@user Please explain why you used your gold badge to reopen this dupe that you answered, which had been closed and deleted (I didn't even realize a gold-badge reopen could reverse a deletion). How is that not a dupe?
@BillDubuque They are very similar but not identical and also the answers are different and give different methods to find the answer. I think that all are useful for the site.
@BillDubuque This also was already discussed on Gentle. The reason are similar as for the previous one.
@BillDubuque Now I need to leave. See you tomorrow. Bye
@user This is a major abuse of gold-badge powers in my opinion. In the rare case that you need to use a gold badge that way you should post a (persuausive) argument in the comments explaining why you used the gold badge powers to reverse the closure and deletion. I see nothing of that sort.
2
user12692
12:45 AM
I have mentioned the following possible duplicates for about a week. And yet nobody seems to bother voting to close for "organizing". Is it because these posts are too old or is it because they were not answered by @user?
I find four stars on the wall for Jyrki's message with unfound evidence against @user. And lots others (against @user) in favor of a few users' opinions. This is close to "bully". I do not think this is the intention of the users who started this room.
@darijgrinberg Come again? What new do the answers to the current edition of DF bring to the site?
I admit that punitive aspects guide me in many deletions of dupes. When essentially identical answers are posted en masse, the wrongfully gained rep must be removed. Delete.
@Jack The main problem is that user is just turning the crank, using math from 1700s to solve homework problems day in, day out. They don't search at all (answers in under 15 minutes), they don't go for the questions where any skill is required. This is anathema. Anyone wanting to reward such practices in an enemy of the site.
In user's case the scale of answering is what would make me come up with a rule like willful answering of dupes is a suspense-worthy offence. If they restricted themselves to, say, 50 answers per month, I would not be so riled up about this. It would still be bad, but then we could sweep it under the rug.
@Jack But I don't see this as targeting user in particular. There are a few other high rep users who don't search either, and seemingly only care about speedy answers. Seeing any of those names under answers to variants of FAQs leads to the same reaction. It is this practice I want to root out. The quality of the content is immaterial. As the content is a reproduction of old stuff, the site is not suffering from such a deletion.
@BillDubuque I don't understand why it should be an abuse, I've just motivated here my decision. If you are considering different ideas from yours an abuse I realy can't help to convince you. If you really think it is an abuse you can flat it to a moderatore or raise a discussion on Meta on that.
@JyrkiLahtonen I'm sorry you don't like the rules of the site. Here question are posed by users, users are free to answer, when an answer/question is good/bad it is upvoted/downvoted and for duplicates we can close or merge. This is the only way a community can work. It is not Jyrki's Community, you can raise one if you want adfirm your own rules. Also we should avoid personalization and raise such kind of discussion on Meta in order to have a larger contribution from the whole community.
@user That is your opinion. When the site was young it was not like that. Mind you, even back then we had disagreements about what to do with homework questions. Which is why the rule about sufficient context was created as a compromise (many teachers wanted to ban all homework questions). This is why I seek to delete posts in violation of that compromise.
@user The following would be a fine disagreement about what the rules of the site are: Some think homework is ok, some think homework should not be allowed at all. The problem in your interpretation is that you ignore the COMPROMISE that HW with sufficient context is ok, and without the context it is not. Because you haven't been here nearly as long as I have, it is possible that you dismiss the current compromise as an opinion of some random people, when, in fact, it is a compromise.
@user "answers are different" is an acceptable reason to undelete or avoid to delete, but not to reopen a question. If a pair of question are asking the same thing, they are duplicates and one should be closed as such, no matter how many amazing answers either one may have. (This is meant in general, not just for the cases pointed out by Bill.)
@JyrkiLahtonen I don't understand the point. Answer to an alleged homework is bad but create a repository with all solution for all homeworks is good? Or give a solution by comments or duplicates is good? In any case, I would be happy to discuss these issues more in detail on Meta, chatrooms are not a good place to discuss the matter.
@ArnaudD. I take note of your point of view on that. Thanks
@user It's an abuse not only because you failed to supply any compelling argument to gold-badge reopen closed & deleted FAQ dupes, but also because you only do that for questions you have answered. If I were still a mod I'd warn you that if you continue to do that then you'll be suspended. I'm not the first highly experienced user who's espoused that opinion about how you use this site. Such critiques should spark some serious introspection about the ethics of your actions on this site.
I would also like you to take note of this part of the answer I just linked, regarding answering a duplicate : "If the asker really needs more help understanding the target and you can't do this adequately in a comment then you can add an answer. Think carefully about doing this, don't add answers that just re-iterate the target answer(s) and certainly don't add an answer that just points at another answer/question." (emphasis mine)
@BillDubuque I think we should avoid such discussion here. I see that we do not obtain any result by exposing our different ideas. Mybe a discussion on Meta could be more useful for the community. I will not escalate more than that. Thanks for your advice and suggestions.
editThis question (with which I have interacted in the last couple of days, but which I have not answered) just came across the review queue for lacking context. I tried to find a good dupe target and was unsuccessful, and think that the question is actually pretty reasonable (though maybe a little unclear). I would be interested to know how this question might be improved (or if it requires it).
For the record, user(gimusi) continues to propose for undeletion in GENTLE only questions that he has answered: he just posted five more even after the above discussion. So much for peer pressure...
@ArnaudD. The "disclaimer" is worthless: "note all question contain my answer but it is not a point to take into account ". All of his (recent) actions I've seen (of which there are many) only apply to questions he has answered.
@BillDubuque For the record these questions are not new at all, 4 of them were already submitted and undeleted and then deleted again. I really can't see your point. I'm acting in a open way and all users can decide freely whether delete/undelete a question. Again I need to recall our CoC "Focus on the content, not the person". Please as former moderatore try to give a good example on that.
@BillDubuque This is false! I've also voted to undelete many other questions which I've not answered. Morover I don need to justify any of my actions with you. I'm responding to you for kindness. Please "Focus on the content, not the person". I'm not going to continue with that discussion and any other violation will be flagged.
@user That's what I observed by browsing your recent activity. I'm trying to understand your justification for these actions, and part of that involves selection criterion.
As there are a lot of new folk in here that have likely shown up in response to flags (user indicates that they have been flagging many posts), the activity that @BillDubuque is referring to is, I think, related to this comment in another chat.
@XanderHenderson Yes, that was one of many mentioned in the above discussion to attempt to understand justifications of possible abuse of gold badge undeletions and reopenings.
I don't see a pressing need to specify DN/CN labelling for small scale suggestions in this room. It is helpful for reference and ratelimiting when there are a whole list, but I only suggest two or three a day at most, and I'd rather avoid introducing any more partiality into my suggestion than I have to.
Is there a bot that aggregates statistics for those, or something?
