Tavern on the Meta

nope

JcbJoe

Then why do people jump to find dups and code questions? Is it a duty or to help keep the site clean?

Close*

6:10 AM

@JcbJoe yes, we want for the same question only one Q/A. If you don't want that go look at a forum, mailinglist, Yahoo! Answers to see and feel the difference. Q/A is more like wikipedia, they also only have one page for topic and curate that one over time, not create 10 new ones when users couldn't find the original one.

Glorfindel

6:25 AM

@Dudecoinheringaahing which version of the script do you have? I pushed an update, coincidentally a few hours before your message. This is how it looks for me now:

6:50 AM

@JcbJoe @rene is modest, it's possible to find dupes and obtain gold Steward badges:

DavidPostill

@Glorfindel Oh, thx for the update

Glorfindel

yw

JcbJoe

Thanks @Rob

11:02 AM

Offline for maintenance...

did I miss an announcement?

A certain website says.... It's not only you!

Resistance Is Futile

No announcements... this is not planned...

Okay, seems back up already.

fun. it did post my comment but my browser told me otherwise

Resistance Is Futile

11:07 AM

Phew... I already thought I will have to take a break ;)

No worries. You can always start flagging comments on YouTube ....

or twitter

I thought twitter was the flagging app for other sites?

Level Up: Build a Quiz App with SwiftUI – Part 4

Naw, its for complaining about things and getting people to listen

3

Feeds

12:55 PM

Ryan Donovan on September 04, 2021

In the fourth and final lesson of the series, we’ll learn how to use SwiftUI navigation to present different views to the user. We’ll build a welcome screen with instructions for the user as well as a final screen with their results to the quiz. A user will also have the option to re-take the…

hm, with that MSO one I don't think SDing it seems appropriate

it's peterh, unsurprisingly...

true but its something that more likely/should have someone deal with it manually and with some... tact

as opposed to spam to be reaped mercilessly

1137 rep since I last checked :D

1:27 PM

@JourneymanGeek missing 200

@MetaAndrewT. amazing he's still around, most SE-haters give up at some point.

@ShadowWizardIsVaccinatedV3 You'd be surprised

I know someone who sticks around chat and watches meta just to be negative

(not this chat, but main meta)

@JourneymanGeek yeah, I pinged the reporter in CHQ

@JourneymanGeek heh, reminds me of Blue Bloods TV show chapter I watched yesterday, about policeman who got hurt during duty, retired as result, and made a fortune from insulting the police for "not keeping him safe".

@ShadowWizardIsVaccinatedV3 I'd say when folks who're too 'attached' to a place get bitter, they... can't let go

(So yeah, if I ever get sick of this place, I hope I have the grace to let it go)

@JourneymanGeek yeah, probably the case.

1:41 PM

What is the time from casting the close vote until the question enters review queue? I thought it was about 15 minutes, but maybe I remember it wrong.

Or perhaps it is longer on a per-site-meta than on the main site? (Maybe I should simply blame caching, as with many other things.)

Always blame caching

:D

> There is an automated background job that adds posts to the review queues. This job runs every few minutes, but exactly how often the job runs is not public information. It is in the order of 'a few minutes'.
However, a reopen vote (or even an edit) must have existed for at least 15 minutes before a post becomes eligible to be bumped into the review queue. Once that 15 minutes has passed, it will be added to review the next time the automated process runs.

According to this answer from 2013: How long does it take for a question to appear in the reopen queue?

I think it is 5 minutes but could be longer for specific queues.

Close review queue might be different, we can't be sure.

I guess it should be similar for close votes and reopen votes. I'll wait and see whether the question appears in the review rather than casting a vote directly on the question - the fact that it was this long (35 minutes) made me a bit curious.

1:46 PM

IIRC when a question is eligible for review it gets marked and then on the next run of the reviewtask job the reviewtask gets created for involved posts.

Glorfindel wrote this answer in 2020: Review queues, when will they add new items?

> Close Votes: at least 15 minutes after the first flag/vote to close

> Note that even if the item is generated, the /review page and the review menu may not be updated immediately, they seem to have a separate cache.

on /review you only get to see the item if one reveiwtask is done by a user

I am not sure I understand. Somebody has to do the first review.

BTW now I see the question I was curious about in the review queue.

It is this review: math.meta.stackexchange.com/review/close/5066

The autogenerated "Does this answer your question?" comment says 40 mins ago.

@Martin I meant /review/history

I see. Yes, that is kind of obvious. I was checking /review/close - not /review/close/history

1:54 PM

@Martin I think the moderator timeline might reveal exact timings.

It was partly curiosity on my side. I thought that there might be some kind of bug when I did not see anything in the close votes review queue and the comment was already 30 minutes old.

It's probably not important enough to bother Mathematics mods to check this. (I am sure they have plenty of toher stuff to do.)

2:12 PM

@Martin I just checked on my main sites, it took from 16 up to 22 minutes from a close vote to enter the review queue. Perhaps it's different on meta sites?

Otherwise, need to wait until the review is done to see the public timeline.

Wow!

Thanks a lot for looking into that.

16 to 22 minutes seems to correspond 15 minutes + the time until job is run.

When I look (as a non-mod) at a review queue of some meta question I see there two times at the close votes review.

Moderators see also some additional details that I do not see, right?

user728672

@Tinkeringbell That ping was a pre-emptive question. I found the answer.

I mean, as a non-mod I do not have some way to find the time of the first close vote from the timeline. (Of course, in the case I mentioned before, I know the time of the autogenerated comment. So I can compare it with the times in the timeline after the question is closed.)

Long time no plz-delete random useless question @rene @Glorfindel (should I still ping you for those now that you're a mod?) @Sonic

@GWarner what are you talking about? Why pinging Tink? She doesn't like random pings, even I restrain myself from pinging her without a real reason. If you refer to some past chat message you really better Reply to it, otherwise context is lost.

@Martin yeah, mods see individual close votes on the timeline.

2:20 PM

That is interesting to know, thanks!

like this

@Martin No prob

This is a post which is already closed and I see this on the timeline:

Those two times shown there on the left are probably when in entered the review queue and when it was completed.

You're correct, and comparing with the first duplicate comment, looks like it's longer on meta: 30+ minutes

I see - the comment has 14:12 and it entered the review queue 14:48.

So it is probably 30 minutes (rather than 15) on meta.

Meta is neglected, raise the alarms!

:D

PM 2Ring

2:58 PM

@Martin Now closed. Math meta is fairly active, compared to some site metas.

3:25 PM

Looking at the timeline I see the timestamp 13:48:55 for entering the queue. The timeline for the comment autogenerated by the close vote was 13:08:57.

That agrees with the 30+ estimate.

Mathematics Meta should probably be flattered. OTOH, one might view high activity as a bad thing - I recall some slogan along the lines of "meta means death".

No, it was "meta means murder". meta.stackexchange.com/q/328160 google.com/…

4:23 PM

Looked for a SEDE, closest thing found thus far is from creation of a question to deletion after being closed is ~90 minutes at SO: data.stackexchange.com/stackoverflow/query/890618/…

user728672

@ShadowWizardIsVaccinatedV3 I pinged her a ? from a cafe room that i wanted to unsubscribe from. that i saw she was still in. but i found the right link right afterwards.

Dude coinheringaahing

4:39 PM

@Glorfindel At the moment, I'm on 2.10 and the problem is fixed. Guess it just hadn't updated at the time

Glorfindel

@Dudecoinheringaahing understandable, since the fix was pushed literally a few hours before :)

@ShadowWizardIsVaccinatedV3 sure, no problem.

4:55 PM

@ShadowWizardIsVaccinatedV3 Nowhere near as "random useless" as their comments on this question and it has three reopen votes - fortunately it was deleted, surprisingly by the author, before we had to endure seemingly bot comments with occasional human intervention. --- Why reopen?

@GWarner oh, OK. But you can't "unsubscribe" from a room, assuming you mean you don't want to get pings from that room anymore.

Unless.... a mod deletes all your messages in the room. But that can be lots of work for a mod, who usually has better things to do.

@Glorfindel thanks!

@Rob no and no? Can't see any problem with neither the question nor the comments. Totally valid site recommendation question, and pity it's downvoted to oblivion only because it was originally poorly written.

I'd also vote to reopen, but author deleted it.

Mithical

@ShadowWizardIsVaccinatedV3 Not even then... you'll still be pingable for a couple days.

@Mithical nope. You're pingable for 48 hours since you last leave a room only if you have at least one message in the room, as far as I know.

If you never wrote anything in the room and leave it, you're not pingable.

Though deleted messages might behave in weird way, i.e. it can still think you wrote something in the past. But it shouldn't.

@ShadowWizardIsVaccinatedV3 Sigh.

@Rob all good, we can disagree. But no ice cream for you.

5:11 PM

It's not "we", it's you and several others there; including two of our mods. - You really didn't read the three dozen comments.

@Rob I meant you and me, that makes it a "we". You think the question if off topic, bad, and should be deleted, I think otherwise.

So does everyone else, including the OP.

And yeah, I read only the OP comments, didn't see anything wrong, so didn't see any reason to keep reading.

@Rob no, OP deleted because they saw massive downvotes.

That's not the reason they gave, proving you didn't: "... read only the OP comments ...".

hehe ok @Rob you win.

@ShadowWizardIsVaccinatedV3 What the hell? the answer is like this XYZ.stackexhange.com so? — Gomesz785 1 min ago

downvoted and voted to delete.

(and flagged the comment of course.)

Rude people don't deserve help.

If OP posted other rude comments that were deleted, I had no way to know.