« first day (1561 days earlier)      last day (3536 days later) » 

10:00 PM
@hichris123 will you?
Salvageable means "ok", as in has at least some value already. So it can be made into "good", what the sight needs.
@JanDvorak You shouldn't, aint nobody got time for dat
In general I don't flag any question that I could cast a valid close vote on instead. Seems to be working out for me.
@bjb568 Then you just told every new user that there's no need for them to edit.
@JasonC Agree.
10:01 PM
@bjb568 nobody asks decent questions nowadays, so the next best thing is to polish crap nto something decent
@bjb568 Well, don't unclear questions have value? Some OT (debugging), too broad.
@hichris123 no
@hichris123 mostly they don't
@hichris123 My first question was not crap.
@JanDvorak Eh, that's debatable.
@bjb568 [reference-needed]
10:02 PM
@bjb568 Mine wasn't actually either. But my second was. ;P
@JanDvorak They ask ok to meh questions which are salvageable. (and crap which isn't)
@JanDvorak (some of my questions are from account merge)
Ugh. I'm trying to find a Shog quote.
Q: How can I make an svg scale with its parent container?

bjb568I want to have an inline svg element's contents scale when size is non-native. Of course I could have it as a separate file and scale it like that. index.html: <img src="foo.svg" style="width: 100%;" /> foo.svg: <svg width="123" height="456"></svg> However, I want to add additional styles to t...

20 votes!
@JanDvorak Gigagram?
10:06 PM
good game
k... nice
Oh. What game?
the Rep Hunter 2k
… now with socks?
@bjb568 Before I decline all of these, let me first warn you not to abuse the flagging system. These flags are a complete waste of our time, and you appear to be using them to farm helpful flags.
10:13 PM
@BradLarson Your time? They can be handled by the LQRQ.
… which handles them properly.
"Very low quality" on a question should only come on one that requires immediate removal, not on questions that already have close votes on them. Those flags are pointless for things that the community is already acting on.
Why would I want to farm flags anyway?
@BradLarson That's what you say, but other people say other things about the use of it.
If the question gets handled outside the queue, it will be removed from the queue anyways, won't it?
I do truly and honestly believe that all those questions are very low quality and unsalvageable, which I think is Shog's definition.
Q: Why won't my button run my javascript

Justin WheelerHi im having trouble figuring out why my button will not work below is my code any help is appreciated. basically once i hit button it should either print story with typed in words or if a spot is left blank story doesnt show and box thats missing characters is surrounded with red border thanks. ...

You flagged this. It may not be a great question, but it has code, a problem statement, and what they're trying to do.
10:16 PM
I wish they'd just change or get rid of the VLQ flag already so the constant banter about it can stop.
till the time Shog makes the machine that turns crap into gold
This is not something that requires immediate removal.
@BradLarson way too much code, in fact
Also, "won't work" isn't a problem statement
Even the desired behavior description isn't very clear
@BradLarson Would it be safe to say that if an existing close vote reason accurately covers a question, then it is definitely not a case for a VLQ flag?
@BradLarson Unclear. To address everything, Too Broad. Offtopic/13 reason (no clear problem statement or minimal code).
10:18 PM
@BradLarson What does then?
@BradLarson What "requires immediate removal"? Only abuse?
Do only unanswered questions need immediate closure?
There's no way it can be edited into something good without changing the fundamental meaning of it.
In fact, it hasn't been closed until now. Were it not for the tavern, it never would. Roomba ignores open questions. Also, I'd hate to have four closevotes rot on that
^^ (which is currently… not a whole lot)
10:20 PM
@JasonC Yes, if a standard close reason applies, use a close vote. I see very little in terms of questions that "very low quality" applies to. Frankly, the I and the rest of the moderators want to see "very low quality" removed as a flag option on questions. It has use cases on answers (gibberish, etc.), but you don't often see complete gibberish in questions.
Complete gibberish is the abuse flag!
My point is the LQRQ handles it in a way that improves the quality of the site. And your handling doesn't do that which is what I don't get.
Given that the community can only dispute, not decline, these flags, people have realized that they can shotgun them on anything they see without penalty in an attempt to farm helpful flags.
IOW, the VLQ flag on questions should never be used once you can CV instead?
@BradLarson Great, so, @Shog9, can you please update whatever the heck answers people keep referring to that you posted about VLQ flags to include that ^^^ , so people can stop quoting you then bickering about it?
@BradLarson then have the community decline them instead of disputing?
Anything can be abused
10:22 PM
@BradLarson I don't see any motivation for farming flags. I think it's more likely they think they're improving the site.
@bjb568 You don't. Others do
@bjb568 … and they are with the LQRQ being efficient at closing questions and deleting answers that moderators would do nothing on and the community unaided by queues would ignore.
@BradLarson I totally agree.
@bjb568 People do this all the time to game the badges. You should see what happens during a moderator election, too.
@bjb568 please note this essentially turns LQRQ into a second CVQ
@BradLarson People answer all the time to game reputation. Should answering be forbidden?
10:24 PM
@BradLarson Well… I've already got gold, so that doesn't apply to me.
Not that we haven't tried, but there's only so much I can downvote
@JanDvorak Meh, that isn't that bad, it's useful to have a queue of the worst stuff out of the overflowing unhandled CV queue.
@bjb568 yet
Well, I'll complain on meta again about how I can't review 100 items in there then.
Because I would.
@bjb568 inb4 "have a life"
10:27 PM
@bjb568 my best recommendation is to get a life. j/k! Or am I??? :D <3 <3 <3 :PCupcake May 10 at 18:32
@BradLarson I'm sorry, but "X is often abused => X a bad feature" is just not a valid argument
112 is often abused
7 is too
@JanDvorak It is, if the feature is not acting as it should and causes way more noise than signal.
We don't let 1-rep users comment because the potential for abuse at present would far outweigh the advantages.
10:29 PM
@BradLarson But if the signal is really important (like with the asking a new question feature), that's irrelevant.
But before VLQ flags are removed (which doesn't seem to be going to happen), should legitimate use be punished?
… especially if right now the LQRQ's handling of them causes a net-positive for the site?
@bjb568 You should post an answer to Brad's post
@bjb568 LQRQ just speeds up the closing of a question. Ask yourself this: would any of those questions actively harm the site if they were not deleted or closed immediately?
@hichris123 Absolutely. They are broken windows.
10:33 PM
(no, broken windows does not apply here. Because then you would flag every question that should be VTC as VLQ)
@bjb568 ^
@JanDvorak To Hide “not an answer” and “very low quality” flags in the moderator flag queue? How's it related?
@hichris123 *(and the deletion of answers)
Even if we expand the usage of low quality flags to a broader class of things than just "this needs to be deleted immediately", what's to prevent them from just turning into a way of queue-jumping over the close votes queue? Does the low quality review queue just take over everything?
@Sam Eh, true. But answers are a lot more important than questions in terms of immediate deletion; users from Google usually see crappy answers a ton more than crappy questions.
@hichris123 No, making the LQRQ the CV queue wouldn't improve the handling of questions. Making the LQRQ the worst of the CV queue (the… low quality questions…) will improve the handling of questions which removes the broken windows better.
10:34 PM
That's a genuine question, and one I've thought about. The low quality reviews work, but do we want to shove everything in there? What's the limit for that?
@bjb568 where do you draw the line?
I'd say, LQRQ = obviously closeworthy
@BradLarson Uh… "what if we make things like <describes how it is currently>?" Nothing.
@hichris123 True.
CVQ = closeworthy if you don't mind actually reading the question and understanding it
@JanDvorak Something which either cannot be edited by me-with-infinite-time into something that I'd upvote or something that an edit that would bring it from its current state to its ideal sate would be one I'd reject for conflicting with the author's intention.
10:36 PM
My suggestion: If you need to spend more than 15 seconds, it's CV-worthy, otherwise it's VLQ
^ Yup.
@JanDvorak Meh. That brings to mind all tool-recs, general computing questions, some too broad and unclear...
@hichris123 Indeed. I'd shove them to LQRQ
VLQ is currently defined as something that isn't likely salvageable via editing
Another suggestion: VLQ = doesn't need knowledge of the topic to determine closeworthiness
10:38 PM
@JanDvorak The name VLQ has to go though.
@SecondRikudo We'd need to narrow that down in order to keep LQRQ useful
@hichris123 Those can sometimes be VLQ. But an old tool request that isn't too demanding that uses proper english and is generally good besides that it's off-topic is obviously just off-topic and not VLQ. VLQ questions have low quality besides being obviously close worthy.
@SecondRikudo why?
@bjb568 still worth dumping into the tavern
@JanDvorak Because "Very Low Quality" is not a good name for a flag.
@JanDvorak It's kind of confusing.
@JanDvorak Of course. But I'd CV not LQ it.
10:40 PM
Flagged because "I don't like it enough"
Closed for "me no likey"
A: Am I misusing the "Very Low Quality" flag?

Shog9Use VLQ for obvious, unarguable garbage. Regardless of whether or not it ends up in /review or the mod queue (and most of the time, it'll end up in both at least for a little while...) VLQ flags on questions that should be closed just create unnecessary overhead - someone else has to spend more...

I'll just leave this here. Gotta go.
A: Am I misusing the "Very Low Quality" flag?

TheolodisI am feeling the way you do, whenever a question is really just garbage, I tend to prefer the low-quality flag for a broader audience. Yesterday I marked the question Using Web Sources in WP8 apps [on hold] as low quality and it got declined, but closed as too broad. The message I got was ...

@bjb568 "an old tool request that isn't too demanding that uses proper english and is generally good besides that it's off-topic" can still be a spam magnet and needs to be dealt with
What's particularly horrifying is when the VLQ flag is declined then the mod insta-deletes the question.
@JanDvorak Not "What's a great code editor that has beautiful code folding and colors and would make your daily life more productive?" being "not low quality". That's VLQ as spam magnet. But if it's harmless and unpoked since 2009 and not awful, it wouldn't constitute VLQ. And I think the preventing of VLQ flag when there is positive score mostly helps.
10:42 PM
@BradLarson so, 15-second rule?
@bjb568 examples or it didn't happen
@bluefeet Asking a non-mod to find examples of a deleted question isn't really fair though :P
@bjb568 You know that answer doesn't support your argument for VLQ flags at all.
@bluefeet ^
@bjb568 Mods can see your flag history, you know.
10:45 PM
@SecondRikudo Tell that to bluefeet.
@bjb568 not deleted by a mod
@bluefeet Ah, I can't tell, but I remember at the time it was deleted soon after the declining of my flag.
@bjb568 But still not insta-deleted by a mod
@bjb568 get 10k
10:46 PM
@JasonC How?
@bjb568 some askers like to delete immediately after closure
@bjb568 It could still be very quickly removed by users.
@bjb568 those were removed by community via roomba
or that.
10:47 PM
@bjb568 What do you mean how? The guy tells how he used a VLQ flag, it got declined, the question was closed, and he became no longer confident in his choice of a VLQ flag. That's... not helpful to you.
#1 deleted with the question
@bjb568 community or self-delete
#2 roomba'd
10:49 PM
They're all awful anyway.
@bjb568 Question deleted, system, system, op, system, system
@bjb568 Ok... so you lost confidence in your use of VLQ flags. Then, proper use was addressed, as above. Now you can be confident in your decisions to not use the flags when you can CV instead. So accept that and move on already.
Haaay, Community is a mod!
@SecondRikudo #1 is deletion by question deletion
@bjb568 But none required mod intervention.
10:50 PM
@JasonC But there are conflicting views so now I flag according to the most-reasonable view.
@bjb568 I don't see a lot of conflict...
@Andy No, they don't. Exactly right. Mods shouldn't handle VLQ/NAA.
@Andy Then I'd like something that shoves the question into LQRQ without also annoying the mods
@JasonC Shog says VLQ unsalvageable questions. Which is what I follow.
10:51 PM
@bjb568 But they do currently and that is what your declined flags are telling you.
Also so far none of the questions in your previous list needed VLQ flags... they were all either about to be closed, or deleted by the OP.
@Andy I have quite a lot of helpful flags countering that.
@bjb568 I think you misunderstand what unsalvageable means.
@bjb568 No, Shog says, and I quote: "VLQ flags on questions that should be closed just create unnecessary overhead". That's pretty clear.
10:52 PM
@JasonC were they? The one quoted by Brad was closed by me, only after Brad quoted it
@JasonC Well, VLQ would attract more attention but would die away as they're closed/deleted.
@JanDvorak (^ and ^^) Also that
@bjb568 ???
@JasonC I think that's true for the ones I flagged.
@JanDvorak (^ and ^^) references both the one above and the one two above. My post and yours.
@JanDvorak Yes. 1. Answer deleted with question. 2. Closed as unclear. 3. 4 closevotes. 4. Deleted by OP. 5. Closed as no-code.
Not a single one of those needed a VLQ flag to help it take its natural course.
@hichris123 "impossible to retrieve or preserve from " without abusing the edit system and wasting time.
10:55 PM
@bjb568 Give it up, man.
Are y'all seriously having an argument over what I said and comparing quotes to back up your side?
… yeah.
@Shog9 Sort of.
@JasonC #1 would need a VLQ flag were not the question deleted - and you can't tell in advance when a mod swoops in
(and make the flag description clear)
10:56 PM
@bjb568 please don't shout
@JanDvorak :P
@JanDvorak Smokey is going to catch him someday!
@JanDvorak #1 is not a solid case at all. NAA (link-only) flags would have gotten that answer, or enough down-votes that it just didn't matter any more.
whispers in italic
flag your conscience.
10:56 PM
@JasonC NAA and VLQ end in the same places
But, if it helps, here's the advice I gave a SO mod a while back
@bjb568 Yeah just make sure when you tell us, you tell us what bjb wants to hear.
... and 3 and a half hours later VS 2013 Community has only installed 7 out of 101 components...
> If you're drawing a distinction between close and delete when handling VLQ, you're probably over-thinking them. If it doesn't warrant you stepping in to delete, it probably doesn't warrant you taking the time to close either - the community can handle those. If your immediate reaction is "NO! BAD! AWFUL!" then the flag is correct, regardless of which action you take.
> If it's so bad that you'd be OK just deleting it, then... VLQ is correct. More downvotes are helpful. Etc. Even if you do close instead of outright deleting.
But mods are anti-deletionist! [serious]
10:57 PM
@Shog9 Nope. My Shog9 quote disagrees with your Shog9 quote.
@Shog9 can we have a community-only VLQ flag, then?
Have fun guys. Night!
Later @Sam
IOW, if you're flagging things as VLQ you don't honestly expect to make the mods reflexively reach for the delete button (while throwing up a little bit), you're probably doing it wrong.
The LQRQ seems to be handling these questions well
10:59 PM
All that being said, that's not really how folks use VLQ on questions
@JanDvorak the problem is that people use the flag wrong especially on questions
@Shog9 Isn't that just abuse/spam mostly then?
@bluefeet And you're saying the LQRQ handles them wrong too?
cue: rename VLQ in questions to "delete this" flag
Which means one of two things should happen:
1) remove it entirely (but lose the signal)
2) do something else with the signal (don't put it in front of moderators)
@bjb568 the review queue disputes doesn't decline so there is no indication that you were wrong
11:00 PM
I vote for #2
My interpretation of what the flag means to folks thus far boils down to "I hate this, why did you show this to me?"
Therefore, the correct action is to alter the status of the post such that it isn't shown readily.
@bluefeet But are you saying their approval of them is in a large amount of cases incorrect, and it should have been "Looks OK"'d?
@Shog9 Which means delete!
Or a "softer" delete.
It could mean delete...
@Shog9 What it means to folks is "very low quality", which is what you guys named the flag. For reasons that boggle the mind, no surprises in interpretation were expected with that great name.
11:01 PM
Also #2, BTW.
@bjb568 I'm saying that since there is no punishment (decline) from the review queue people throw the VLQ on everything - even stuff that doesn't need it.
@bjb568 "softer" delete?
and yet LQRQ reviewers can't delete questions from the queue
Also "softer" and "#2" don't go hand-by-hand.
@bluefeet But would you say?
11:02 PM
@Shog9 how many of those flags end up with the question being closed faster?
Anyway, I'm leaving…
and deleted?
@JanDvorak there we go - there's the problem. Right now, delete for questions means close, then either get 20K users involved, or wait 2 days and get 10K users involved, or wait 9 days and let the system remove it.
... unless two rep-whores chime in in the mean time
...or get mods involved since they can delete immediately without closing.
11:03 PM
@Shog9 Hmm, I could get behind that. Although I'm not sure it would really be a flag anymore... it's more like a notification to the system (not the community) that the question sucks.
I would love to see a few months with the VLQ flag removed, then a few months with it back, and a comparison of time and number for closed/deleted questions between the two.
Only the last one - getting mods involved - works to satisfy folks' expectations.
@hichris123 the close flag works that way, so it isn't novel
And yet, we've already established that mods won't delete unless it's actually garbage sickening horri-bad.
So, we have need of a third path
one that will quickly remove things from view
@Braiam But close flags put the question in front of users, not the system like Shog proposes.
11:04 PM
but won't require mods
flags tavern as VLQ, expects delete
This room was placed in timeout for 5 seconds; the topic of this room is "MY GOD, IT'S FULL OF STARS! Wheel of blame link bolted on for your ease of use: jsfiddle.net/AYPpF/82/embedded/result/"; - conversation should be limited to that topic.
Jason C gets softer delete instead
LIES! for me was like 1 second
That may be the greatest thing you've ever done.
@Shog9 So... our room topic is talking about the stars & blaming people for things going wrong?
11:05 PM
Also, this is all your fault
a Tavern without beer isn't a Tavern... nuff said
@Shog9 Well, should I do a $(".leave").click()?
So far, I'm wildly happy with now VLQ and NAA flags are working for answers - even answers that would require 20K users to delete under normal circumstances get quickly removed by low-rep users, but removed without prejudice - they can be restored by the author if they so desire.
beer sounds good. Is it 5 O'Clock somewhere yet?
@hichris123 -1 too much jQuery
@Shog9 It's 6:07 here.
11:07 PM
It's midnight where I am
y'all are not helpful
@JanDvorak You should totally drop downvotes and try jQuery.
@hichris123 Eastern time reperzent!
Beer is an alcoholic beverage produced by the saccharification of starch and fermentation of the resulting sugar. The starch and saccharification enzymes are often derived from malted cereal grains, most commonly malted barley and malted wheat. Most beer is also flavoured with hops, which add bitterness and act as a natural preservative, though other flavourings such as herbs or fruit may occasionally be included. The preparation of beer is called brewing. Beer is the world's most widely consumed alcoholic beverage, and is the third-most popular drink overall, after water and tea. It is thought...
@Shog9 isn't it 5 there?
11:08 PM
So, we just need a conceptually equivalent path for questions - one available to low-rep users, one that's fast, and one that allows authors to lift it easily if they actually care even a little bit.
It's 6:07 and I have a lot of scotch on my shelf; does that count
@hichris123 I have tried jQuery. Turns out I didn't need it.
^ updated
@JasonC I'm on the other side of the timezone compared to you, though. ;)
@JanDvorak -1 you obviously didn't work hard enough.
11:09 PM
I'm mildly disconcerted that "united states" keeps being shortened to US rather than USA. Now, if they start shortening Europe to THEM, that will be bad
@Braiam that image is wildly out of date time
@JanDvorak is accurate for me... so your problem is local
It shows late evening for Europe. It's midnight here.
@JanDvorak you sure?
@Braiam OK... it shows early evening here
In my cache, midnight points to the "A" in "India"
@JanDvorak Yes
11:18 PM
I believe I should blame my ISP
btw @TimPost may forgot to translate the rate limit screen meta.pt.stackoverflow.com/q/2221/15023
@Braiam plox? :P
How does that wiki have to do with the word "plox"?
@hichris123 because plox?
11:55 PM
Was watching a movie and missed all the drama... For the record, I totally misuse VLQ when I'm out of CVs and I want to push some really bad question into CV queue. But it has to be worse than an average closable question for that.
How's y'all?
I think this is the only time I use VLQ on a question. And I would not need to do that if SE allowed using closeflags after running out of CVs. But that request was declined by you-know-who.

« first day (1561 days earlier)      last day (3536 days later) »