May I just say, I find the "we've already discussed this to death" thing to be... off-putting. Some people haven't. Some people are new to the discussion and this is the first time they get to speak their mind after they've been told to "take it to chat" on meta.
Your first message in a room looking to stir up drama (and it doesn't need to mean to) is a bit of showstopper
If I entered The Nineteenth Byte and went all "I don't meant to insult anyone folks, but is there a reasonable way to code golf?", with no context, it's probably going to ruffle up feathers even if I just intended to understand the whole thing innocuously
@House-'ReinstateMonica'-man At some point, there comes a time when there is nothing to be gained by continuing to discuss a topic. Everyone in the room is sick of the topic, and frankly, there's no need for everyone say something. We don't need thousands of people all giving their two cents here. At some point, a topic has to take a break.
If the topic is brought up again, I won't discourage it but just not participate in it unless it's something that hasn't already been said and it doesn't smell like the discussion will end in messages being trashed (rightfully)
@House-'ReinstateMonica'-man Alright, well, let's just say I'd be really skeptical if someone new came in and started a discussion like that EVEN if I agree with them.
user245382
I like MAR's solution of just not discouraging or participating
Seems easier to just not answer. I mean, if anyone doesn't want to be drawn in, just don't get involved. That way, those users, if any, who aren't exhausted and haven't had the same conversation N times can have their own N+1th conversation.
listening to everyone is kinda a core thing of keeping a community going, and sometimes that means not discussing a topic you want to out of respect for others who don't want to
@House-'ReinstateMonica'-man At some point, there comes a time when there is nothing to be gained by continuing to discuss a topic. Everyone in the room is sick of the topic, and frankly, there's no need for everyone say something. We don't need thousands of people all giving their two cents here. At some point, a topic has to take a break.
@user58's position is absolutely understandable. But this being the room it is, I just think that if someone wants to discuss the #1 topic on meta, then that should happen. If nobody else wants to, they can just ignore whoever is trying to start the conversation.
@terdon come in with simple curiosity, a request for an update on the situation or whatever, and this room generally will entertain your discussion, as happened a couple of times over the last few days.
@Bart Oh sure, I'm not defending the way the aborted attempt was phrased.
I just don't want there to be a situation where just because the regulars are all talked out, the main and most active room is no longer allowing the discussion.
I do not want to allow this room to simply reiterate the same topic over and over again for weeks at a time. That will kill the room and only make the room turn toxic (similar to what I describe in my latest MSE answer). To preserve the health of the room, I strongly feel that there comes a time where there needs to be period of time without beating the same dead horse.
@user58 I can understand that desire, but as long as the topic remains unresolved, I don't see how you (general you) could reasonably block discussing it here.
Alright, is it just me, or is the Welcome Wagon's push for new user inclusivity, and the following more vocal voices on meta defending new user "rights", has ended up with way more outright insults directed at the veteran users than ever before? I don't mean criticism, I mean insults.
@user1306322 things like this that don't change are usually a carved-in-stone thing. You need a good reason, and whether on-topicness is one is debatable
the question basically asks "what approach do I pick" and has programming language tags but no code, and answers propose "use a webcam" or "check for mouse movements"
This experiment has concluded and the affected settings have been restored to their previous values.
Results are available here.
-- Shog9, 2019-09-07
For the next 30 days, we'll be running an experiment on Stack Overflow: the threshold for closing or reopening a question will be set a...
if it can happen without hindering the process, sure, why not
Closing sooner speeds up closure and makes voting to close feel more impactful. It also potentially increases the number of posts wrongfully closed, though i'd argue that's less of an issue.
@KevinB I'd argue it'd make wrongful closures more visible, not necessary quantitatively more (if people adapt to it)
The number of "accidental" closures because of fast pace should be low, unless something else becomes at play
For that, we have to consider what psychological effects come at play when folks arrive at a -4 question when voting to close, vs. arriving at -1 or +1.
do users normally contact other reviewers if they see enough bogus review actions?
I remember noticing some users who never used chat approve weird edits that should not have been approved, and couldn't call them into chat to ask what that was all about
It could help the thinkgroup type of closure happen less (as would fewer votes to close), but it could also mean the line gets fuzzier and people wouldn't put enough thought into considering every question for too long
@user1306322 More often than not it's someone you don't know and I don't think people take such risks SO-scale. Maybe SE-site scale yes, because there a few well-known members handle the curation at a time
I poked someone a dozen times at least to stop making crappy edits a while back. I tried reject+edit, comment, chat ping (the one time they joined), probably a bunch of other things
They just got tired of the damage they made and moved on.
@user1306322 Well, sure, you see, I'm chill about it. I'm not angry. I"M NOT ANGRY
@SonictheReinstateMonica-hog psst. "I'll try to remember" doesn't always mean "please ping me". Some people may find it helpful. Others may find it rude.
interestingly, I was looking for "flip table", and the dialog said it was not found... along with an flip table ascii. such troll. very amaze. much angery windoze
I just made a suggestion about the moderator reinstatement/removal process: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/336177/… and would be open to feedback (and votes), but it has fallen off the front page, so it is likely no one will see it.
user310756
a new answer will kick it to the active question page
This experiment has concluded and the affected settings have been restored to their previous values.
Results are available here.
-- Shog9, 2019-09-07
For the next 30 days, we'll be running an experiment on Stack Overflow: the threshold for closing or reopening a question will be set a...
