The h Bar

0celo7

12:33 AM

$\mathscr{Hom}$

@ACuriousMind hmm

Sir Cumference

1:02 AM

I'm sick of having the cold

0celo7

then get over it

@SirCumference did you try praying

Sir Cumference

@0celo7 Question, when you imagine me, how religious do you think I am?

0celo7

average?

Sir Cumference

@0celo7 Eh, sorta, yeah

0celo7

@ACuriousMind what does o.E. stand for in German?

I think it's wlog

but what is the E

o is probably ohne

Einschränkung?

@SirCumference then you will pray

Sir Cumference

1:33 AM

@0celo7 You want to test something for me?

The game I wrote up

no

...thanks best bud

np

1:58 AM

oh my god

Sir Cumference

@0celo7 I skipped around while watching that and I threw my headphones across the room when the insanely loud metal suddenly started.

My ears are still ringing

0celo7

Justice - Safe And Sound (Audio)

►

vzn

2:18 AM

quantum technology AMA / reddit

↑ wow, serious competition o_O

0celo7

3:16 AM

Iggy Azalea - Team (Explicit)

►

@SirCumference how much do you know about vector bundles

yuggib

5:36 AM

@0celo7 I like it more, but not so much... ;-P

@0celo7 you are sparking many C discussions...I like it ;-)

NeuroFuzzy

8:05 AM

@0celo7 nice.

user116211

8:30 AM

user116211

O.o

John Rennie

8:42 AM

@dmckee @DavidZ @Qmechanic: troll alert

InformedA

124 3

See for example:

Garbage answer to equally garbage question. Don't you people have more productive things to do or there is some obscure reason that makes people give you money and resources. — InformedA 35 mins ago

@BernardMeurer Correct. Running the pump too fast just wastes whatever power is needed to operate the pump. It won't make the cooling any worse.

@Chinatsu-creepy-chan I've only just seen your post, but if you're still interested I'll help if I can

Qmechanic

9:17 AM

@JohnRennie : Thanks. We'll look into it.

yuggib

10:29 AM

@MAFIA36790 I am using it as a bed book

user116211

11:42 AM

@yuggib Already started reading it alongside with Jech's and Bourbaki's set.

Jim

12:35 PM

@JohnRennie My response: It's their money, if they want to waste it on us, who are you to say don't?

0celo7

1:09 PM

@ACuriousMind hello

@ACuriousMind what kind of German name is Vinson?

As a last name

ACuriousMind

@0celo7 heyhey

@0celo7 One I've never heard before

@Jim Where can I sign up for this alleged money? :)

0celo7

@ACuriousMind I'm doing business with a "Joachim Vinson"

American dad, German mom?

Emilio Pisanty

0celo7

He speaks German

@EmilioPisanty #adblock

Emilio Pisanty

@0celo7 Oh, hell yeah, that's ages old

Jim

1:14 PM

@ACuriousMind from the way I understand it, you don't have to sign up. Random people seem to throw money at us scientists for obscure reasons

Emilio Pisanty

But see the original search that made Google suggest that

0celo7

@EmilioPisanty I saw

people dumb enough to not have adblock are people dumb enough to appreciate that ad :P

Jim

@EmilioPisanty lol, google spelling fail

0celo7

@ACuriousMind Did you know that homotopic maps pull back a vector bundle to two isomorphic bundles

Emilio Pisanty

@Jim No, unfortunately I think there's a sizable population of folks that actually mean to google psychics and misspell it as physics

Google is just doing the appropriate response and adapting to other people's spelling habits

(Of course, even more appropriate: don't advertise psychics at all!)

Jim

1:17 PM

@EmilioPisanty and I think those people should take what they get, they'd be better off with physics results

0celo7

@ACuriousMind And now that you do know, can you please help with Thm 6.8 on page 57?

Balarka took a look at it last night and didn't understand

Specifically, the part about the fibers being euclidean

I'm not even sure to what extent the section on $Y\times\{t_0\}$ is smooth

I don't know how to extend the section

Slereah

@yuggib What's a good ressource for Schrodinger wavefunctionals

All the ones I find have $\hat \pi \propto \frac{\delta}{\delta \varphi}$

0celo7

@ACuriousMind See theorem 6.8 then :)

> Some things are just hard to catch, the perfect tan, the sickest wave or a Pikachu. But we have a hot sale just in time to close the summer on a high note! We're also adding a sick new two bedroom floor plan that you're sure to love!

Stop by our leasing office on Cumberland to tour our model home. If you sign a lease within 48 hours, you'll receive a $100 Visa gift card! Not ready to make a decision today? We'll give you a Chipotle gift card to decide over a tasty burrito bowl.

@ChrisWhite

ACuriousMind

1:36 PM

@0celo7 I think the relevant part is that they are just vector spaces, so you can simply extend the map at a point to the whole trivializing set by just taking the same map on every other fiber over the same triviializing set.

Don't ask me why they say Euclidean then, I don't know.

0celo7

@ACuriousMind I'm sorry, what

but it's not a point

it's a slice

how is that smooth?

ACuriousMind

Ah, sorry

0celo7

let my run my idea by you

suppose we define some function on the x axis

ACuriousMind

Then you have to go to a trivializing set that's also diffeomorphic to a ball in $\mathbb{R}^n$.

0celo7

what

what is $n$ here

ACuriousMind

1:42 PM

Your idea is probably right, you extend the function off the axis, like you extend $f : \mathbb{R}^n\to\mathbb{R}^m$ by $\bar{f}(x_1,\dots,x_n,\dots,x_m) = f(x_1,\dots,x_n)$.

0celo7

yes

I was going to say that but got distracted

because in the trivializing set the bundle is like $\Bbb R^k\times\Bbb R$

where $k$ is the dimension of the base

but I don't know where the fibers come in

@Slereah On a complete, simply connected Riemannian manifold with nonpositive curvature, every isometry of finite order has a fixed point.

Slereah

if u say so

0celo7

@Slereah No compact product manifold admits a metric of negative curvature.

Slereah

I'd believe it

0celo7

@ACuriousMind I'm not seeing where balls or Euclideanness come in...

ACuriousMind

1:53 PM

I said the balls thing only because it is usually not guaranteed that a trivializing set is homeomorphic to $\mathbb{R}^k$.

And Euclideanness doesn't come in, only that the fibers are vecotr spaces, so you are effectively just extending a map $\mathbb{R}^n\to\mathbb{R}^m$, which is easy.

0celo7

is it?

@ACuriousMind How do you ensure these extensions agree on the overlaps?

ACuriousMind

with effort

0celo7

what does that mean

ACuriousMind

You probably have to do some partition of unity shenanigans on the overlap

0celo7

nooooo

why don't they do that in the proof

ACuriousMind

2:00 PM

Because it's boring?

0celo7

how is that an excuse

ACuriousMind

That's an excuse because it means that one sees an argument of that type once and then never does it again. And they probably assume you've seen extending e.g. a vector field off a submanifold already

0celo7

@ACuriousMind What? I've never seen that

@ACuriousMind The definition of a smooth vector field on a non-open set is one that has a smooth extension

are you talking about pushing a vector field along the embedding map?

ACuriousMind

So? How do you prove that the pushforward of a vector field on the submanifold has such an extension?

0celo7

I don't know, I've never done that

How do you do that?

ACuriousMind

2:06 PM

It's exactly the same idea

And no, I don't know a reference

innisfree

Anyone going to ICHEP?

ichep2016.org

Secret

2:18 PM

This photo gives me an impression of time standing still (despite there's clearly an element of motion here as captured in the water droplets)

Obliv

2:49 PM

@secret where is that picture taken?

0celo7

3:00 PM

@Secret clearly?

John Rennie

@Secret isn't it in the nature of photographs to be a spacelike hypersurface? :)

0celo7

@JohnRennie what

@JohnRennie please read Sachs and Wu and write a solution manual

it's an intro GR book

I would appreciate solutions though

John Rennie

A book aimed at mathematicians? Are they going to want mathematician oriented solutions?

0celo7

It's "introductory" in no usual sense of the word, btw

I think they say that to make you feel bad about yourself

the chapter 8 problems are...incredibly hard

@JohnRennie one of the harder ones

Obliv

oh nvm im good

0celo7

3:15 PM

what

Obliv

@0celo7 zee's solution to the celestial mechanics problem on p.51-52 isn't explained very much

like the steps towards the solution anyway

0celo7

ugh, let me get the book

I have to reach really far

huh?

there's no celestial mechanics on that page

Obliv

p.29*

just step 12

0celo7

that should not be new to you if you're reading this book

Sanya

is there no "insufficient research" flag? :O

0celo7

3:22 PM

the stuff under "orbit closes" might be new

but I did all of that in my diff eq class

Obliv

i guess ill do it on paper then if i can't follow the steps

0celo7

@ACuriousMind 1.5 hours later and I figured out the stupid partition of unity argument

pretty upset

@Obliv what part is confusing you

ACuriousMind

@Sanya Cf. this meta posts and links therein, it's not even absolutely clear we should be closing things are insufficient research.

@0celo7 Oh, the irony...

0celo7

@ACuriousMind Hmm?

Just because I learned basic mechanics after GR doesn't mean @Obliv should

Or that it's a good or advisable thing

Sanya

@ACuriousMind thanks ... meh, then I'd even claim we could as well leave all homework questions open, but I guess that's a discussion which has been gone through before; I'll have a look at the threads

ACuriousMind

3:28 PM

@Sanya Don't get me wrong - I do close things as insufficient research. We can just use the "other" reason for that, I think we don't have a slot for another pre-generated off-topic message anyway

0celo7

@Obliv I can help you if you tell me what you need help with

but just saying two pages confuse you doesn't help me help you

Obliv

it's okay i'm trying it out on my own first

if I find a specific question i'll ask you

0celo7

@ACuriousMind If I had to do it all over, I would have read set theory and topology in high school

analysis

Sanya

@ACuriousMind okay :D

John Rennie

@Sanya I normally close as Off topic/Other and post a link to meta.physics.stackexchange.com/questions/5778/…

0celo7

3:30 PM

@ACuriousMind Jesus, how expensive is shipping from De to US? They're charging me $400 for two pieces of pipe!

ACuriousMind

If I had to do it all over, I'd spend my school years just as free of advanced math and physics as I did :)

0celo7

@ACuriousMind But you're smart, I needed a head start...

ACuriousMind

@0celo7 Uh, no idea, I've never shipped anything

0celo7

Freaking partition of unity

I hate that thing so much

It's not even funny

@ACuriousMind I would rather do an algebra proof than a partition of unity proof

@ACuriousMind What's the German word for "quote" in the context of sales

ACuriousMind

I don't know what quote in the context of sales means

Sanya

3:41 PM

@0celo7 Kostenvoranschlag I think - you want to be told how much it will cost, do you?

0celo7

Get a quote for the price of something

ACuriousMind

If it's a preliminary price, then yes, what @Sanya said

0celo7

Yes, that sounds correct, thanks

Obliv

yay i solved it

0celo7

@ACuriousMind You know, I never did understand what "averaging two vectors over the unit sphere" means

what does it mean?

ACuriousMind

3:49 PM

I have never heard that phrase

Or I might have, but without context, I can't identify it

0celo7

I guarantee I've asked it before, but I can't chat search fu

Obliv

wait am i going crazy $\frac{d}{dt}(r^2\cdot \dot{\theta}) = 2\dot{r}\dot{\theta} + r^2\ddot{\theta}$ and not $2\dot{r}\dot{\theta} + r\ddot{\theta}$

0celo7

@ACuriousMind

@Obliv you can't calculus, sorry

Obliv

waaaat

0celo7

wait, which one is from the book

Obliv

3:51 PM

the second

0celo7

yeah, you can't calculus

Obliv

wtf

0celo7

he's not saying those things are equal

Obliv

they're equivalent doesn't mean they're equal?

0celo7

CHAT SESSION IN SEVEN MINUTES

@Obliv no

Obliv

3:52 PM

oh..

dangit

0celo7

but you can't calculus anyway

what you wrote there is wrong

Obliv

that's a simple derivative of a product

what did i do wrong

0celo7

you didn't do the derivative correctly, obviously.

Obliv

@0celo7 ...

0celo7

what is $[f(x)^2]'$

Balarka Sen

3:55 PM

@Obliv The first term should be $2r\dot{r}\dot{\theta}$, not $2\dot{r} \dot{\theta}$

Obliv

i remember from calculus that $[f(x)^2]' = 2f(x)f'(x)$ i just dont remember why

Balarka Sen

Chain rule.

David Z

Hey all, I believe it's almost chat session time?

ACuriousMind

@0celo7 Oh, I remember that and I don't care to rehash that discussion

@DavidZ Yep, T-2 min

David Z

Be forewarned, my internet connection is very far from stable

What do we have to discuss today? History questions I guess; anything else?

0celo7

3:59 PM

@ACuriousMind what?

ACuriousMind

@DavidZ VLQ flag, perhaps?

David Z

Ah yeah, good idea

OK, well we can piece this agenda together as we go.

0celo7

@ACuriousMind I can't even find it, damn.

David Z

Welcome to this fortnight's chat session, everyone!

As always, please keep unrelated discussion to a minimum for the duration of the session. (1 hour)

Balarka Sen

I should scurry off, for I am no physics person.

David Z

4:02 PM

Our agenda for today is kind of ad-hoc: we will have our usual 5-minute intro, 5 minutes for physics news, and then we'll have to talk about history questions and the VLQ flag. I'm not sure how long those will take so I won't bother to put times on them.

(plus I don't have an agenda message to copy and paste like usual)

0celo7

@BalarkaSen let's talk about vector bundles

David Z

So, to start off, anyone new here? To chat, chat sessions, or the site?

vzn

@BalarkaSen all with physics interest welcome feel free to intro yourself

David Z

This is the perfect time to ask any questions you might have about the site, even seemingly stupid ones

...nothing then? (taps modem is this still on?)

:-P

If there's no introductory stuff, let's move on to recent physics news. What interesting science has been done recently?

user116211

CP violation or new physics?

vzn

4:08 PM

not real "hard core" physics but found this interesting/ notable/ cool. materials science. everyday application. (my dad has recent hip replacement) Super-hard metal that is FOUR times tougher than titanium could mean hip replacements will last forever

David Z

@vzn there's no requirement on being "hard-core" (whatever that even means)

@MAFIA36790 interesting to see that coming from space

vzn

@DavidZ right. agreed. @JohnRennie once kinda made the distinction to justify declining being a speaker, lol

David Z

Huh. well.

OK, anyway. As I said, the agenda for today is kind of ad-hoc, so if anyone has something else to discuss, ping me about it and we'll see if we can slip it in.

vzn

@MAFIA36790's article mentions neutrinos. this also came up. enjoy hearing about physics anomalies, they are not-so-often admitted.

Jul 19 at 17:20, by vzn

MIT scientists find weird quantum effects, even over hundreds of miles / MIT news

David Z

For now, let's get on to the issue of history questions. We have a meta post about a proposed new policy on history questions on this site.

17

Q: Should history of physics questions be on topic?

When we last visited the issue of history questions, the dedicated History of Science and Mathematics Stack Exchange was in its early stages. At that time, we decided against closing questions for being historical, but with the implication that it may make sense to revisit that decision someday. ...

discussion featured scope faq-proposed

There seems to be a pretty good consensus on the posted top answer, so I guess what we need to discuss is, are people clear on it? Is this suitable to go ahead with faq-ifying?

Any serious objections that haven't been heard?

ACuriousMind

4:16 PM

My only problem is that this will be another policy where personal judgement plays a large role

David Z

@ACuriousMind So you think the criteria in the post are insufficiently precise?

ACuriousMind

Since "has a bearing on our modern understanding of physics" is both dependent on knowing the answer and on your definition of what constitutes "sufficient" bearing.

Take Why was the first discovered neutrino an anti-neutrino?. Without knowing the answer, it might have been coincidence for all the person reading the question knows

I have a problem with deciding the on-topicness of questions based on their answer

David Z

Yeah, so do I.

A possibility is that someone writes another answer, perhaps motivated by Emilio's, which more clearly spells out the policy.

user54412

Emilio's 3 examples of "should be migrated" could also be classified as "biographical"

David Z

(or, a policy)

@ChrisWhite It's possible that being biographical, as you call it, is a good criterion for determining whether questions are too historical or not

user54412

4:20 PM

They're the only 3 where the focus is what some person believed, rather than what science they did

ACuriousMind

@ChrisWhite Yes, I think we can agree that such questions are definitely off-topic

David Z

I get the sense that everyone is talking about nearly the same kind of policy under the hood, we just don't have a really good way to describe it.

ACuriousMind

But take e.g. Why was the Stark effect discovered much later than the Zeeman effect?, which Emilio says should "definitely be on-topic here" and then his own answer says it's probably historical coincidence. I mean, the answer is great because it teaches something about physics, but the literal answer to the literal question ("It's probably coincidence") doesn't teach us anything about physics.

vzn

seems like there are not a large # of history questions on the site anyway? ie not a problem? if it aint broke dont fix it? seems like the post/ answer is good/ thorough guidance for anyone. like idea of not excluding history questions a priori, agree history plays big role in physics understanding etc

David Z

@vzn no, I don't agree with that. I think there are enough history-oriented questions to make this a discussion worth having.

vzn

4:24 PM

@DavidZ right. as attested by significant votes on the meta post. it seemed to have now occurred on meta with no major/ key objections?

David Z

@ACuriousMind I think this is part of a more general expectation we have on the site, that a good answer should use the question to teach something. Even if, strictly speaking, the answer to a question could be very short (yes or no, for example, or "it was a coincidence", etc.), there's still an opportunity to explain some physics.

So the fact that a question of this nature could be answered with "just coincidence" shouldn't automatically disqualify the question from being on topic, I'm saying.

user54412

Also, ideally question on-topicness is not dependent on that the answer turns out to be.

ACuriousMind

@DavidZ It shows that the policy is rather fuzzy, though - how, before the answer, would I have decided whether that question "has bearing on our modern understanding of physics"?

Even with the answer I'm not even sure I'd say that question has such bearing.

And yet the meta answer seems to say it is completely obvious that it does

Which brings me full circle to my point about this policy involving too much personal judgement for my taste

David Z

@ACuriousMind Not by considering whether it could be answered with such a short answer, then!

We don't have to stick with that description, you know. That's why we're having this discussion, in part. To see if it can be improved.

ACuriousMind

@DavidZ Yeah, I kinda switched my argument somewhere in the middle there :P

I'm not really seeing a better description, though, partly because I'm not even sure whether I want questions such as that one to be off- or on-topic

David Z

4:32 PM

Well, I suppose we do need to figure out what it is we should be describing, before we can write a good description of it. But I think the community is mostly in agreement about that. Not exactly, but pretty close.

vzn

it might be helpful/ useful to study "edge cases". high voted questions that high rep users dont like on the site. not sure there are any cases here.

ACuriousMind

Not very useful due to the HNQ effect

0celo7

@ACuriousMind I thought that was related to the Quantum Hall effect at first

vzn

@ACuriousMind not sure what you mean. am saying looking at HNQ-like stuff can help articulate/ clarify policy.

ACuriousMind

@vzn The point is that highly upvoted things are upvoted because they landed on the HNQ list, not because they are so much better or more loved than the things in the middle ranges of the vote count

vzn

4:36 PM

@ACuriousMind understand that. so are there any history questions that turned HNQ? (and high rep users still didnt like them?) if not, maybe no big issues with history category on this site. etc. also can look at downvotes hidden in the vote count etc...

ACuriousMind

@vzn No one is saying that history questions have "big issues". But without a clear policy, we have to debate this in the comments or on meta for every single history question that we get.

Which gets tiring

And is inefficient

user54412

proposed should be off-topic:

user54412

29

Q: Why did Einstein get credit for formulating the theory of special relativity?

See The Principle of Relativity here: The Principles of Mathematical Physics. This was written by Poincaré in 1904, a year before Einstein published his theory of relativity. It appears from this and other writings of Poincaré that Poincaré discovered the theory of special relativity before Eins...

special-relativity history

user54412

it's not biography in the same way as EP's 3 examples -- this is more about community sociological practices

David Z

@ChrisWhite good point. I would also consider questions on community sociology to be off topic.

ACuriousMind

4:39 PM

@ChrisWhite Yeah, that should be off-topic. I've voted to close similar questions with "that's a question about the decision of the Nobel prize commitee, not about physics" before

William Bulmer

Hi, again

David Z

@WilliamBulmer hi, welcome into our chat session

So here's something I've been thinking about. I've heard it said a lot that, say, Einstein's papers are not good reading material to learn about relativity. Or that the Principia is a terrible source to learn about Newtonian mechanics. And so on. Basically, the original sources for ideas, and the methods within, tend to become more obsolete over time as new derivations are developed.

I think the questions that I consider historical (and off topic as such) are generally those which rely on specific knowledge of original sources, or the original procedures that led to some idea, or basically knowing how something actually happened, as opposed to how it could have happened.

William Bulmer

@DavidZ That's what I am always trying to tell crackpots :)

user54412

I actually think the Principia is just fine. But most other old stuff is not, especially anything written by a famous person in QM.

William Bulmer

@DavidZ But I agree, the modern version of the classical theory we see today is often not in its original form, and has been streamlined, and many conceptual difficulties have been ironed out

David Z

4:48 PM

@ChrisWhite Well, yeah, we all have our opinions about that. (I like some of Einstein's old papers myself, and Schroedinger's derivation of his equation, etc.) I'm just talking about the general point, like @WilliamBulmer just said.

user54412

@DavidZ Something strikes me as not quite right about this, though. There are multiple paths to the truth, and we seem to be favoring whatever Modern Textbook Authors have deemed The One True Physics.

David Z

@ChrisWhite I'm not saying anything about Modern Textbook Authors.

ACuriousMind

@ChrisWhite I'm not so sure that the modern approaches are so uniform that you can say it's "The One True Physics"

user54412

Going after historical accounts for history's sake should be off topic, but trying to understand the physics in old papers... that seems like it should be on topic.

ACuriousMind

Some of them are uniformly terrible, though :P

vzn

4:49 PM

@ChrisWhite reminds me of kuhnianism ie that happens across sciences not merely physics :) anyway seems like not many people are going back to original sources in physics other than historians..... agreed science is all about good/ accurate citations etc...

David Z

Actually, by my criterion I think a question about The One True Physics (as you call it) would also qualify as historical. As much as it seems weird to call something current "historical", it's going to be history someday after it gets replaced by The Next One True Physics.

@ChrisWhite I think that's much along the same lines as what I'm saying.

Oh... so, I hate to interrupt a good thread of discussion but we do have 10 minutes left and I want us to get in a word about VLQ flags. Let's table the history thing for 10 minutes and continue after the official session.

user54412

@DavidZ Okay. But I worry about policy wording that can be construed into "I'm voting to close this question as off topic because it references old papers that have since been streamlined."

David Z

@ChrisWhite yeah, we'll talk about that.

John Rennie

Oops, completely forgot about the chat session. Oh well, better late than never I suppose ...

William Bulmer

@ACuriousMind In regards to that, and forgive me if I sound slightly crankish, I wonder how well science actually converges to the global maximum

vzn

4:53 PM

@ACuriousMind undergrad edu does come close to describing/ nailing down a "standard". past undergrad, it gets more "provisional"

ACuriousMind

@WilliamBulmer I think we just locally extremize :P

William Bulmer

@ACuriousMind That seems plausible to me, which is why I bring it up

John Rennie

@WilliamBulmer you're assuming there is a global maximum :-)

David Z

As far as the flagging issue: the problem is that posts which are "egregiously wrong" (crackpottish, etc.) seem to be things that people want deleted from the site, but the mods don't want to be put in the position to make that decision.

William Bulmer

@ACuriousMind But then, aren't we in danger of never actually converging on the global extreme?

David Z

4:54 PM

There has been a problem so far with flagging those posts as very low quality (VLQ), because VLQ flags go into the moderator flag queue.

ACuriousMind

I think that's a weird design decision in the first place to have them go into both a community review queue and the moderator queue

David Z

So Emilio has proposed an experiment in which the mods will not handle VLQ flags for a while. We aren't starting this just yet; there will be a meta post announcing it. But this is just a heads-up that it's coming.

John Rennie

@DavidZ I think the VLG flag issue is an argument for another day, though i have to say i agree with Emilio and not with the mods.

ACuriousMind

And that's what's leading to the confusion about the meaning of VLQ flags because the review queue handles them very differently from the mods, so there's no consistent helpful/disputed behaviour for the flagging user to adjust to

David Z

@JohnRennie you think the mods should be tasked with unilaterally deleting egregiously wrong posts?

vzn

4:56 PM

trying to understand difference between "egregiously wrong" and "VLQ" and dont follow why theyre not nearly the same. "egregiously wrong" sounds worse than VLQ

David Z

@ACuriousMind yeah, this is the problem. I mean, to be fair, we did have guidance on meta on what to use VLQ flags for, but it didn't really stick.

John Rennie

@DavidZ well I find it daunting being able to unilaterally close tasks as duplicates, and it would be even more daunting having the power to unilaterally delete. So I fully understand the mods' reluctance to do so.

David Z

@vzn The reason they're not the same is that we are not supposed to delete posts for being wrong.

John Rennie

I suggest leaving it to the 20K users to vote to delete

At least then the blame is shared.

ACuriousMind

Yeah, I think no one read the guidance on that. People see useless answers flagged as "low quality", people think "yep, that's low quality", people vote to delete.

David Z

4:57 PM

@JohnRennie Yes, this is the experiment we're going to try.

vzn

@DavidZ not totally following is there a meta or SE policy on that?

John Rennie

@DavidZ Excellent :-)

The VLQ queue is about to get genuinely useful

David Z

In the long term, the hope is that the data we collect from this trial run may help convince SE to alter the meanings and/or names of the available flags

@vzn the most directly relevant policy is this one:

6

Q: Which flag do I use for an inappropriate post?

Other than off topic flags, there are several different types of flags that one can cast on a question, answer, or comment. What are each of these flags for? Question and answer flags: spam offensive/abusive/hate speech not an answer very low quality other Comment flags: rude or offensive ...

support flagging faq-proposed

Transcript for