12:00 AM
@TimStone The comment. You can always escalate - but recently when this question was posted - and completely sucked - I commented and it got converted perfectly without having to edit or close: rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/14900/… I believe in starting with the light touch - you can always edit or close in a couple hours instead of RIGHT NOW.
@FRandallFarmer I believe that the format is a perfect fit. Only non-programmers or non-gamers believe that programming is more objective than RPGing. I think that with "Good Subjective, Bad Subjective" (blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/09/good-subjective-bad-subjective) SE has given us everything we need. If it works for parenting it'll work for us!
@TimStone Not enough people participate in meta. The new "Community Bulletin" box is helping with that. I consider meta q&a more binding if there's more than a couple answerers. meta.rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/570/… , I disagree with the consensus but the Q has 19 votes and the dissenting answer 12, so I consider myself bound by it. Something with 2 votes... I take it into account but will act differently if my mod experience tells me so.
@Kalamane Discuss in comments; possibly arrange a reversion (we did this at least once) or ask the other question as well and migrate answers. Don't let it stand though.
@FRandallFarmer They are discouraging, though certainly not as much as a close. People react better IME to "I don't like what you're saying" than "and I want to stop you from saying it."
@FRandallFarmer Fixes have to be indirect, as votes are community action, but we certainly encourage comments with downvotes.
@waxeagle Neutral good. I am concerned with both site rule/precedent and the unique case in promoting questions that solve people's problems. The overweening goal is for questions that solve people's real problems. Site guidelines are helpful but not sovereign in that regard.
« first day (2 days earlier) ← previous day last day (14 days later) »