I'm AmE, and probably a native English speaker.
Ok, so I will incorporate this into your question about profiles, then.
7:36 AM
In that way, an OP can at least have the opportunity to glance at an answerer's profile to see if the answer is coming from a native English speaker.
I agree. I think it would be very helpful information. Once again, though, dissemblance is not controlable.
But all the candidates, when they answered their questionnaires, seemed to not be aware of this aspect of the issue (w.r.t. indicating whether the answerer is a native English speaker). That was troublesome for me, seeing that.
Hmm, I didn't even notice. I think I know where most of them are from. However, In the question, I'll also ask them if they would mind identifying their native language and their current country of residence, would that be ok with you?
@medica I think it should be positively encouraged, and an informative explanation as to why they might want to indicate whether or not they are a native English speaker, and to perhaps indicate which major dialect family (AmE vs BrE) applies to them, or if they want, perhaps even more info as to dialect if they actually wanted to add that too.
I know that I treat questions differently w.r.t. it coming from an EFL speaker versus a native speaker.
I have more patience for an EFL speaker. :) . . . When the OP is at least trying to be polite, that is.
lol, this is turning into a long question. Perhaps I will break them up. :)
but expect to get pinged; the candidates are pretty good at answering questions.
7:45 AM
Oh, no, I don't want to get pinged. They should update their "answers" on the questionnaire, though it might be too late now to do any good. This is something the voters might/should be interested in.
Oh, I don't think they can do that. I
hold on, let me check
I'm going to look at someone's question (which happens to be related to grammar) . . .
@F.E. we can't edit our candidate profiles.
How about I ask the question but without your name so you don't get pinged?
@medica That sounds good. But then how do the voters get to see the candidates' responses?
You would either need to come back here and scroll..... or be willing to get your answer delivered to you with a ping.
7:52 AM
The 2nd big issue was the ELL and ELU situation. Which one of the two is going to handle the English grammar questions?
I can ask that as well.
But my guess is that both sites will, according to the difficulty of the question.
ELL seems mostly to be a EFL site, and ELU seems mostly to be a Single-Word-Request site. So where should the grammar questions be aimed at?
Good question. I will incorporate it into the second question.
My two questions were the two major ones. Thank you for your ear. :)
my pleasure. Thank you for asking!
7:55 AM
Bye. :)
@F.E. shall the candidates ping you?
@medica No. -- Thank you. :)
Bye :)
@medica Bye :) . . . for real now.
@AndrewLeach - you missed the commotion, lucky you.
8:16 AM
@Mari-LouA hello!
Hi, I was just catching up on the news.
@TheodoreBroda has written a nice piece on ELU, but who is this bot that everyone's talking about?
In chat, there is a bot, quite funny, that answers questions. It's name was KitSox (cuz Kit made ie). When new users go to chat, they initially think it is a person.
I've actually greeted it once: "Hello, KitSox!"
People are often chagrinned to find that they were duped. But I think it's harmless and rather funny. The bot itself is hilarious, like Siri.
OK. I've just spent over an hour wading through last night's transcript. So...
* Yes the chatroom tagline has been around far too long. It was instructive to find out where it came from. As a Catholic I'm used to religion-bashing and don't worry too much about that myself -- it says more about the basher than the recipient; but the tagline might be seen as mocking religion ("some Son of God") and non-native speakers ("manufacture more win"), and cliquey if you don't get the origin of the joke. I do favour changing it.
@Mari-LouA If you ask it, Do you love me? It answers something like "All indicators would point to no."
@AndrewLeach - please ping Theodore Broda with your answer. Before time runs out.
I am a little concerned that this room is not going to be helpful in helping members of the community at large decide who to vote for. Moderation is largely about drudge work and keeping a weather eye and a level head. Moderators lead by example. The signal-to-noise ratio in this room seems rather low after last night, and the transcript is enormous.
8:24 AM
After last night, it will make us appear as bad as some of the unkind commenters.
@tchrist It takes some time before your name can appear on such a list. I know for a fact I was hesitant about editing the first few months I was here, so I think it's unfair to criticize those candidates who have been members for less than a year. And sometimes, (my peeve) these edits are really minimal=superficial too.
@AndrewLeach You have no argument from me. I actually engaged a mod to clean it up (see the moved comments) but they came out of ELU chat unhappy as a clam at low tide.
@medica @TheodoreBroda Follow the trail back from this ping to find an answer from me to your questions.
@medica I don't think I've ever come across it. The first time I actually interacted in chat was to understand why a post (or posts) of mine was getting downvotes. I didn't have a pleasant experience.
No, Mari-lou, chat can be a very intimidating place. It is still intimidating for me, and I've been going there for at least a couple of months.
8:28 AM
Unfortunately, having spent that time, I now have to go out to collect a parcel. BBL
@medica I thought you were asking me, for a moment. Why is medica asking if I love her??!!
lol! see? a bot will do that to you! ;-) It absolutely pulls you into her fantasy existence. But it really is a fun creation.
But you seem to be testing the waters. Here, esp, but also in chat. Which is good if chat is to ever become something we all feel comfortable in.
@AndrewLeach It's my general impression that there are the same old faces, who participate actively, which may or may not be influential when voting. I had hoped to hear from @oerkelens (?). If candidates are having second thoughts, is there a way they can notify the community? What does one do? Apart from "disappearing" ?
8:44 AM
@Mari-LouA - the mods have been a bit concerned with this as well. It would be apporpriate to ask in chat: It's empty now, and you can just ping reg or Kit, and they should get back to you.
@AndrewLeach, @MrHen, @Matt Эллен, @Manhax, @Yoichi Oichi, @phenry, @oerkelens, @Fractured Retina, @medica: A user asked if you would be so kind as to share the following information (not a requirement, of course): 1. What is your native tongue? If it is English, is it BrE or AmE? 2. Where do you currently reside?
@AndrewLeach, @MrHen, @Matt Эллен, @Manhax, @Yoichi Oichi, @phenry, @oerkelens, @Fractured Retina, @medica: A user asked if you would share your opinion on the following: Do you think there should be an option in the user profile form (e.g. an automatic prompt) for listing what the user’s native tongue is, or, alternately, if
the user’s is a native speaker of English (and if so, is it BrE, AmE, etc.), non-native English speaker, other, or none? The user wonders if such a profile prompt existed, whether it might some to be more sympathetic to the non-native speaker. and have a better informed opinion of the quality of the answer if it was iffy.
@medica But surely if the mods are concerned then it's up to them to notify the candidates or inform us if any have effectually withdrawn. I don't want my third vote wasted!
@AndrewLeach, @MrHen, @Matt Эллен, @Manhax, @Yoichi Oichi, @phenry, @oerkelens, @Fractured Retina, @medica: A user wondered if you had an opinion on which of the two sites, ELU or ELL, would be handling the grammar questions. It seems as if ELL is an EFL site getting the grammar questions, and ELU getting the single word requests. Any wisdom to share?
Time for me to leave. Thank you @medica for the chat. You have, as always, been very helpful.
@Mari-LouA I agree, but they don't know how to approach YoichiSan, for instance.
Always a pleasure, Mari Lou!
Finally, in comparing the candidates, please consider the amount of time they've had time to do these chores. Obviously moderators and members who work hard, and who have been here for a long time, will have high counts. Alternately moderator candidates (like myself) who have been here 7 months or less should be judged on what they did in that period of time.
Any user who has a question for the all of the mod candidates, please post it with @(no space)medica, @(no space)MrHen, @(no space)phenry, @(no space)MattЭллен, (or the @name of any mod candidate you have a question for) and I/we will see to it that it is readdressed to all the mod candidates. Thanks!
9:42 AM
@medica Or on your actual dealings with people on the site, especially in real time.
What do you seek here?
@Robusto do you have a point to make, red squiggly line?
@Robusto It appeard not. Good day to you.
"Red squiggly line?" That's how you apostrophize me?
@medica As is stated in my profile: native tongue is BrE, and I live in the UK.
@medica You really think you have the temperament to be a mod? I think you would be a disaster.
@medica No. The important thing is questions, not what type of English you speak. Judge the question not the asker.
9:50 AM
Don't ping me, I'm not the user; please just answer the question. He didn't want to be pinged. I certainly don't.
@medica Questions looking for rules to follow should go to ELL. Questions asking about a deeper understanding of English should go to EL&U
@medica ok
too late now
@MattЭллен Do Do not ping me. Just answer the qiestion, K?
pinging you makes it easier to figure out what I'm answering,
because the answers link back to the questions
but any way
Wow, medica. You really are a petty person.
@Robusto as to what you think, you're a little red squiggle, and an unpleasant one. I certainly put no stock in what you think.
9:52 AM
now everyone else won't make the same mistake
@medica Ah, what a large heart you have. Magnanimity, grace, forbearance—all the wonderful qualities that we expect from moderators.
hey, go back to your cave, what do you say?
play nice kids. it's early
@medica I say piss off. You can't tell me what to do.
@MattЭллен It's so easy to get her to drop the veneer and show her true nature.
@Robusto what a mannerley man. everything we would like from a cave dwelling high rep user.
9:57 AM
See what I mean?
I really don't want to get involved.
OK, here's the solution. I'm just going to ignore you sitewide. I don't need this unpleasantness.
@Robusto why don't you stop trying to stir dissent and go back to your cave. Your knickers see to be in a twist.
@Robusto Praise the powers that be! My prayer has been answered! Hallelluia!
@TheodoreBroda Personally I don't like the current topic as it is a bit too obscure. but, on the other hand I think new people come to the chat room regardless what the byline says. I like it when the topic describes how the room is, like when it used to say "All languages spoken at once". I don't think the topic has to be serious, we're not a serious group of people (except maybe Jez) so the topic should reflect that.
1 hour later…
11:21 AM
@MattЭллен I know, right? Pace yourselves. Eat one piece of cake between bites of meat, not the whole thing.
so hungry
11:40 AM
@Mari-LouA I believe candidates can not accept the moderators' agreement after the election, in which case the runner-up candidate(s) get offered it. The system doesn't allow withdrawal of nominations after the nomination phase. (Of course, it a candidate died, it would be appropriate to do something about that; but that would be a manual process by exception.)
You have to determine whether a willingness to participate in this phase of the process is a factor which is relevant to the site as a whole. Personally, I would also factor in previous track record of involvement in the site and its management (principally, flags and meta, but edits and review queues are relevant) and also general demeanour in comments and answers. In my view this room, particularly this year, is less useful. That's a pity.
@medica I'm pretty sure those pings will not work for users recently in the room. You'll need a mod to super-ping them and let them know their presence has been requested (or I think you can send them an invite yourself, then if they show up you'll be able to ping them too).
@medica If you were not a mod candidate and this was not an election chat room and I saw shenanigans like you just pulled there I would be tempted to suspend your chat privs for a while and warn you about the "be nice" expectation. How is making personal jabs like that good form for a prospective moderator? If you've getting into it with folks yourself, why would the community want to entrust you with moderator powers?
11:58 AM
To answer the most recent queries:
1. My profile already says I'm in the UK. My native English is British English.
2. I believe it could be useful to know where a user comes from -- there's a space for that already. However questions should be dealt with on their own merits. If someone is clearly learning English (which shows because they are having difficulty with the question), then ELL is likely to be a more appropriate forum. We shouldn't base that judgement call on whether the user actually has English as mother tongue.
3. Either site can handle either kind of question. It's the question and what it's asking which is key, not its subject or its writer's origin. See the last paragraph of this answer.
2a. Answers are less of an issue, because votes usually take care of glaring problems.
2 hours later…
2:27 PM
@TheodoreBroda That particular topic is actually a quote from a recent question on ELU that people found amusing. I don't have a link handy but can dig one up if necessary. The topic text is regularly changed from time to time and doesn't really reflect the purpose of the room. I don't think the room's topic needs to be a literal topic and, for better or worse, this chat room doesn't really have a topic of discussion. The regular users in that room talk about anything they feel like discussing.
@phenry The topic confused me too. It's a quote from a recently closed question on ELU.
@TheodoreBroda ELU chat -- on average -- can be intimidating but most of the regulars are extremely open to questions about ELU and the site. Periodically they go completely crazy over a topic and turn on the mean machine.
In my opinion, the problem is that I don't see a good option for better regulation. As a moderator, I would be open to suggestions on how to improve chat (specifically, make it more welcoming) but I would not trounce through trying to fix it.
I do encourage people to flag messages they consider problematic -- that's what the system is there for.
I also acknowledge that certain users in the chat are jerks and don't realize it. It is inappropriate for me to call anyone out on this publicly and as a regular user I couldn't find a compelling reason to discuss behavior with someone who I thought was causing problems.
But as a moderator, that is part of my job. If a user feels uncomfortable because of how someone treats them in chat I would want to know about it. And I would take the issue to the full moderator team for discussion.
(Heh, I misused the word trounce. Not sure what word I was thinking of. Oops.)
Oh, and I see people found the question in question later in the topic.
@phenry I don't have strong feelings on that particular subject. I personally would make a meta post about it and let the community as a whole tell me what they wanted.
@medica That is one of the features of being a moderator, yes. :)
@tchrist I think you are overstating the topic. A user had some questions about the ELU chat room and asked for opinions. I see no problem with the candidates choosing to talk about whatever they want to talk about. At the worst, it helps you learn more about them.
@phenry The other "main rooms" I visit from time to time are almost completely dead.
It may be tricky to do a good comparison.
@medica @tchrist was not misrepresenting all of the candidates. tchrist was indirectly referring to a particular candidate. I'm not sure why you seem to be on the defensive, here? Did I miss something?
@tchrist Minor correction: SE is a reputation-ocracy. You can gain reputation simply by doing lots and lots of mediocre work.
@tchrist I am actually on the first page of editors. The screenshot trimmed me out -- I was on the very next line.
As for why I'm not higher on the list, I've been spending my time answering really old questions. :)
3:08 PM
@TheodoreBroda I slightly disagree with this. Someone who wants to pop in and ask a quick question about ELU doesn't -- and shouldn't -- care about things like bots or stars. Learning to reply is optional and if a particular user sticks around they are usually taught by the other users in the room.
Hello! You have my vote. Despite our differences of opinion, of course.
@phenry Er, you mean besides RegDwight?
@Cerberus You talking to me?
I suppose I'm the only one here chatting to myself... :P
I'm still digging through the transcript. You lot went at it over chat... sheesh...
@MrHen But you are tallking sense. I read the transcript too.
Oh, looks like the transcript doesn't log deleted messages. That explains why some of that was confusing.
A lot of this info is available at the election page or through links on the election page.

Also, I'd like to point out that most of my recent activity has been answering old questions since other regular users have been doing a fine job clearing out the review queues.
@F.E. Is this a feature request? As in, you want a "native language" field on the user profile page?
3:23 PM
@MrHen And, the review queue figures don't include close votes or reviews outside those queues.
@AndrewLeach Oh, that's good to know. I didn't know that.
(I'm fairly certain, anyway. I'm sure my close-vote figure should be there.)
@F.E. The questionnaires were just a preset list of questions. The questionnaire did ask us about distinguishing between native and non-native posters. Was there a follow-up to that question you wanted to ask?
@F.E. I speak AmE and live in Minnesota. I would consider my dialect Midwestern. I have also lived in East Texas and can "speak Texan" if necessary.
@F.E. - I am a native speaker of American English, currently residing near Seattle, on the West Coast of the United States.
@F.E. Users should always feel free to ask grammar questions on ELU. If the question is inappropriate for the site we will deal with accordingly.
@F.E. I pinged you so people could follow the reply link and find the question. I will not be updating my questionnaire answers because I don't want people to get confused by the edits. If you have any other questions, please ask away. :)
3:35 PM
@F.E. - The profile functionality is shared across the SE network. It would be necessary to petition the developers to implement custom fields that would be used for our site only, and with the other things on their plate I doubt the request would be granted. However, I do think it's a good idea to encourage users to supply this information in the free-text part of their profiles.
@AndrewLeach I completely agree.
@F.E. - I don't believe either site should become the exclusive home of either grammar questions or single-word requests. ELL should be the place for speakers of other languages who are learning English to ask questions, and ELU should be the place for fluent speakers to get their questions answered.
@MrHen - It's been changed now. It's still inscrutable, but at least it doesn't appear to be ridiculing a specific person anymore. I suppose that's progress.
@MrHen - I suspect the ability of any new moderator to materially affect the culture of chat is going to be very limited. The regulars are going to do what they want, and won't be told that any of it is less than perfect.
Online chat is cliquish by nature. It's wrong to expect that can change.
@MrHen - I suppose, if you want to see that as an attack. The individual in question has done many good things for the site, as well as some not-so-good things. I don't think anyone should be above criticism... certainly not myself.
3:51 PM
@phenry That's why I'd get feedback from Meta to start the conversation.
@phenry Sure, criticism is a more accurate word. :)
@MrHen - I think Theodore Broda did an excellent job doing exactly that with his recent meta question. It's currently +6 after 11 hours on a Saturday, which I think is a pretty significant early indication that it's a problem that should be looked at.
But my question is, if that question got 100 upvotes, would it change anything by itself? Several of the chat regulars seem wedded to the idea that the chat culture "belongs" to them and are angered by any suggestion that anyone who's not part of that group should be able to come in from the outside and tell them they need to change, even for the betterment of the site as a whole.
anyway, I can't stay... it's my wife's birthday and she wants me to make her breakfast. :) Au revoir.
@phenry No, obviously not by itself. Nothing upvoted on Meta changes things on its own. It still needs someone to drive the change.
The chat culture question is complicated and I don't have a quick response. I think that my primary focus as a moderator would be on the primary site. I would step in to help quell drama if it explodes on chat -- and I am all for more user friendliness -- if the question was whether I would rather spend time fixing ELU issues or ELU Chat issues, I am going to spend it on the former. ELU is more important than ELU Chat.
@phenry Ah, best of luck. :)
2 hours later…
5:44 PM
@Caleb The one person with whom I've "gotten into it" is unkind to me. Yesterday some people flagged an abusive conversation he had with me, and he was simply here to engage further. Last evening I acted like a moderator. I tried to moderate a fracas. I was able to avoid the greatest of it and finally brought it to a stop. I will apologize to Robusto, but look at chat records; you will see he's had it in for me for a while. His behavior was nothing new. Mine towards him was.
5:59 PM
@MrHen, You might want to look again at the information tchrist pulled up; there were three candidates on that page, which he indicated, by virtue of that page and in words, should be the new moderators. I was not being defensive; I was merely adding information to round out the information.
6:16 PM
@medica Ok, but you see my point don't you? As a moderator far more than just one user is going to have it in for you. You're going to get chewed out and picked on on a regular basis. If you can't consistently be the one to put a dead end to it and you let yourself fire back like that...
@medica Except that the information is only as complete as it goes. The review queue, for example, only counts reviews. I've actually cast 751 close votes, so I must have reviewed at least that many questions. Just not using the review queue. Statistics are good; but all statistics need caveats.
@Caleb Yes, I do see your point, and frankly, it shouldn't have happened. I am sorry that it did. As a moderator, I hope I will behave exactly as you say. KitFox was here describing to all of us the things that happen to moderators.
@Caleb - I have no access to the kind of information that will paint a true picture of the work all of us have done here. @tchrist had access to a page I've never seen. If you have access to information you want to make public, please do so. An accurate picture is very desirable.
@medica I'm assuming that was for @AndrewLeach?
I'm sorry, you're correct.
@AndrewLeach - I have no access to the kind of information that will paint a true picture of the work all of us have done here. @tchrist had access to a page I've never seen. If you have access to information you want to make public, please do so. An accurate picture is very desirable.
@Caleb apologies, you are correct.
@AndrewLeach - I have also cast close votes without going through the review queue. Probably many of us have to one degree or another. Where did you find your information?
@AndrewLeach I see you did some close vote reviewing. I rechecked to make sure I had not missed you. Your name isn't on the first page (All Time Reviews). I don't know how to access the information you have. Again, please post whatever you feel more accurately represents yourself and, hopefully, the rest of the candidates.
6:46 PM
user: before the age of five, my native tongue was French; since then it has been English. I live and work in the USA. I think a prompt to include native language is a great idea.
User: I don’t see ELL and ELU separating along those lines; I would like to see fewer single word requests and less basic grammar. I see ELU as being the place to ask for advanced grammar advice.
2 hours later…
8:23 PM
@medica This data uses the Data Explorer, which means it's slightly out-of-date, but there is a common datum and it can be used for comparison. Explanation below.
                 UserId  Close  Reopen  Comnts (sc)

Fractured Retina  52446      0      0       17 ( 7)
medica            58761    632     18     1711 (28)
Yoichi Oishi       3119      0      3     1073 (18)
Andrew Leach      18696    647     17     2703 (42)
oerkelens         54363     56      2      611 (59)
Mahnax            11550    479      8      271 (34)
phenry             3534    149     17      171 (24)
Matt Эллен         3559   1429     47     2079 (32)
MrHen              6006    555      9     1221 (10)
Columns are name, user id number, number of votes cast for successfully closed questions, number of votes cast in successfully reopening questions, number of comments and in brackets the highest score (upvotes) one of those comments achieved.
Candidates are in no particular order. This data is simply what I could get out of the Data Explorer; it may be useful, or it might be ignored.
As with all statistics, treat with caution.
8:53 PM
@medica I did look at the information. I did not interpret tchrist's actions as you did.
@AndrewLeach Thank you for posting that! I think it's helpful.
@MrHen hmm. what did I miss?
@medica That page was public. It is located here: english.stackexchange.com/users?tab=Editors&filter=all
@medica Btw, if you are ever curious about a particular stat feel free to ask me if I can dig up a query on it. Data.SE is hard to use but can find some interesting stats. (I won't be able to do anything to get you data just now, though, seeing as I'm more concerned about keeping an eye on the election. Post-election, however, I will be available to help.)
@medica I'm not sure. I didn't draw the same conclusions you have. That usually means you saw something I did not.
@MrHen I'm glad you found that. Had he included one more line, his selection would have included five of the candidates instead of three.
Not that I care deeply about a screenshot of the editors page. My actions speak for themselves. If people want to rely on overly specific metrics that is their right.
@medica Yes. I called that out but it wasn't until much, much later.
6 hours ago, by MrHen
@tchrist I am actually on the first page of editors. The screenshot trimmed me out -- I was on the very next line.
Looks like I didn't mention you were also there, one position ahead of me. :)
@MrHen All I know, and it's old news now, is that he presented that shot and stated "these are the candidates that merit special attention."
9:00 PM
19 hours ago, by tchrist
@Cerberus Open discussion: Why do only 3 out of 9 candidates in this election appear on the list of editors above? IM!HO, the three who do appear there merit special mention — and thanks.
I don't have a problem with that. Like I said, my actions speak for themselves. I'm on the next line, anyway, so... okay.
Anyone who really cared would look at the data themselves. Anyone who forms an opinion based on a screenshot like that isn't really someone I feel compelled to sway.
I asked for more info, but he said no. I'm not very tech savvy (i don't really evenknow what that page actually represents), but I sought to present more information the only way I knew how - the review record.
@MrHen Please accept my sincere apology for omitting you. It was utterly unintentional.
I didn't have their ear in the first place.
@medica I didn't see a refusal when I was reading the transcript -- but I may have missed it. There was a lot to catch up on.
@tchrist I assume you just snipped the image quickly. No worries.
@MrHen I don't know what people base their votes on.
@MrHen It's a long way back. It was about helping me find more data.
@medica Mmk. Well, you know where the page is now. And you can get lots of similar data here: elections.stackexchange.com/#english.stackexchange
Except... that page is down right now. Bummer.
9:04 PM
@MrHen Well, we are both on the next line.
@medica Yep.
Anyway, just wanted to probe a bit more deeply.
That's fair. And now you can. :)
Gotta head out again. Back in a bit.
1 hour later…
10:29 PM
Andrew Reach. I was surprised to find so many close-votes were given just like they are enjoying rapid-fire. It looks like abuse of ‘Close-vote’ to me. In my recent case, the question, “Is ‘battled-hardened” correct, or just a typo?” was closed albeit gaining 5 up-votes offsetting 2 down-votes and 336 views just for the reason of ‘off-topic.” Many answerers said it’s typo. But there was an answerer who insisted it wasn’t typo by showing the case of ‘battled –hardened “being used in journalism and encyclopedia. I don’t think all of those 5 (actually 7) up-voters and 336 viewers are idiot.
Correction: Do Presidential Election and Primary require down-votes or disapproval votes?
@YoichiOishi Voting, both up and down -- and to close and reopen -- is one of the fundamental lynch-pins of the Stack Exchange model.
The statistics I found only show votes where another four of the community have agreed: they don't show where candidates have voted to close a question which has actually remained open.
I think your question is reasonable: perhaps it could have been phrased as "Is this one of the New Yorker's renowned idiosyncrasies?" rather than lead people into thinking of it as a typo;. And you'll note that I didn't vote to close it. In fact it was closed before I even saw it. I think tchrist's answer (with its addendum) is rather good.
I admit it. But it's abused, boundlessly. It's looks almost cruel, and there are patholological down-voters as I've seen in the coplaints of users in meta section.
10:47 PM
Perhaps the statistics show me to be one of them! I don't believe I am. I do believe that questions need to show a bit of research and be within the scope of the site as presented in the Help pages. In my experience, yours always qualify. If only that were the case for all.
11:40 PM
@YoichiOishi I do not think downvotes should always be accompanied by an explanation of the downvote simply because people have retaliated against downvoters in the past. All up- and down-voting should be anonymous. Any particular downvoter can choose to forgo that anonymity and post a reason explaining the downvote. But this is their choice -- it is not the choice of the person who was downvoted.
00:00 - 03:0003:00 - 00:00

« first day (11 days earlier)      last day (96 days later) »