@FinalContest ... so? Can't you bounty it? (and it doesn't matter if it's reported on a billion per-site metas... honestly I'm confused why you're creating a bug report knowing that it's already been reported)
NO
Ask the question on the site you think is most applicable. If, like in this case, it does not get any answer, ask a moderator to migrate the question, or alternatively, delete it and re-ask it.
Each site is focused on a specific topic area. If you have a question you feel is too ambiguous, e...
but you are free to point out any bugreport which is "duplicated", theoretically speaking, it really is not, that got 3 downvotes within such a short while. Good luck with that, I think you will have very hard task.
well, I do not care, it is just causing more work for moderators.
@Braiam Well I think the main problem of that question was that he already knew there was a duplicate but posted a duplicate question anyways, but I can't re-read/or improve his question since he deleted it.
@FinalContest so if the majority starts a mob over an incorrect assumption you'd follow them.. better to stand on principals than what everyone else is doing
If a bug needs to be fixed, it doesn't matter if it's at +50 or -50, it's gonna be fixed. Similarly, if it's by design, it doesn't matter if the report has a score of +200. Higher score helps attract attention, sure, but that's about it.
And it is not really about just bugreports, but also further additions in comments which gained no further upvotes.... come on, you cannot really say this system is not fundamentally broken or objective rather than subjective.
Would I prefer it if you reported the issues you saw? Definitely. Am I going to try to convince you to do it? No. You're welcome to participate as much or as little as you want.
@FinalContest it's a freaking bug report. It's META. It's useless rep. Stop freaking caring and just post whatever you want to post. And then MOVE ON! ... And if all that is too much for you, just don't Meta. Stay away from it. Do whatever it is you enjoy doing on the site.
@Andy: a friendly reminder still goes before going the law-way.
I think it is fair that way.
the moderator and community management team could not manage it so far. If the main management team will not be able either, the law has to come, sadly.
user102937
5:37 PM
In other news, turns out that Stack Exchange doesn't have unlimited resources after all. Just like every other software shop.
You're here every single day @FinalContest. So you know full well that there are plenty of employees roaming around here. Why not ping one of them and ask for a status update?
yeah, deleting comments for downvote reasons are more important topics than license violation, I agree, Robert. I would like to friendly remind you that moderators have been rejecting flags that the "team" suggested and it's been a month without fixing things. I think this is a valid limit to wait for.
@FinalContest your meta account is again scheduled for deletion. This will remove your name from anything you've written there. If you honestly want your stuff anonymized, consider this done. If you're just here to make trouble, then cancel the deletion and STFU.
yes, after the disassociation it became "normal flow". Before that, it had two downvotes to start with (without content change, of course). How do you explain this, honestly?
@AnnaLear: after the moderator brought the topic to him, yes.
before that, he was proud of his downvote when I asked why. He said he could not reproduce blabla, not that he could after the disassociation and moderator-talk, right?
I just came across several user deletions the last couple of days in my history.
I am not much concerned about the reputation, but for sure, score is a type of measure on Stack Overflow how good a post is.
The help center says:
This message means that a user who voted for one of your posts ...
@FinalContest I understood your comment as Are there more bug reports that get downvotes while still being valid/legit bugs-reports to either support or defeat your point that you're victimized, whatever that means.
Currently, when a moderator deletes a user all of the user's votes are removed along with the user himself. I was pretty surprised at this behaviour when I first heard about it, and I don't think it is a good idea to throw away all of the votes just because the user is deleted.
Votes are locked ...
@FinalContest I can't prove subjectivity. I won't assume subjectivity. And, correct me if I'm wrong, but you've pointed out subjectivity to moderators or the team and the response was "no such evidence"?
@FinalContest There's no accounting for voting. On the level of your meta question and on the level of the main site, there's no way to know why people vote. But I do have to say I had to read the comments and your feature request to understand it was about post score and not reputation. (That's probably because the two are very closely linked.)
@Braiam: I do not learn anything from fact-free throwing either, I am afraid.
@JonEricson: honestly?
"I agree about the reputation removal if it is a fake account in question. However, if it is not, I am proposing not to remove the scores. Since scores are a valuable measure of the posts, I am personally inclined to think that these ought to remain around for user removal."
how is it not clear that I am talking about scores?
feel free to propose better wording because it goes beyond my league why that is not clear that I am referring to scores..
So, yeah... Final is ignoring me here, so none of this is for his benefit...
But for the record - because he's stating this stuff publicly - I and several other members of the community team have invested a considerable amount of time and effort into investigating these reports of voting fraud, taken action where it was warranted, and responded honestly when there was no evidence. We're quite frankly sick of him crying wolf and refusing to believe any words that are not coming from inside his own head.
8
If I see him wasting one more employee's time here chasing ghosts, he's gonna be asked to take a break.
@JonEricson: I kindly hoped for discussing the edit first here. I do not agree with it completely, and of course it will gain further downvotes as it is marked with my name. I really wished to disassociate it first. It was already flagged.
@JonEricson: I will do that if you do not wish to discuss the edit as I do not agree with it in its current form (like help center removal).
Even the appreciate the willingness, it was not the right move to bump it before the disassociation. I am kind of sad about this edit due to that plan. Of course, it further gained another downvote even with the "new edit".
This is a revisit of Are certain users favored the opportunity to review posts? that seems to have grown stale without any solid answer.
Just recently I was baffled by a user's ability to review a "First Post" almost 6 hours after it had been reviewed previously:
In my experience, certain rev...
ah, who would have thought Bart is the first in a few seconds to complain about downvotes, even though it is valid and explained :D
"Just move on", yeah, right, hypocrisy ...
@hichris123: huh? You strongly claimed yourself as an Android expert and you got attention to a clearly very beginner Android/Programming question. Be careful what an expert means; that is my advice. Even you yourself requested the deletion of that rubbish question.
yeah, and 8-9 months raised you an expert, I see. =) I read some of the other "expert" posts, but I just decided not to act on that to avoid fraudulently and validly explained downvotes.
@ColeJohnson: bmb seems to be a software development manager, so he is probably bullet-proof against offensive posts and tries to actually focus on the point which is the right spirit IMHO.
@ColeJohnson: nah, they were criticizing the answer that has not got deleted or rewritten from scratch.
@AnnaLear: in short, I could not manage to get the requested posts disassociated, neither through the moderator team, nor the community team. Perhaps, they are not the right people to handle this aspect of SE. I trust Jay that he will be able to point me to the people that can assist with this being resolved.
that is pretty much the gist of my email and intention.
@rene Those aren't two branches, those are two different build configurations. They build off the same repo, but since meta also serves as a bit of a test environment/last sanity check before we push changes to all other sites, including SO, it tends to get built more frequently and its version # is different.
Under normal circumstances, the buildout process goes like this: push changes, wait for dev to build, make sure nothing exploded, build out to MSE, make sure nothing exploded, build out to everywhere else.
Sorry, but this does not seem to make sense to me, I am afraid. This answer got flagged as low-quality and it had negative scores. Yet it had been declined by the same reason. It is either "let us kick into Final again because we can", or even negatively scored link-only answer flags are declined like that if it gets into a moderator hand. — Final Contest1 min ago
and
Related: Cannot review anymore after 19 reviews
This is a revisit of Are certain users favored the opportunity to review posts? that seems to have grown stale without any solid answer.
Just recently I was baffled by a user's ability to review a "First Post" almost 6 hours after it had been reviewed previously:
In my experience, certain rev...
