« first day (1190 days earlier)      last day (3199 days later) » 

1:21 AM
Meta confuses me. Anyone want to take a gander at why this question was so aggressively downvoted?
-8
Q: Influence of the weather in the upvote/downvote ratio?

Paulo ScardineI'm under the impression that people are more grumpy and prone to downvote when the weather is cold. Is there any way of verifying this hypothesis? I mean, is the daily total of upvotes and downvotes available somewhere for mere mortals like me? [update] This link is very interesting, I would...

Maybe it's because it's cold and people are grumpy about being reminded that it's cold...
Oh goodness gracious me. I hit 3k rep on Meta.SO faster than SO. That isn't right...
 
Assuming that people being cold makes them grumpy and thus makes them more prone to downvoting is a terrible premise that apparently a lot of people don't agree has any merit.
I'd say it's much more likely that the cold weather makes more people stay indoors at home and post stupid things on the Internet...
 
No problem over here - it's almost summer in the southern hemisphere.
 
@animuson I get grumpier when it's hot, but I just found it funny that someone asking, "How can I calculate this?" gets downvoted for the reason for the research, rather than the actual request.
It's the equivalent of having someone ask with help for code streaming audio on the internet, and getting downvoted because his code is for "justinbieber4everandever.com"
 
Not really. There is no applicable data. Sure, I gave him a link to some geographic data, but the data on that page is slightly outdated and only includes a subset of the population of Stack overflow. From there, you'd have to define what "cold weather" means, determine which locations were experiencing cold weather during periods of downvotes, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc.
 
Yeah, some awesome geographic data which isn't that out of date (I mean, it's only a couple months old). And all the other issues he can sort out himself. I doubt he'll find an answer, but I think there's no harm in pointing him at the tools to try.
 
1:31 AM
@jmac I'd say because the insinuation is that Stack Overflow people downvote because of an emotional problem, as opposed to, well, bad content.
Although I'm sure he has kind of a point. I'm definitely more prone to downvoting (instead of, say, trying to help) when I'm in a bad mood, for example.
... and if he were able to correlate voting data with weather data, I wouldn't be surprised if he actually managed to find a correlation
 
I'm personally ruthless all the time, but I'm mysteriously evil like that.
 
Maybe I'm just a bit too optimistic about people's intentions
 
But doesn't it always rain in Delaware?
 
Well, rain doesn't necessarily mean it's cold. I happen to love when it rains, and it actually puts me in a better mood.
 
I saw it as a guy who just got a bunch of downvotes (probably because of poor content of his questions/answers) looking to leap through hoops of flame to shirk blame. And I am all for pointless exercises like that as a great form of misdirected self-flagellation!
 
1:35 AM
Also, I want to ask how you're doing in a less...nonchalant sort of way @animuson, but I'm having trouble. >:/
@probablyPekka No, it never rains because the state is so small the clouds pass right over it before the first rain drop falls.
 
@TimStone ah, I see.
I would have thought clouds are attracted by the state's low taxes
 
@probablyPekka I believe it's always Raining in Baltimore (if you have the CD on repeat at any rate)
@probablyPekka And don't forget their incredibly corporation-friendly laws!
 
@jmac hah, nice
 
@TimStone I get over things fairly quickly. It does feel weird that he's gone, though. The funeral is Saturday.
 
@jmac yes. If I were a raincloud, that's definitely where I'd incorporate
 
1:38 AM
@animuson I can imagine so. If you do need anything though, feel free to ping me...it's the least-brown thing I could do.
@probablyPekka Right, but the trick is just leaving your fluffy shell here while you do the bulk of your business elsewhere.
 
@TimStone good point, good point
 
@animuson Don't know the details, but while we may think we get over things fairly quickly, we may find ourselves getting over getting over things fairly quickly as well. Be sure to take care of yourself and not try to convince yourself you're okay if you're not (not saying you aren't).
 
My parents are going to make me see a psychologist at some point. I've spent my entire life psycho-analyzing myself. She'snot gonna know what hit her. xP
 
 
1 hour later…
3:03 AM
> You've earned the "meta" badge. See your profile.
Wooo, a meta badge on meta!
 
3:50 AM
Even the link has two metas in it! meta.stackoverflow.com/help/badges/127/meta?userid=141525 ... if there is a meta(meta), is there a hidden meta(meta(meta))) too?
 
4:35 AM
Hi!
Is this post a high quality post (please judge without looking at the upvotes)? I got this in a review audit (and failed). It doesnt show any attempted solutions. So is choosing the "Close" option for this one really wrong?
 
5:18 AM
looks like nobody here right now :(
 
5:34 AM
@Harry I am here but don't really have an opinion. It sounds like he tried using a basic partition integer but that didn't work because the results weren't sorted in order.
 
thanks for the reply @jmac. Maybe my question isn't probably right for this place. But just that I am too annoyed that I have got myself review banned for "wrongly" (?) reviewing these kind of posts. never mind, people have different opinions, so I will consider the system also as a person and leave it :)
 
@Harry Everyone knows there are less than ideal review audits. And that's fine. The system is designed to work such that occasional failures aren't punished, only regular failures are. So if you're failing so many of these audits, chances are that you may want to look more carefully when reviewing after the ban expires?
 
@jmac: Do you by any chance know how many such failures get you a ban (or) is there some place where I can see how many audits I have failed?
and I have to admit that I have failed a good amount of reviews similar to the one I have posted earlier.
 
You can see the information on audits in this faq
Chances are that they keep the actual mechanism top secret in order to prevent people from gaming the system somehow. As far as seeing how many audits you've failed, I don't know. Sorry!
more info here as well
 
thanks mate
 
5:43 AM
This answer tells you how to check your audit history. Note: it requires lots of manual labor.
 
appreciate your time and help mate
 
No problem. In general, searching for what you're looking for on meta will find you the answer (that is how I found all the above resources).
 
I did @jmac and found a different post which basically said something similar to the last post you had linked. You can put it down to my laziness that I wanted to see if there was a better option than manually looking through each item :D
 
@Harry Currently you can't use either the API or the Data Explorer to view review history, so manually is really the only way to go.
 
@jmac: hmm, I see. thanks again. Btw, did you notice that the question (that I failed the audit) had 11 upvotes but even the accepted answer has only 3. seems strange.
 
6:00 AM
@Harry Personally I think it's a question that developers love to play around with and come up with a solution to, so lots of people liked the question (regardless of whether or not it is on-topic). But people are more interested in coming up with an answer than actually reading the answers of other people.
 
@jmac: Agreed, I wasn't pointing to the quality of that post (I have cooled down :D) just that it seemed strange. Any ways, thanks for your time and help, I am leaving :)
 
@Harry Glad I could help, just remember, SO is supposed to be fun -- don't get too worried about failing a review audit (if good intentioned), even if you do get banned from reviewing. Just focus on enjoying yourself, and long-term improvement of the site.
 
agreed mate :) I wouldn't have been too annoyed if I was a bot/drone reviewing only to get the badges.
 
@Harry Yeah, I get that, but it may be a good time to take a review break for a week and answer some questions or make some edits instead! Always good to be done, don't get hung up over a certain type of help.
 
 
4 hours later…
10:32 AM
Just noticed a weird anomaly / duplicate account when reviewing edits. Original user GCooper posted this question and then LCooper edited it, (this edit was rejected). LCooper attempted to add exactly the info that ultimately appeard courtesy of GCooper in [this edit]...? (stackoverflow.com/posts/19806219/revisions)
 
@beroe Link to suggested edit, please?
 
11:04 AM
@michaelb958 I can't find the page. I think when the edit was later rejected by someone else, it disappeared and was replaced by the same edit in the revision history? No idea if there is a way to reveal edit history of users, but it is not showing up in my search history. I was thinking it could also be innocent: logged on with wife's account or something, but seemed odd.
 
11:16 AM
@jmac: you can also use a user script to run through each page of a particular review queue, I've done that to check when I previously got review banned.
@Harry: I think it's a minimum of three failed review audits, unless you're going at complete robo-speeds.
That's in a month.
(to be more precise, a running total of the last 30 days).
 
11:50 AM
-1
A: Pause terminal between input lines

r00t-err0rTry look at http://www.tcl.tk/man/tcl8.4/TclCmd/vwait.htm Maybe can help. I dont know whole code and i didnt understand point, but has i read, vwait can help you a lot.

"I don't understand the question, but I'll throw in a link to an outdated manual that doesn't help you to solve the problem"
 
 
2 hours later…
1:51 PM
9
A: What kind of computer is being used in "Workin on ur problemz"?

Jeff AtwoodFantastic -- I posted this as a blog entry, with a little bonus, here: http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/06/workin-on-ur-problemz/

Should be a comment</thought>
 
2:36 PM
Is that an automatic comment?
spam spam spam spam spam spam spam beaked beans spam spam spam and spam! — marinus 1 min ago
 
Nope. Though why do that instead (or in addition) to flagging, I don't know.
 
Well, I voted to close, flagged it and somehow I upvoted that comment.
I don't think that I actually clicked on the up button.
 
lol
 
Ehm, custom oftopic close reason?
 
Just flag as spam. Nothing more needed.
 
2:42 PM
ok.
 
@Harry you should come to workplace sometime, we get all sorts of screwed up voting on accepted answers
 
Hehe. @enderland - the subject matter invites that
 
3:13 PM
@enderland: sorry mate, I didn't quite catch that. Are you referring to workplace.stackexchange?
 
@Harry yeah
 
oh, thanks @Oded
 
3:28 PM
Oh, yeah. I forget not everyone loves The Workplace (you should!)
 
[workplace.se] == The Workplace
 
cool. thanks @JohannesKuhn
I noticed that fail a bit too late to actually change the message...
 
@enderland fixed that for you
@enderland - it was featured in the latest podcast
 
Yeah, inspired me to ask a question too on The Workplace
 
Hehe. I did see that one ;)
 
4:09 PM
They are all within less than ~ 1minute apart..
 
Yeah - the script will catch these (assuming all by the same person, which is a safe assumption)
 
4:49 PM
When I wrote this yesterday there were 89.9k close votes in the review queue. Now there are 90.3k. By my calculations we should reach 0.1M close votes in the review queue around November 25th. Maybe we should have a party?
Erm, in the SO review queue, not meta.
Maybe I'm in the wrong chat....
 
No, correct chat.
I'm for free swag :P
 
 
4 hours later…
8:39 PM
@JohannesKuhn Beaked beans? Has some farmer been using bird genes again?
 
 
3 hours later…
11:15 PM
user image
2
nice ad :D
from the 404 page, correct?
 

« first day (1190 days earlier)      last day (3199 days later) »