« first day (2827 days earlier)      last day (2268 days later) » 

12:00 AM
I don't remember the exact rules but if a user has 1 rep and no posts (they're all self deleted), I think that they can have their account deleted immediately.
@Vogel612'sShadow I believe it went on since humans exist.
@πάνταῥεῖ I don't remember that being stated anywhere in the SO Inc. commentary..
@Catija <=1 posts and 0 votes. Rep does not matter.
Ah, there you go. :)
<=1 posts and 0 votes implies <=3 rep
oops, I can almost count
12:01 AM
@AndrasDeak Can get any number of rep points from one post.
no, that accept might be right after all. Oh, let's call it <=20 to be safe
@AndrasDeak nope.
Supposedly that single post could have dozens of votes on it... "votes" means "hasn't cast any votes" not "hasn't received any votes".
@Vogel612'sShadow There are sometimes subtle things inbetween the lines.
0 votes cast, not received.
12:02 AM
@Catija Oooooooh!
It implies <= 1001 rep
ignore me then :D
@Catija eh. Could screenshot or just selectively quote :(
@AndrasDeak Did you see the final comment?
> I thankfully found a few people who were nice enough to help me out. I'm deleting this thread.
Though, it's more likely for users under 15 rep to meet those requirements, since they're prohibited from actually voting.
12:03 AM
@JonEricson yeah, I did. Did you see OP's deleted rage comments?
@AndrasDeak approved edits give +2 rep, up to a maximum of 1k rep :)
but anyway, in the meantime Catija educated me that the fact that OP got deleted doesn't mean anything
weird edge-case though.
@Vogel612'sShadow hehe, right
Though, I guess accepts count as votes and users of any rep level who have asked a question can do that.
Time to go home! Toodles, y'all.
12:04 AM
@AndrasDeak Yeah. If this does end up on twitter or whatever, I don't think they have a strong case. ;-)
OK :) I just have a really bad taste in my mouth
thanks for the feedback
Yeah. As long as it's pinned to the community bulletin, I'm afraid the blog title will prime people to look for rudeness. :-(
@JonEricson They'll find all kind they think it is :-/
@JonEricson I've been seriously thinking about a feature request to let the 1st comment given for a post should cost -2 reputation. That'll reduce a lot of unnecessary snark quite quickly.
A dupe probably.
12:13 AM
inb4 "why are posts closed with no comments"
@AndrasDeak No post gets closed "without a comment", the comment is implicit.
@JonEricson None of the complainers on twitter ever did
That article chain about SO was laughably transparent in its attempt to troll
@πάνταῥεῖ what do you mean?
@bjb568 Congratulations!
12:16 AM
There's a reason given if a post is put on hold or closed
Oh, sure. But it's general courtesy to try and help askers fix their questions before it gets closed. I could understand if someone finds SO "rude and traumatizing" when out of the blue their question gets closed as no MCVE just because they didn't add the error message nor the line where it happens
I guarantee if comments start to cost rep, helpful comments will be even more scarce than snarky ones
after all grumps are usually more invested in the matter than altruist volunteers
@AndrasDeak It's the best way to give an unbiased feedback, based on consensus of mostly more than a single person.
surely you're aware that one of the largest alleged crimes of the site is that it's already so inhuman and artificial
I do kinda like the idea of limiting kibitzing comments on questions. Certainly I'd rather people answer or ignore questions more often than comment on them.
12:23 AM
One problem is though, that the same 5 people may repeatedly display up in similar fields of problems (i.e. language tags), and be considered a pack
if someone wants to feel oppressed by moderation as it works on SO, they will
it's either that or giving up moderation (hence the responses to the blog post)
And let's be honest: There's none of us here, who never posted a snarky comment at some point of time.
@AndrasDeak Eh? That's a weird way to look at it.
That seems to be how the blog post came across and looking at the meta fallout many people had the same interpretation
@AndrasDeak My Yup has to be precised.
12:28 AM
put everything and more has already been said in the "conflating noobs with minorities" meta, probably
@πάνταῥεῖ yeah I got that
@AndrasDeak Well, if people want to misunderstand the post, they will, I suppose. ;-)
@JonEricson I honestly think there's no way to do quality-control on SO without someone being able to find offense in it.
@JonEricson -1 rep for question comments?
well, we could; if there were literally no snarky people or prejudiced ones on SO
but that isn't going to happen
if we restrict comments, the helpful ones will go away and people will rightfully complain that their posts get shot down without even trying to help them fix them
@AndrasDeak That's true. We're sorta hoping that at least people will be offended for the right reasons.
12:30 AM
@AndrasDeak Nobody promised any help to them; they have nothing to complain about.
Why should anyone bother trying to figure out OP's indentation if it costs them to help fix it?
@bro have you read the criticisms against SO? People demand to be helped, because apparently this site is all about helping people
@bro Now we're talking.
I see nothing wrong with ignoring that subset of criticism.
@bro -2 for 1st comment on any post.
@bro refund when the comment is deleted as no longer needed, no refund if deleted as rude
not sure about self-deletions
12:32 AM
@bro Haha, good luck. The vast majority of whiny askers who feel that SO is rude (and are probably partly the subject of Jay's blog post) are ones that come here instead of reading a tutorial and then are hurt when their question is closed as off-topic or too broad
not talking about flags, but about the actual reason for deletion.
-1 for close votes?
-10 for answer downvotes?
~desperately holds in the snark
12:35 AM
@πάνταῥεῖ I'd like to see quicker closes (and easier reopens if the asker fixes the problem).
@JonEricson Now we're talking (cc: @rene)
@JonEricson You think having your question closed and heavily downvoted without any commentary quicker will be more welcoming then some snarky comments?
@user5389107 sorry, we forgot -10 for downvoting a question :P
12:36 AM
@user5389107 The bias thing!
There are also two pending tag wiki edits
making quality control cost rep is a good way to make sure that everything questionable gets closed and deleted
@AndrasDeak Might be a positive influence after all then
@user5389107 We probably need to figure out how to measure that rather than just winging it.
@user5389107 "questionable" as in "what is your exact error message?"
12:37 AM
@user5389107 If it's closed and downvoted then it will hopefully be deleted. Which means there is nothing for anonymous visitors (the majority) to find. While snarky comments remain forever.
@AndrasDeak Yah. The focus will shift from "Try to get your question into shape and reopened" to "Do it right the first time or we'll speed you to a post ban"
I'm confused. You seem to be talking about being more friendly and deleting all the closed questions at the same time. I find this...amusingly paradox
It's not more friendly then right now
@JonEricson Decrease CVs/reopenVs needed to 3 then.
But if we're putting emphasis on reducing snark in comments, that's the outcome
12:39 AM
I've always thought that getting snarked at is the price you pay for asking a low effort garbage question
And not to forget that feeling of a missed call of duty: "I could have followed that nice invitation, but now I'm gonna have to argue with you moron." Frequent source of all kind of snarkiness.
@user5389107 That would be true but we have quite a few butts who will snark anyone, or even worse, snark minorities more. The issue is that I don't think we should mess with moderation to fix this.
@AndrasDeak Deleting closed questions makes the site more friendly, yes.
@bjb568 That's on the table. It's one of the easiest things we can do. The key is getting people in the habit of actually voting to reopen:
Q: The number of votes required to close and reopen questions is temporarily reduced . . . for science!

Jon EricsonThis experiment is over. I will be adding an answer to show the results and suggest a plan for going forward. For the next 30 days, closing a question will require just 3 votes. Also 3 votes will be sufficient to reopen a closed question. In essence, each close and reopen vote has 5/3rds the n...

12:40 AM
The perception of its unfriendliness is amplified by 3rd party reading comments directed at the OP.
@AndrasDeak Have you ever tried asking in the ?
@bro And here I thought that was very rude to the askers, robbing them from their voice and oppressing them completely
(can't tell if you're being serious)
I am serious.
@user5389107 ha, no. But I've seen some of the heavy-weight grumps there
@JonEricson The issue with that is the original closers will rarely if ever take another look at derivative homework garbage #112838 they've spent all of 3 seconds closing several hours ago
12:41 AM
@user5389107 Try , he he ...
@bro then I strongly disagree with you
@πάνταῥεῖ hard mode: tag your question c and c++
@JonEricson Can I see an example question that was closed with 3 votes?
People who never posted on SO think it's hostile, because they read comments that were not directed at them.
@bro They are notified of them.
12:42 AM
@user5389107 That's usually quickly sorted out with tag edits.
If I see someone complaining of toxic oppression after a downvoted and closed post, I shrug. If the same post is promptly deleted, now that gives a bad message
@πάνταῥεῖ Yes but you bet you'll get an entire comment thread about how you should quit trying if you're this horrible (exaggerating for comedic effect, but not much)
I can't see how routinely deleting closed questions would help askers feel more welcome. I suspect the exact opposite.
@user5389107 waffles
@AndrasDeak Promptly as within 30 minutes? Yes. In 9 days, after no edits from OP? Different story.
12:43 AM
@JonEricson I was gonna say a ping option for the closers if a closed post is edited might work
Who is going to stick around for 9 days if comments cost rep?
Until I realized most of these OPs edit in stuff like "Why close?!?!!!1112"
@user5389107 so many meta feature-requests in limbo...
Remember the days when "not a real question" and "off topic" (not a typo) close reasons carried an automatic Community downvote?
@user5389107 That wasn't the reason for my suspension, it was the snarkiness at least.
@SonicWizard I'm mostly carrying one along my close votes/flags. Off-topic questions are rarely found "useful", no?
12:46 AM
The reopen queue is a meme at this point
@user5389107 Not for real pearls.
@SonicWizard Probably. There were a lot of them closed during the experiment. Surely some of them have not been deleted. ;-)
@JonEricson Can you link me to one?
@AndrasDeak Those who write serious answers.
12:50 AM
Answers?! I'm losing this thread completely :D
Well, there are answers, or seeing popcorn pop :D
are you saying that you'd be camping out for 9 days on a closed question to see if it becomes an answerable gem? (and delvote otherwise)
Depends on what kinda entertainment you want to see from the whole game :3
you need a hobby!
I've got some. What are yours?
12:52 AM
programming :P
One meeting point.
But it's also my profession, so that doesn't count :3
arguing with strangers about things that are irrelevant in the grand scheme of things: another one
Hi! I sit around the internet for fun. ;p
(That can't be my profession yet but one can dream)
Sometimes I accidentally try to make it a better place. I'm not sure that actually works though
@JourneymanGeek Well, there's slackware ;-)
@Journey I hope Ash is well. He should live long and prosper!
Ash is napping after long walkies.
I think the world is a wonderful place for him
Also made a new friend ;p
1:02 AM
Sounds cool
Someone rescued a spanish greyhound (apparently they breed them en mass and kill them when they get too old to hunt)
she's apparently skittish around men cause of abuse, but I apparently kinda have mild disney princess syndrome around dogs ;p
so this one was all "oh HI HUMAN! I FRIENDLY DOG! PETZ PLZ!"
@JourneymanGeek Oh, no. Goofy, go away ..
Not as bad as my dad
I think he's been bitten twice
And heh. There's a bit of a story about the second time I can't quite tell yet ;)
@hey almost recovered, but annoying thing is that coughing mostly happens at night, so still affects sleep a little bit
Codeine is fine at all.
If not used frequently ...
1:08 AM
There are two kinds of websites: those that people complain about, and those that nobody uses. SO is trying to leave the first category.
@bro I seriously have to complain about your avatar. That's something obviously unfriendly!
Nah. We just want to change what people complain about.
@πάνταῥεῖ subscription drug since recently
@Jon I already told you that'll be a hard job. Remember?
pholcodine did nothing
1:11 AM
The avatar is a reminder for me to always do the right thing.
@TelKitty I guessed so ...
@πάνταῥεῖ Certainly. :-)
welp, good night
Sweet dreams.
1:13 AM
thanks, you too (in n hours ;)
Using the site mechanics actually lets you look like being a bot. We might need more granularity at consensus.
Or better explanations at the CV banners.
@Andras N8
just my 0,02c, if people dont complain about welcomeness, they would for other reasons imo. on another platform i'am on, the flood of newbie is there too, not only a SO problem, and people complain about the content quality because they let them be.
The point is to let the complaints went in vain (aka poofed out) for clear and concise reasons (that everyone would understand without feeling discriminated in a way)
@yagmoth555 "and people complain about the content quality because they let them be" Stack Exchange already provides low barrier mechanisms to help fixing that. You just need to participate actively, and within the rules.
Complaint: "Who are you to make the rules." Follows up.
@πάνταῥεῖ badly wrote my point :) I mean that on the other platform iam on, not SE, they complain for quality because they try to be too much welcome
1:30 AM
@yagmoth555 I certainly know what you're talking about. I receive their weekly newsletters and keep these for good laughs ;-)
@πάνταῥεῖ ironically - both SE and twitter are the worst places to have that arguement
@JourneymanGeek I've even got a twitter account. Rarely interested about the so called global trendsetters. I prefer to gather my own data and facts.
1:48 AM
I actually mostly use it to keep in touch with a small group of people and news
I follow like...
20 people?
@JonEricson What do you think about my FR idea? Is there a dupe already? Comments like "Do your homework please (implicit eyerolling)." aren't helpful, and given away like candy. While a consciously written comment like "Welcome to <site xy>. Your question seems to address a common problem. Did you already have a look at <link to the documentation (not that one ;) )>. If you have problems to understand it, please care to point these out in your question" could be well worth it.
@πάνταῥεῖ why not write that?
like, manually? ;p
@JourneymanGeek I believe I follow even less. Some artists (comic and satire), and some rare expert people ins programming.
34 followed 28 followers
@πάνταῥεῖ good point, it would be nice to be about the let community user write that after some close vote, ppl will even take it less personnal, and will take less time to write it actually
1:51 AM
@JourneymanGeek I still have some doubts. The discussion escalated into so many directions.
and a good chunk of them are SE people, or folks I've met in meatspace
with a handful of companies
@πάνταῥεῖ funny thing is I literally start all the comments where someone is... lost with "welcome to"
and use the victorian we a lot
On the other hand, if its not a show me the codez question - how does that comment benefit the whole more than an answer?
@JourneymanGeek Yeah. That 9-tailed cat :P
Whenever I see a "documentation/manual reading as a service" answer - I often try to add a little to the post
@JourneymanGeek That kind of consciously written comments isn't meant for "Gimme teh codez plz!" questions, and would cost you 2 pts rep.
If it makes things better ... wait
how would it cost me rep?
1:56 AM
@JourneymanGeek the problem I see is after X time you write it, sometime you can become more direct, having something to help moderate such could be nice
and why does it matter?
I get lots of -2s all the time ;p
@JourneymanGeek That was my proposal.
@JourneymanGeek Because you're writing answers ;-)
preferencially yes!
That was the point of my thinking/considerations
I'd just the option to comment suspend people
1:59 AM
Instead of writing a snarky comment, encourage to write well consciously written and concise answers, that have a chance to receive upvotes instead of that initial cost.
2:15 AM
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Username similar to website in answer: How to decode input data from a transaction? by WTD on ethereum.SE
Comments are kind of a broken window in that people are trained to see the space directly under each question as a place for them to discuss the question
What if: all comments under questions that are not upvoted, don't have code, and don't have links (links to help center don't count)... were summarily deleted.
Would anything of value be lost?
Perhaps better to ignore the votes under some threshold
on sf yes, as often the question lack diagnostic, and we need to do it by commenting, to help the op isolate the trouble
2:22 AM
well, we sometimes need comments to help questions get better
and we summarily delete them and get complaints
Maybe move to chat, all of them. Imagine: no comments under questions anywhere, just a link to archive in chat
My point is more about comments from last week. You helped them get better, now what are those comments for?
the diagnostic step, it guide other user with same problem
why not just a tolerance zero for snarky comment, lets punish them, not all
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Offensive answer detected, toxic answer detected: How do i get rid of uneccessary System Memory? by Buttnigger on android.SE
@SmokeDetector naa-
2:35 AM
@yagmoth555 cause the only choice we have is a suspension and its hard when users contribute in other ways.
I kept on saying subscription when I meant prescription drugs, wtf ~_~
@hichris123 Yeah... that's rude...
When someone decides to express their anger about a company instead of a particular person, that's only NAA to me.
Having a username including the word "nigger" and repeatedly saying "fuck"... is r/a.
its trolling and probably needs a mod to look at it
2:40 AM
Yeah, the username part is problematic. But I've seen legitimate users do stuff like that before (a user posts ranting about a company and then asks a real question a couple days later), so I avoid red-flagging them.
and nothing of value was lost
@TelKitty I was confused by that, but I thought "maybe drug subscription is a thing now"...
Here we go:
Q: Apply a reputation loss for posting the 1st comment at any post

πάντα ῥεῖThere's a lot of complaint recently, about the culture of Stack Exchange sites, and how newcomers feel welcome, or just feel being minorized when asking questions. One source of these complaints are snarky and unnecessary comments placed on posts (no matter which quality they actually are): ...

4 hours ago, by πάντα ῥεῖ
Maybe Hey guys isn't the best start on this. :3
I think that's the objective of these usernames: @hey @bro
2:43 AM
@hey <==
@πάνταῥεῖ :/ That seems like a somewhat arbitrary solution. Why would we make it less likely that someone would actually be helpful? Also, that seems to whitelist every other comment...
No reference to casting the first stone?
or implicit casting...
Sometimes people need to be driven to use their brains ans social skills. You just have to charge them some cost, and they'll probably react more conscious, that's the idea.
2:46 AM
@Shog9 Would y'all ever consider excluding the association bonus from counting towards the Comment Everywhere privilege?
No clue, if that could work out at SE.
@JourneymanGeek for good standing user punish can be to flag them in a chat first to check why, I remember some slack discussion directed to some user about some snarky comment, but you are right as maybe easier with a comment suspension like you told
One of the bigger problems that some are talking about is the pile-on, not necessarily the first comment... why not just charge for all comments?
@Catija If I was going in for that kind of complexity, I'd definitely try really hard to make rate limiting work first.
@hey What do you think is the objective of my username?
2:47 AM
I feel like... If folks had 1-5 comments a day, they'd use 'em a lot more carefully.
HNQ commenters generally only use 1-5 comments.
@Shog9 Another good idea of throttling.
I don't know that I feel like it's necessary (the privilege exclusion) but it'd be at least useful on protected questions, like Monica explains in her MSE FR.
@πάνταῥεῖ I tend to read that word as "attack or kill (someone) by choking or strangling them"
2:50 AM
I sort of wonder if a combination of both would be the end solution.
@bro No that wasn't meant like this.
Fell encouraged to use your brain before doing something the intention it is
@bro Plain unnecessary snark, yes. Worth -5.
It'd be possibly more difficult to set up but I think treating the comment rate limits like the flagging rate limits - start with very few and your available total depends on your history of commenting - would be interesting but really difficult to implement in a way that doesn't unfairly catch users who actually do write primarily useful comments that were later flagged as NLN... it's as if we'd need to swap back up to four flags... "never necessary" and "served its purpose". :D
@Catija Whoever told @Jon that would be an easy job?
2:54 AM
Where does Jon come into it?
@Catija He's gotta deploy something in the end, no?
@Catija will self-deletion prevent increasing the quota?
@πάνταῥεῖ I think I'm missing a link here. Why Jon?
@hey It shouldn't... the downside is that some (very few) users use self-deletion in a ... abusive way.
Thing is, folks tend to be pretty careless when managing what they perceive as an unlimited resource. Seeing a limit on it can make one reluctant to use it at all
Shog and I bounced some thoughts on that back and forth briefly on Shog's answer to Yvette's question.
2:57 AM
@yagmoth555 done that.
A: Can we implement temporary automatic comment ban on 'x' number of validated rude comment flags?

Shog9This suggestion is coming up with increasing frequency in various forms; one of my colleagues expressed amazement this morning that we don't already do this - he'd spent the morning cleaning up after an abusive comment-author, only to find this person had kept right on leaving abusive comments th...

Yeah, because someone can just comments as they like on their own post and self-delete them, unless of course it won't count comment on self-post to increase the quota (just like you can't flag your own comment)
It would not be hard to count all comments, including deleted ones, toward the quota. They still exist in some database.
@Shog9 Or seeing a warning on it... I really dislike the "use sparingly" note on annotations.

« first day (2827 days earlier)      last day (2268 days later) »