« first day (1973 days earlier)      last day (805 days later) » 

12:13 AM
See you later guys
4 hours later…
3:49 AM
@Lilienthal He self-answered it as well. Hmm ... :)
@GrayCygnus I noticed that user too, but I decided to stay out of it, since he would be leaving SE soon anyway. ;) :P
3 hours later…
6:51 AM
Looks like that guy is joining stacks and then giving away his association bonus as bounties. Look at his network profile and you'll see a one rep point per stack. He only joined two days ago.
1 hour later…
7:56 AM
@Pete FYI that's being discussed here. I've undone his bounty here for now. It seemed to have been placed in rather bad faith all things considered.
8:15 AM
@Lilienthal I saw you refunded rep when undoing bounty, what if user decides to try it again? Their activity at MSE makes me feel that it's quite possible
8:43 AM
Good morning everyone!
8:53 AM
@gnat It's possible. There's been some discussion amongst network moderators with no clear consensus. It would likely depend on whether he bounties the same question, whether he leaves a comment justifying his bounty (as he did on some other sites) and who on our mod team ends up seeing/handling it. It looks like that bounty was already previously flagged and left alone by another mod (which I saw too late).
I see the argument that this is a beneficial action but I don't agree in this instance considering the question he picked and his lack of involvement, which is why I ended up removing the bounty.
(Removing the bounty always refunds the rep, we don't get a choice in that.)
9:07 AM
@Lilienthal oh, so user gets rep back and can repeat bounty. If it turns out harmful again, the only way to stop them seems to be "cool down" suspension (along with undoing bounty)
I don't see this as being malicious. Even if these were rewarded to sock accounts, it's only 100 rep per stack. Certainly isn't going to upset the balance of the SE universe. It's probably taking up more moderator head-space than is needed.
Morning, guys
Morning @jserv
9:33 AM
wonder what happens if this user deletes account at one of the "bountied" sites and joins it again a bit later. I've read somewhere that system simply checks some database flag in network profile and awards bonus rep if flag value is true (like "yeah we already know this user is trusted enough for 100 repz"). If bonus is awarded again in cases like that, this would open some interesting possibilities for abuse... — gnat 3 hours ago
How's it going, @Nofel?
I am ok, soaked in rain today.
Hope I won't get fever
how about urself
I took up motorbiking earlier this year in Wales. I have become immune to rain.
@gnat Really? How much abuse can someone do with 100 rep points? Maybe I'm just not seeing the obvious here.
9:50 AM
@gnat Pretty much yes.
As for your comment on the meta, I'm also curious whether he gets an association bonus again but that's really not a major concern in my view. If he actually started doing that I'd wager that he'd be hit with a network-wide suspension virtually immediately.
10:11 AM
@Pete maybe you're not seeing that this can be done at 150+ sites simultaneously
10:21 AM
@gnat That still doesn't really answer how this can be viewed as "abuse" or damaging to the wider community. One user per stack will be getting a 100 rep bonus. Yay for them, I say!
10:51 AM
A: What's with all the questions involving tears?

Masked ManSomeone who cried a lot made it to HNQ, and scored a lot of points. Then a lot of other people started crying too in the hope of making some easy points. Don't read too much into it.

It is one user doing it now, but if this trick becomes popular, several users may start doing it. If such a question hits HNQ, it will certainly "help".
I'd just deal with it as an when it happens. In the meantime, raise the rep level needed to award bonuses to 125, as was suggested in the meta discussion. It does seem a bit pointless for people to award bonuses on other people's questions when they've made little to no contribution to a stack.
@Pete I suppose this is a case of "if it isn't broken, don't fix it". I am not sure it is even necessary to place any restriction to award bounty. We allow users to upvote answers on communities that they have never been to before, and that does a lot more damage than awarding bounties.
Making any special rules for bounty now sounds like an unnecessary patchwork to me. It is like saying, "look we give you an association bonus because we trust you know what to do with these privileges ... but, no, wait, except for that bounty thing, we don't trust you with that."
1 hour later…
12:06 PM
Q: How can I ask my boss to summarise or rephrase a task?

hoangtu9xAs I mentioned, sometimes I get a task by the phone when my English boss is outside. And he is making it difficult for me to express the task with a lot of details. Therefore I wonder which expressions or sentences to ask him to describe the task briefly and politely. Here are my expressions: I...

They could have cleaned the question up but I think this is one of the better migrated questions we've gotten in some time.
Not entirely sure it's fully on-topic but it seems answerable enough.
I had a stab at it. I didn't much care for the existing answer.
@Pete It's clearly using the bounty system for something that's outside it's normally intended use. Who knows what he's trying to accomplish but giving increased visibility to questions that need it is clearly not it. Couple that with the fact that it's likely meant as a statement considering his username that makes this something that I don't think should be condoned.
@Lilienthal I've had my lunch, I've moved on from this discussion now.
Hah, suit yourself.
No offence, I just know when I should quit yapping and let things go.
1:03 PM
@Pete That sounds like a good idea. :)
@Lilienthal I was about to click it but saw ur instruction
Hehe. It's a line from The Truman Show, no filth. But technically NSFW as it's a video site.
Oh damn, that site has "what line is next" quiz.... And it's got Monty Python
Please no, I have work to do....
2:28 PM
We are having an all-hands meeting in the office. I extend the offer of cake to all here present.
I hate those. 3/4 times it's "we're going to make some changes that involve some people being unemployed..."
As long as you have an ID badge - we have additional security to ensure that no non-employees take any cake.
@JoeStrazzere - I've always felt that people on SE will often strive hardest to find a reason to close a question, and then only answer it if they can't find a reason not to close it. Personally (like you), I'd rather help people than tell them they can't ask a question correctly.
Then again, I am a bottom-feeder who can do no more than tell people how to answer emails....
Personally, I'd like to see the review queue disappear.
I'd rather not see who voted for what option. It serves no real purpose except to moderators.
or that
At a minimum, restrict it to the analytics permission (25k)
2:40 PM
Seems reasonable.
3:04 PM
Q: There is no shame in using "Skip"

OmarIs there a way to encourage reviewers - especially new ones - to use "Skip" button when they are hesitant and not 100% sure what to do? For example, this edit was approved, although it is 100% incorrect and should be rejected at once. The answer will be considered wrong and hence will get down-v...

3:51 PM
so how is it permitted that networkengineering.stackexchange.com/users/39629/… goes to a bazillion SE sites just to offer a bounty? Seems kind of gamey to me.
@ChristopherEstep That sounds like a great idea. The 25k analytics privilege is pretty unimpressive presently. It is supposed to be a "pinnacle" of privileges, but that glory is practically taken by the 20k trusted user privilege.
@ChristopherEstep Oh no, not that again. :) There seems to have been a network-wide debate about that already. ;)
I also considered that suspicious
Not trying to start up anything, I just saw it myself a moment ago.
3:54 PM
@ChristopherEstep I know, I didn't mean you were "starting" anything. :)
It is amazing what bounties can do to a question ... all that quality ;)
@Lilienthal Apparently the undone bounty has been redone.
I think the best way to deal with that is to just ignore it. Like I said earlier, he is leaving the network soon anyway, so why bother? Besides, you know, don't feed the ...... :P
That thread has talk of raising the bounty rep to 125, but I think that's too low. I think it should be 500 unless it's your own question you're putting bounty on. You should have to have participated somewhat in an exchange before rewarding answers with anything more than an upvote. IMHO
I agree with Christopher, however maybe 500 is too high. I know it is the max bounty possible, so it is a valid amount, but still I think is too high. The differentiation between your question and other's is also a good idea
4:10 PM
If it isn't broken, don't fix it. Just leave it alone.
if we lived by that philosophy, nothing working would ever be improved.
4:35 PM
@MaskedMan no. cast close/delete votes and purge everything... :D
5:08 PM
All of these examples point to the fact that the concept of tying reputation to privileges is not perfect. We give association bonus because we trust them to use the privileges that come with it ... but, eh, no, not the "award bounty" privilege. We don't trust them to use the upvote privilege correctly either ... especially noticed on HNQ. So what's the point of association bonus? Just scrap it altogether.
We don't trust trusted users (oi!?) to use their privileges correctly either, hence there is a need to do an "automated" review of reviews. And what is the guarantee that the computer gets it right? So let's have another privilege to verify the computer reviews, and then one more computer review to review that.
2 hours later…
7:15 PM
I don't see how this is remotely beneficial for the site. — enderland ♦ 8 secs ago
@ChristopherEstep you don't understand why review actions are public (as opposed to similar actions done by diamond moderators), don't you. Even 1-rep users, even unregistered visitors can see reviews, why do you think system was designed that way (from the very start). Hint: coonsider how many reviewers and reviews are there and how many diamond moderators would it take to audit review decisions...
...(or, since you mention 25K, how many trusted users would it take and how it is possible that these would spend their time scrutinizing review decisions instead of providing content)
@enderland Sorry if it wasn't appropriate. I was just answering the questions that were raised. I don't feel as if I was being impolite.
I don't see how further discussion of this is going to be productive @gnat
let it go
@JoeStrazzere nah, it's ok. I just cleared that up because of what I just said to gnat :) I don't really see how further back/forth on that is going to be adding value and just purged the convo for that reason
also that comment was for a question that I just deleted (not directed to you guys at all)
7:27 PM
@enderland you might want to check this advice (10K link)
@gnat it's not the what, but the how, that makes it not beneficial
7:47 PM
@gnat That comment was specifically a response to your Meta question - you posed a question to the entire Workplace community when you really wanted to know why a specific user acted how they did.
Now you have spoken to that user in chat and gotten a response. It's clear that the two of you don't agree and no amount of discussion is going to change that. Drawing the conversation on longer will not have any positive result.
I think part of the issue is that since he recommends deletion every time, he doesn't like it when that's thwarted. Just speculation though.
@ChristopherEstep pure speculation, given three prior examples I mentioned (10K link). Focusing on disagreement about review votes just makes no sense
8:07 PM
so when was the last time you thought a post on review "looks ok"?
8:19 PM
@ChristopherEstep two weeks ago. (browsing review history won't help you here because in cases like that I prefer to skip)
8:56 PM
I will never understand the HNQ. How on earth does a pretty drab question about filling in timesheets after resigning end up there?
9:36 PM
@Lilienthal this thing brings ~100K clicks a day. I think that's about as much as whole Stack Overflow or maybe even more. Which means it is probably safer to assume that we don't understand something about it :)
10:05 PM
I give you, my CV:
3 guesses what my job title is ^^
Internal Data Manager
@RoryAlsop You know, now that I think about it, that really is my actual job title ^^
oops I only got 3 guesses. :(
lumin developer
Any of you wonderful people willing to critique said CV?
Especially you @enderland, your advice is always awesome.
10:26 PM
@Kaz Word Cloud Developer?
1 hour later…
11:35 PM
See you later guys
@Kaz I don't like the colors, try using material design for a matching color palette .... LOL joking. So you actually have used that Word Cloud as a CV?

« first day (1973 days earlier)      last day (805 days later) »