Well, I'm just a native speaker well grown with my idiom, high speech and english decades later to gain more perfection. I believe I can be helpful to solve some language misunderstandings. (@rene)
@TimPost thank you, hopefully people will just ignore it now. It seems to have triggered some strong emotions based on the downvotes. As mentioned earlier it's also made me less likely to contribute because of how violently it was rejected.
@TimPost and yet entirely consistent with how downvotes on meta are used. They are used to vote on the emotional appeal of the proposal or question and not on the merit
This whole "voting on meta works differently" hasn't held up at scale very well. I think we need to be a little more specific about how it should be different, and maybe think about being more deliberate about what we want to express, which means maybe looking at a voting system on meta that goes beyond the up / no vote / down schema that we have.
Well, if you've been around for a while and remember when all we had was user voice, meta was like OH WOW I TOTALLY CAN'T BELIEVE JEFF CAVED AND SET UP A META SITE, so we were really happy to make due with what we had there, even if it meant scratching our heads when folks would down vote and not write an answer to explain what they didn't like (which was pretty uniformly customary and followed).
But the folks wanting to interact there these days are not that original audience, and aren't as accepting of the wonky work-arounds we put in place to make meta .. well .. 'work'.
Heck, many people don't even know about those wonky work arounds.
So essentially, I think loving meta means making sure we poke it occasionally to make sure it's still meeting our goals, and remind ourselves to occasionally talk about what those goals are and why we have 'em.
@rene Is it a duplicate then? Has the question already been asked? (I'm taking your answer to mean the FR was not well written, badly researched, and thus has no merit in even asking)
I would propose this: the normal set of votes would be used solely to indicate quality, as they are for main sites and support questions on meta sites, while we would introduce a new, separate set of "agreement/disagreement" votes that wouldn't affect reputation in any way.
@M.A.R. I think this would make things simpler. While the overall code would be more complex and it would be just a teeny bit more complex for NTs used to the current system, it would make things much simpler for AS people and perhaps for newer NTs. Regular votes would just be for quality, nothing else, everywhere. A separate set of dis/agreement votes would make things simpler to understand and not an outright mess for people like me.
I've been seeing a different phenomenon: when a question (in general, not just on meta) has a negative score, people tend to judge it more negatively than if it had a zero score.
@rene I stand by my rebuttal votes on meta shouldn't be emotional votes. They should be votes based on the criteria in the help center. This isn't about popularity, this is about making clear why the community did something.
On meta, I've seen users see negative votes and simply not be bothered to read through the post and decide its worthy of an upvote. So if your post receives a couple of downvotes immediately, it's very unlikely that it will later be upvoted.
> There was a serious flaw in code published and positively promoted at your website and our spaceship crashed. Is there a way you could agree to participate with our losses? -Elon Musk-
If you provide a person with a way to say both "this post is of low quality" and "I disagree with this proposal", you're likely to find that folks who disagree with your proposal also believe it is of poor quality
It's like the handful of folks in the SOCVR who talk endlessly about which flags to use on things, debating the philosophies and mechanics behind them...
...vs the majority of flags on SO, raised by folks who only flag one or two things a month tops, and are picked based on what sounds right in the moment
With 2-voting system, soon there will be a term "Downvote magnet by upvote" on meta, where you upvote an unpopular feature request to get it downvoted more.
if you want something like this to work, you have to look at the mental models of the folks who are voting. The way the options present themselves matter far more than what they actually do
Also... It's a super bad idea to discuss your own posts in the context of such a discussion, since you & me & Sterling over here are all human and thus perversely blind to our own faults.
You might be able to identify what's problematic in someone else's proposal, or report, or support request... The chance that you'll be able to see it in your own - even if it is pointed out to you - is slim.
> I want to like it, but I keep having to quit Reddit and delete my account based on the terribad combination of opinions + downvoting. Particularly dispiriting on small subreddits; they need an "upvotes only" mode for subs. -- Jeff Atwood at 3:54 PM - 3 May 2018
@SterlingArcher I can control my car reasonably well when sitting in the driver's seat. Less well when sitting in the passenger seat. Even less when when sitting in the passenger seat while my wife sits behind the wheel. Communication becomes a much bigger concern as the potential for control diminishes.
It is our duty to remember that we are not gods, able to bend others to our will; we are not even legislators, commanding an army with a pen... We are mostly (and primarily!) tool-makers, and should strive to make tools that will be put to good use, observing their effects in order to build better replacements when and while we are yet privileged to do so.
@Shog9 communication is great, but some people (not saying y'all) don't know when to stop. I'm just worried about the bystanders alienated by all of this
The ones who have been here many many years, scared to comment or vote because they have to tiptoe around red tape, and worry about their comments being taken out of context, etc.
@SterlingArcher this is where the notion that we can fix any problem by just adding more rules to the game falls apart. There are already more rules than anyone can remember; this is the source of much of the frustration on all sides. Folks just want stuff to work, and obvious paths to fixing it when it doesn't.
Their purpose is to reassure participants that the game is fair and that referees are standing by. To this end, they should not neglect what to do when you observe poor sportsmanship, nor try to replace refereeing with an exhaustive list of potential fouls.
Failure to remember this results in a document that is used by participants to beat each other with, rather than one which they strive to abide by.
@Shog9 I'd actually be interested in what percentage of users actually use flags at all... I've seen people mention that they're unaware flagging is even an option.
Was there a reason to prohibit users under 15 rep from flagging? Fear of flag abuse? I think I saw a proposal to at least allow users to flag content on their own posts/answers to their questions...
@SterlingArcher LEDs can get hot, particularly if they aren't as efficient as some of the more expensive ones. Phillips has 120 Lumen/W design but I don't know if it's commercial yet
@Shog9 If I have delete privileges, can I vote to delete my downvoted accepted answer like any other high-rep user or am I also prevented from voting to delete in addition to not being able to just delete it myself?
This whole "voting on meta works differently" hasn't held up at scale very well. I think we need to be a little more specific about how it should be different, and maybe think about being more deliberate about what we want to express, which means maybe looking at a voting system on meta that goes beyond the up / no vote / down schema that we have.
Good point: there's still a chance that GDPR will just bring the entire network down and solve all our problems. Best not get too enthusiastic about other solutions.
Is Stack Exchange making any changes in preparation for GDPR? What will the procedures be in order to comply with this regulation?
The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) (EU) 2016/679 is a regulation in EU law on data protection and privacy for all individuals within the European Union...
Why wouldn't they? It's not like GDPR introduces something that would harm competitive advantage. If you do business with EU Citizens you have to deal with GDPR
@Shog9 I can assure you that most of my customers (mostly councils) done less to prepare then you did and I'm the one who is going to take the penalty when they are confronted with GDPR related claims.
@canon that, or feel free to drop in SOCVR and have the regulars there have a look. They also have enough 20K-ers around in case deletion is warranted.
StackExchange's image upload tool is very handy, and I especially like that you can just give it a url to get an image that's already on the internet. But there's a problem when trying to get png versions of svg images from Wikimedia Commons; it appears, though I can't say with confidence, that t...
I'm trying to get the highlighting on the last code block to be lang-none here but it looks like it doesn't pick it up due to it being in a citation markup as well?
@Shog9 if I flagged this post with a custom flag stating that, "While this looks like an answer, it makes no attempt to answer the question. It cobbles together bits from other, established answers and still fails to address the question." ... would you accept that flag or reject it?
I have to imagine that a flag is overkill. Still, that post irks me.
Is Stack Exchange making any changes in preparation for GDPR? What will the procedures be in order to comply with this regulation?
The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) (EU) 2016/679 is a regulation in EU law on data protection and privacy for all individuals within the European Union...
