1 hour later…
1:46 AM
I hope you guys don't mind the usage of in chat.. There seems to have been a controversy on the PHP chat regarding this (a sharks in a tank issue). Don't think that would happen here..
Anyway, since meta.physics.stackexchange.com/questions/117/… got closed, there's no other way to advertise closevotes. Which is sort of necessary since the mods are ending up closing all the questions--we rarely get a 5-vote-close.
Is there any place a non-mod can view all active close votes?
I feel that there should be one--and there most probably is one--just that I don't know about it (just yesterday I discovered that CV-dupe gives an auto comment if one isn't there already)
Anyway, since meta.physics.stackexchange.com/questions/117/… is closed, how do we handle CVs now?

2:20 AM
Alright, slightly better version of script: pastebin.com/jc3Pg3Bu

3:16 AM
@DavidZaslavsky Would a self-answered question on "how can one explain QM to a layperson" be acceptable?
I could convert chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/2778/… into an answer

3:30 AM
@DavidZaslavsky It seems that diamond mods can create synonyms with one click. Maybe you didn't know that--or you did it on purpose to check out the commnity's response.. meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/128147/…

4:00 AM
@Manishearth Yeah, I know we can do that, I'm just really trying not to do things unilaterally these days.
@Manishearth It strikes me as too broad. Now if you had one very specific thing from QM, then perhaps it would be okay to ask how to explain that to a layperson - but I would lean toward letting one of those laypeople ask it. (There's technically nothing wrong with self-answered questions, but I just personally feel like if you ask a question knowing the answer already, it's kind of like "cheating")
I don't think it's necessary to make a chat session into something else just because you think the content is worth saving. There are certain types of content that are appropriate on the site and certain types that, while very useful, are not.

4:24 AM
@DavidZaslavsky Alright, I see. Technically one of the laypeople did ask it (CodeAdmiral), though in an indirect manner. We sort of forced him to ask it--he thought he was going fine, till we explained that his way of looking at it was sort of wrong..
@DavidZaslavsky Alright--though our community is sleepy enough that such things will just gather dust :P

@Manishearth True... I'll take care of that sometime.

I think I'll post it on Philosophy then (the guy who suggested it is a diamond on Philosophy--I don't see how it fits in Philosophy, but he probably knows the scope better than I do)
> those interested in logical reasoning . Hmm... can weasel it in :P

4:49 AM
@DavidZaslavsky Regarding "one specific thing", I do feel that just an introduction to QM via the historical method (how it unfolded &c) won't be too broad. The aswer will certainly be long, though. I would say that such a question would be useful to refer to (portions of, at any rate).
@DavidZaslavsky How is it not appropriate? I've explained lots of physics in layperson-speak, and the most commonly recurring question I get is "how does QM work?" (and there's the other "explain why time goes kooky in SR")
(though you've been here longer than I have--you probably know better what's on topic)

@Manishearth Bear in mind that I'm just one person, but I'll say that is absolutely too broad. I'm not saying that's not useful information, but it's Wikipedia-type material (or maybe Wikibooks). This site is not meant to duplicate Wikipedia; we are trying to fill a different niche, and if we try to expand our scope too much then the site's quality is going to suffer.

@DavidZaslavsky Alright, I see

"How does QM work?" is not a practical, answerable question, and neither is it based on a specific problem that someone faces.

There are many valid potential questions that address small pieces of that topic, but one master question to rule them all (lol) is too broad. It'd call for a book. (If you enjoy writing about that sort of thing, please do write a book about it :-P)
@Manishearth What is that?

5:04 AM
after all, our meta-closevote-question got closed, ironically
so, you just post [cv-pls] in chat with the question link
after all, there's no way for 3k+ to see all the closevotes
so questions that need CVs don't get them

@Manishearth yeah, that doesn't seem to be working
It's fine with me - pretty much anything goes in chat

Just asking cos it became a bit controversial on PHP chat, it seems meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/120186/…
We really need a way to see all CVd questions centralised.
Maybe i'll MSO it later if its not been proposed already

@Manishearth yeah, that would be nice... I think there might already be something in the 10k tools that lets them see questions with close votes, but this site is small enough that that isn't of much use to us

Exactly
the mods shouldn't have to waste their time searching for CVs, the questions should get closed by the community
Did you check out the bookmarklet?
(better version:pastebin.com/jc3Pg3Bu)

Oh the units thing? Yeah, it seems interesting but I personally don't have much use for it. It's quicker for me to just type than to bother with the buttons.

5:17 AM
Not me though... I find myself ing and \:\rm{} ing stuff a bit too often
And I'm not experienced in TeX, so the keystrokes aren't that natural to me

5:28 AM
@DavidZaslavsky There is something in the 10k tools it seems.. Anyways, MSO post: meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/128222/…