um hi

Hey

sorry

good movie though

o/ Gwideon

o/

Um I'm sorry about my latest post

@Gwideon Repent ye sinner?

not really my thing so pardon if I'm not doing it right

i needed to offer my perspective. I probably came off as to forceful but to be honest I am angry

um not at anyone personally. I don't think your evil for um disagreeing with the CoC change but um yeah.

sorry

I'll shut up

@Gwideon why? its not a bad post

i don't want to hurt anyone

Are you trying to do that in your post?

I thought it was fine

It doesn't read like you are hurting anyone there

no

I just want to be a much needed perspective

well, I mean its not a question but Meta invites discussion (which is forgotten a lot...also argued about) so I don't see a problem with that. And its respectful and presents a problem (and to be fair the linked questions were not the best idea - one shouldn't "ask" people to prove discrimination in such a public setting - IMHO) +1 from me

thanks

@Gwideon I find it difficult to see how your post is hurtful to anyone. I think some may find it lacks a clear question, but that isn't the worst thing on Meta, esp. right now.

@Gwideon this has descended into petty bickering. There's no other word for it. Not everyone, of course, and no side has a monopoly on petty bickering, but a lot of what we're seeing is indeed petty bickering.

and without even looking at the comments (remember that right now a lot of good people are angry and angry people watch their language a lot less, are more defensive, and comments are not a great format for discussion - so comments reflect all that). I know someone will ask you to prove where you see this & at least one will say "this does not reflect my views" (hopefully that politely but unlikely): this also happened when it was simply unfriendliness with the welcome wagon.

yeah

^^ long way of saying take comments with a grain of salt right now

^ this

@Gwideon can you say where you've personally seen negative comments? Only on Meta or on main sites also?

I will say I have seen them (briefly and quickly removed) on WB at least once and a while

meta mainly

my main site is rpg which is pretty safe

IMHO, we're usually pretty good across SE in general about deleting that kind of thing very quickly. It's gotten a bit slower recently, with the mass reduction in moderator and power user participation, but we're still doing fairly well.

@Gwideon see now that I've gone and looked at your post I feel like what I am: a sarcastic ass. /sigh

yeah but it doesn't erase the fact that it still happens. I know everyone is doing there best but it hurts none the less

sorry

@Gwideon not your fault?

I'd say if you want to feel better, maybe don't read meta too often for the next month or so...

@Gwideon OK. Do not apologize for feeling distress!

^

Please. You have every right to feel distressed. And you're certainly not alone!

I mean, thank you, you're being wonderful, but there really isn't any reason to apologize.

@user1306322 That's probably a wise piece of advice in general.

it was probably always the case, not just now :)

meta is only bearable for the strong of heart

@user1306322 I have gotten that advice but I feel I need to be apart of this discussion as I feel there is a severe lack of LGBTQ+ perspectives

yes, I considered that too

which is why I hesitate giving that advice

I stand by what I said earlier today. The current meta rep system encourages bad behavior which was not the intent of the metas

but you also have to consider that one's own health must be more important than the ongoing discussions on SE

besides, you're not the only representative of your group, there are others stepping in and sharing their perspective when they also feel they're able to

and sometimes they step away too, to replenish their mental health bar

Honestly, anybody posting something on Meta that is not furiously negative about the CoC right now is a pretty brave soul, IMO.

This ^

@Rubiksmoose They shouldn't have to be, but the rep system on MSE exacerbates this to the point of massive pile on

flag-pls (comment) meta.stackexchange.com/questions/334900/…

Um I was also trying to get at in my post is that both the community and SE are at fault for what's currently happening

@Gwideon we need your perspective. There's no question about that. But you need to take care of yourself first!

the intent of meta was to be a place you could say unpopular things

um my question was put on hold

sigh

I just voted to reopen.

same

Gotta love selective closing :]

To be fair, it's true that it isn't seeking input. Back in the times of normality, I would have left it closed. These are not those times though.

yeah sorry

@Gwideon it would help if you could add a question somewhere there. Give some way for people to provide answers.

@Gwideon There you go apologizing again! :)

@Mgetz Yeah it definitely shouldn't be that way. The way Meta is set up is particularly bad for minority issues. It makes it both very hard for them to be seen at all and very easy to suppress if even a slightly greater number of people disagree with it.

I think the contrasting opinions you've received on your post are because it's premised on the notion that the "rest of us" don't want to show you basic decency. That is untrue, and not a pleasant accusation. Many of us are concerned only with (a) logistically, how the heck do you apply this thing in its current form, and to a lesser degree (b) feelings regarding forced speech. I said this to you yesterday as well.

Even for "majority" (for lack of a better term) issues, it's just not great.

@LightnessRacesinOrbit what in that post gives you that impression? I don't see it.

@Rubiksmoose so it wasn't pre split, because meta didn't have rep (or at least it wasn't as bad) to me MSE shouldn't have rep consequences. It should just give privileges based on highest network rep. As mentioned above I'd open a feature request if I wasn't already sure it would be sent straight into oblivion

added a question

@LightnessRacesinOrbit Yes, my primary issue with the new CoC (or more accurately the FAQ) is that it's possibly the least enforceable rule I've ever read.

@Gryphon And you're not even tasked with enforcing it...

@Mgetz I'd almost certainly guess there would be a dupe of it somewhere as well. So even better for you /s

@terdon And I'm so very glad about that.

> a community that I had felt was a bastion of rational thought has descended into petty bickering over whether they have to extend a certain group of people a basic amount of human respect

I mean it literally says that.

@LightnessRacesinOrbit Well, that's literally true.

Not of everyone, obviously, but certainly of many.

@Rubiksmoose I assumed that too but there doesn't seem to be an exact dupe

I've been guilty of petty bickering myself these past few weeks.

i'm honestly telling it how I see it. I see so much of that so i may be a bit biased.

that doesn't mean it wouldn't be close as dupe of some "Why do we have rep on MSE" question

I voted to reopen it

@terdon It's that "not of everyone" part that wasn't evident in the post as currently phrased.

I always hated to see the "seeks no input" close reason used to deny discussion

I mean one has only to look at almost any Meta post in the last 8+ days and they'll see plenty of bickering.

@LightnessRacesinOrbit No, but neither does it suggest "of everyone".

@Gwideon thank you for your perspective, I like when people don't sugarcoat or euphemize like some others did. Your input is definitely valuable.

We're all super sensitive these days and each of us will read into posts things that aren't necessarily there. We all come to this with baggage.

@terdon It's implied. "The community", without qualification. That means, the community. Not certain aspects of the community, or some people in the community. It also more directly implies that the arguments are only about giving respect, which is not true also.

Of all the threads of the past week left open, this isn't even in the top 50 of most rantiest

sorry i don't mean to be rude

@LightnessRacesinOrbit Well, the community has absolutely descended into petty bickering. I don't really see how else to call it. There are some shining counterexamples, but by and large, the tone of the debate hasn't been very constructive.

Personally I don't care at all, and have no personal problem with the post. But if you're getting any negative reactions to it Gwideon, IMO that'll be why.

@terdon Petty bickering about more than one topic, yes. Not just about "I don't want to treat people with decency"

i understood that when I wrote it i'm ready for it

👍

@LightnessRacesinOrbit true

@Gwideon It's got a positive score, so you're doing better than some. Heck, you've got a score above -1000, so you're doing better than some.

haha yeah

-1300 I think

@Magisch There are two at < -1400 at the moment.

oh

My avatar is actually a screencapture of one of those two from a while back.

-1400 and -1700

Specifically the -1700 one.

I just hope I'm making meaningful points

you probably are, but honest to god a lot of us have reached a severe state of outrage fatigue so it'll be a while before most read it

yeah i know'

@Gwideon Hey, you've made 112 of them already ;)

I'm honestly tired of the outrage put yeah

Oh sorry I thought you said meaningless points.

I'm not that fatigued or outraged and I'm not super sensitive :p

your post is one of the most level-headed ones

@user1306322 Obviously, you haven't been trying hard enough! :P

trust me, I'm a user! one of many

@Rubiksmoose grumbles Meta shouldn't be about internet points...

Meta shouldn't have rep at all... As someone already mentioned.

yeah it shouldn't

I'm trying in a smart way, part of it is letting myself cool off, recharge, step away, etc

by now I've done this so many times I don't feel any kind of anger

@terdon been kinda ranting on it all day

I used to get mad at people on the internet, but not anymore, coz I know it's not worth it and doesn't help

MSO doesn't have rep

@Mgetz I've been doing so for years too. :(

it's not a significantly friendlier place

@Magisch it still doesn't encourage pile on as much

@Magisch But it isn't supposed to be the main support venue for the network either. It's tied to main rep, which is how all local metas work. The friendliness of local metas depends on the spirit of their attached site.

MSE should be different.

or encourage people to delete their posts, or get them question banned.

@Mgetz can you honestly say that?

mso is full of pile up

all of which happen on MSE

the pile is so high it reaches heaven some days

@Magisch I believe it's going in the other direction.

@Magisch as much... no way to stop it

@terdon metaphorically sure, but a pile down isn't evoking imagery :P

a NEGA-PILE

It's a consequence of developing bureaucracy except the bureaucracy is untransparent and largely written

@Magisch I know. But my pedant switch broke years ago and I never got round to fixing it! :P

it is the UK constitution of the SE network

@user1306322 are you saying we need Sailor Scouts to deal with it?

@Magisch A infinite downward hole with rising flames consuming everything is probably more accurate in terms of imagery?

a pile of antimatter if you will

If you look closer it's really fascinating

intractable tone and approach 100% determines the fate of your post

I um changed the title of my post

you can get a good popular idea horribly downvoted there through no fault of your own :p

honestly we need some community leaders stat to answer hot topic questions and explain what is going on to fix things daily, best results achieved if they're also going to be doing things that are good, not bad

but that is unlikely unfortunately

@user1306322 honestly you could probably use a hidden controversy metric based on total votes on the post and answers. The higher the controversy metric the higher the rep needed to even comment

pff

at some point you even block out votes from users without enough rep

if that was implemented on reddit, there would be no comments

might be a nicer place?

no person - no problem?

@Mgetz Congrats, you've come up with another potentially-good idea that will be feature-declined if ever posted. Or just ignored completely by the dev team.

I don't think it would be potentially good

well it would have to have a timeout that is logarithmic

hidden mechanics never seem fair

so that it caps out soon

I'm fine showing it if necessary

@user1306322 Meh, I did say "potentially".

@Mgetz That would probably be a better idea.

it would attract "are you opressing this group in a hidden secret way now?" and they'd explain "no, we're equally silencing everyone... wait"

I don't have good ideas, I have crap ideas that others can polish into something potentially useful

um so um what now

how about this: let people talk, we're just 0.0015% of the community, surely it's possible to handle all our input

@user1306322 nah just "This question seems to have attracted a lot of controversy, as a way of helping keep the discussion constructive we've restricted some actions. This will gradually age away"

remove obviously rude comments, people will get tired of posting the same thing eventually

hand out suspensions to those who don't understand normal people behavior / decide to go off the rails

@user1306322 They haven't yet...

@user1306322 0.015%*, and that's based on a bad calculation

at this point there should be enough information and advice from top members of the community who know how to fix things, to follow it and resolve all this

and yet, here we are

lol

yes, because they're not going to follow most of it

it's not in their best interests

@Zoethetransgirl it's kind of a joke reference at this point

some have calculated this "minority" actually accounts for about 25% of all content

@user1306322 So?

And this needs deletion meta.stackexchange.com/a/335715/226653

nothing, a bit of humor

@user1306322 I mean, in that case we still are a minority.

sure

extrapolate that over the years and see what the site looks like in 2022

@Mgetz Flagged.

I see no need for flagging it. Monica and the author are discussing amicably and deletion according to their consensus looks likely.

Leave the two remaining mods alone

to be fair, I don't think the site will decline as rapidly as many predict, I just think it won't improve anymore at the rate it has been previously

time will tell

I'm fairly certain that a better alternative will appear within 2 years from now at most

Honestly? I think it would be hard for the site to find ways to decline much more than it already has. It's not going to disappear, or self-combust; it's not going to find itself with 24 users left overnight. It's just going to be mostly full of crap and frustrated people and, oh wait, it already is.

heh yeah

SO maybe

@LightnessRacesinOrbit so it will myspace

it's unmanageable at its current scale with its current mod toolset

it's been a problem for years

other sites probably not

smaller communities where review queue reaches 0 many times a day are fine

if it was possible, I'd petition to detach SO and a few other unmanageable technical sites off the rest of the SE network and let the rest be free under the rule of elected mods

let them have their jobs and ads and whatever else brings them money

@user1306322 That would require someone to pay for the servers.

I um kinda don't know how to feel right now

Well... if you only leave SO under company's direct influence, that obviates the new CoC as well :D

@Gwideon welcome to the club, can I get you a 🍸

I'm not convinced hosting a text-based site is all that expensive

@user1306322 I'd vote for that.

I think every mod of a non-SO site would vote for that.

@user1306322 decent uplink is bloody expensive

I mean, decent for a worldwide famous network

you can edit by pressing ↑ arrow key

i know

@user1306322 "not all that expensive" is still different from "no expense". Someone's going to have to pay for it.

crowd-fund it

patreon or whatever

@user1306322 SO main page is about 1Mb

that adds up very quickly

caching?

so SO should start a patreon. Like a youtuber?

youtube is not profitable either

That would be the nonprofit route like say wikipedia

yea that's what I'm thinking

the goal of the site must be to gather high quality low noise knowledge, not gain profits like it is right now

thats clearly not happening several venture capital funds have ownership stakes in the company

they'd shut it down before letting it go nonprofit

obviously

so a new site must be born!

@user1306322 Might work.

but not actually patreon probably, their cut is too big

@Magisch nah they'd sell it first, shutting it down means not getting anything back

the bigger issue is who would buy it

I've read recently how SO bought a russian SO-like Q&A site and uploaded all its content to its database

it's called RU.SO now (stackoverflow in rusian)

Hash Code

yea

I wasn't going anywhere fruitful with this example, it's not like anyone is going to buy SO and replace all the bad apples in management from above

now this meta.stackexchange.com/a/335717/183800 is a good post

I've sensed this could happen a year or two ago

management doesn't take their time to have a good look into the site's issues, and they say "all of the meta is bad" because just some of the users are bad, ignoring the 90% of good users

people get angry at such a shallow assessment

then other things happen and new people arrive, again not taking time to study the issue and read all the posts and comments, ignoring 90% of good people they say "all people are bad here", again

and again, people are mad, but new people

this is now the third or fourth wave of that same pattern

it's worth noting SO has "survived" all of them so far

That works until it suddenly doesn't, though

it could have been avoided with more careful managerial decisions and faster response times

yeah it could've

all these times could have been avoided

@user1306322 pruning not rage quitting

I think my point is that, from the POV of management, "these times" aren't really that bad.

because they have made a shallow assessment

Maybe they're using other KPIs then we do

because the happiness of a couple of thousand meta users means bugger all to the business

to asess "success"

People will still ask questions, and people will still answer them. So it survives.

it's surprising to me because even though they are looking at their profits, they are looking at short term profits first and foremost, their knowledge doesn't allow them to realize their long term are going to tank

it's bad for profits, it's bad for the content, what's it good for?

I think their knowledge allows them to realize that their long terms aren't going to tank, no matter how much we might sit here and project (without any data at all) that they would

@LightnessRacesinOrbit To that point the longevity of a user is irrelevant then

Correct

A profitable SO is not predicated on X, Y, Z famousest C++ answer writers sticking around. It just isn't.

Heck, the profits come from not-Q&A anyway....

Whereas Jeff wanted quality, Joel wanted quantity

by "tank" I mean significant reduction in potential future profits, but I suppose they've calculated that they can take a hit if the price would be to really study the community issues, and I get it, it's hard, maybe it's not worth that bit of extra money

I repeat, the profitability of the Teams offering has absolutely nothing to do with arguing on meta and mods resigning from CookingUtensils.SE

The community is like the structure of a building. You can keep making profits renting out spaces in the building, but if you don't take care of the structure, it will eventually all fall apart.

It will get really rotten and horrible but it won't collapse. It'll always be there in some form, and that form will be sufficient for ad revenue, which is all that the company needs from public Q&A

Experts Exchange is still in business.

@LightnessRacesinOrbit If it gets rotten, quite a few tenants would want to move elsewhere, so it may not collapse, but become unprofitable

Look I'm not saying that I want it to be that way; but from a business perspective I just don't see much reason for management to be panicking or even really worrying about any of this drama, which may be one reason why they're not engaging with anyone about it at all: they have nothing to gain from the trauma of it whatsoever.

It's unprofitable already. It has always been unprofitable.

Weeeelll...

SO public Q&A in the form we love is not profitable. So projections that it would be unprofitable in the form we don't love are kind of vacuous

Hence the increased focus on Teams and Careers (which are both unaffected by any of this drama) because that's where the money is.

Granted, they owe their genesis, and to some degree their continued existence, to public Q&A, but (a) I think that job's been done now, and (b) I don't think public Q&A will ever degrade in terms of participation to the point that it doesn't continue to do that job

Obviously it's all speculation but I don't think it's without reasoning

(the mood is now: somber)

@user1306322 HELP @M.A.R.'S PANTS ARE ON FIRE

was lying involved?

on the open flame? probably

@LightnessRacesinOrbit One possible cause of panic is the prospect of a fork

In theory, we could replatform the content on a community-run, open-source site

that's not a theory at this point

And it could gain enough popularity to start reliably beating SO in search rankings

@MarkAmery Now that is something to be concerned about. I can only imagine they find the likelihood of this to be low.

They will also figure we'd struggle to fund it (knowing first-hand how much of a problem that can be)

4 more mods are on strike

all of the active ones on blender.SE

look they're all very talented business people with respectable portfolios, they'll find another job if this one doesn't work out in a couple years, no reason for panic even then

I'm not sure they're right to, though. We've already seen scummy clones manage to out-SEO Stack Overflow for particular queries in the past, which was always frustrating, but now... is kind of promising

and that

Out of curiosity, is there a post still tracking all the mods who've left?

yes

Might be easier to track all the mods who haven't

meta.stackexchange.com/questions/333965/… this one

they were added earlier

how many mods are active vs total mod positions?

37 resigned 31 are on strike

out of?

someone tallied it somewhere, I forgot how many exactly but like 350 or so?

not sure

I thought it was 600

so only 20% have made any action whatsoever

welp I'm feeling kinda terrible

However many rows are in this table: stackexchange.com/about/moderators?by=users

what now

gah tables without enumeration!!

563

plus they're actually divs

:(

ok so like 10%

not really the end of the world from SE's perspective tbh

563 currently.

last message 3232 days ago :p

new record!

the best we can hope to do for this site is prevent early onset ruination, and I don't have enough neither knowledge nor will for that, especially being fairly certain that a better site will inevitably appear soon enough, and that gives me hope

so "why do I stay?" the flame is hot, weather is cold, I'm gonna stay warm until a new house is built for me to go to :p

lets all calm down a little

a friendly proposal to bin the last couple messages and start over?

^

sighs and headdesks at being silenced

I enjoyed how that got repeated with emphasis after the first time, @Magisch. I assume that in due course you'll be advising calmness in bold and all caps. ;)

we're all walking a tightrope between allowing discussion and keeping the heat down enough so nobody will freeze our room or feel like they can't be here without nonstop drama

@Mgetz if you and @jcolebrand want to continue this debate a better way would be to create a seperate room for it

I'm not sure how that turned into drama, I'm sorry I'll just shut up

@Magisch it wasn't intended to be a debate or cause drama

Good, then we have no problem :)

sorry

@MarkAmery I think it is a bit much to label them "right wing" per se, but I'm definitely in agreement that it is highly ironic.

"This is totally a problem [sees no problem], [creates problem] see?! It's a huge issue!"

I don't understand the "direction-wing" thing in political terminology

In the original version, liberals sat on the left and conservatives sat on the right side of the parliament house

with a gap big enough that you couldn't poke the opposing party with a sword without having to stand up first

speaking about prices, here are the allegedly real stats: stackexchange.com/performance

In fairness, @Rubiksmoose, besides creating a problem they also demonstrate one that is not of their creation: that the fear the company has successfully instilled is enough that most people are unwilling to make even obviously good edits removing those pronouns.

@JohnDvorak oh I thought it was something to do with the eagles

(And I do wonder a little if I'm going to walk straight into a suspension by editing them out.)

I guess it ties into @GeorgeStocker point on Twitter about the need for shared vision. The only tools the company is currently are punishment, suspension, and fear. You can disincentivise behaviours like that, but - with people on the internet who are free to walk away - you can't incentivise any. And so you end up with people just not wanting to come anywhere near this shit; leaving troll pronouns alone and saying they'll just avoid talking to trans people to not get into trouble.

The problem here is that SE has no power to create incentives. Besides gamification and idealism nothing drives someone to spend their time here

so they have to be industrious with the little deeper engagement they get

@Magisch idealism is a fine incentive, though

Not when the source of that idealism decides to walk over you, I guess :p

which we have strayed from greatly and obviously