@JourneymanGeek User Atul asked for a site recommendation in their question on Meta, but was piled on and closed OT. - If I could ping RobertC here I would have brought this up with him instead. Thanks for looking, and whatever you decide
@SonictheAnonymousHedgehog I don't have the ability to take screenshots, but I can post a copy.
It says it is a confidential and private communication. I would just like to clarify that that is for my sake, and that I am allowed to post a moderator message in public, before I do.
> We have cancelled your bounty on meta.stackexchange.com/q/314981/384528. Now that the issue you were discussing in chat (presumably why you started this bounty) has been cleared up, we see no need to keep highlighting this question. The original question was resolved a year ago.
The intention of the bounty "presumably why [...]" was assumed, and assumed incorrectly.
In particular, I don't see why "we see no need to keep highlighting this question" is a reason to cancel a bounty. It's my rep that I'm putting into it, and I do not believe there are limits on bounties as to whether or not they can only be created for questions that moderators feel a "need to keep highlighting".
As am I. I don't want to assume malice or censorship, so my first assumption is that it's a misunderstanding and moderators were just trying to be helpful so I don't waste rep.
Maybe someone else will bounty the question instead of me, if they see it...
@SonictheAnonymousHedgehog To clarify, will I need to worry about suspensions if I re-instate the bounty? It looks to me like staff were just trying to be helpful but misunderstood the bounty's intention. However if that's not the case and it turns out that it is not permissible to bounty "resolved" questions, then I don't want to go against the rules, even if I wasn't aware of them.
A user had put a bounty on this question. The bounty was later cleared by a moderator, who sent the user a private message citing the reason for revoking the bounty (supplied by the user in chat):
We have cancelled your bounty on [the question]. Now that the issue you were discussing in chat ...
@SonictheAnonymousHedgehog Regarding your last paragraph, there is no history of bounty abuse (or any site mechanic abuse, e.g. vote fraud). In fact, this is the first time this happened.
@JourneymanGeek I was not aware that bounties can only be awarded to answers which a moderator approves of as needing further views. Site rules concur.
@SonictheAnonymousHedgehog That is what I plan to do if that specific bounty isn't manually re-applied, although I would rather try to promote more input instead of simply rewarding an existing answer (since the "award an answer" bounty reason may discourage additional answers).
@forest Why not use one of the reasons that mention "current answers"? The "draw attention" reason is more for the case where no answers are being received.
But the fact of the matter is, I don't see an explicit policy basis that says it's not permitted to set bounties to draw attention to answered questions.
@JourneymanGeek I was trying to assume good intent, that moderators simply thought I had opened a bounty and regretted wasting rep. Is that not the case?
@JourneymanGeek My cynical self is telling me that the intent is "don't bring attention to problems in Stack Exchange", but you've told me not to assume bad intent, and I'm trying to do that.
@JourneymanGeek If there is a rule against bountying old questions or questions that mods don't personally feel should be highlighted, could you point me to them? I did look, but found nothing.
@JourneymanGeek I believe those are unhelpful. I wish to see them improved, or new answers to be posted. Would I be not permitted to downvote the answers either if I think they are unhelpful?
I was told in a new question I opened that I could bounty as I wish.
@JourneymanGeek You recommended that I should not, and I agreed with both you and Sonic and I'll wait for an answer to his question. I wasn't aware that I was told not to. Thanks.
@JourneymanGeek It's not exactly clear how that implies "please don't put another bounty on that question, for any reason". (I get it, but it took me multiple tries.)
@JourneymanGeek Please link to them. "We see no reason [...]" is a mod stating their opinion on whether or not the bounty is worth it. Is there a section of the message I missed?
@JourneymanGeek Perhaps then a clarifying message pointing me to the relevant rules should be posted. I do not want to violate any rules that I might not be aware of.
For future mod messages, if one wants an explicit action, just ask for it explicitly, rather than leaving an interpretation loophole that allows them to think of it a different (wrong) way.
Simple question: Is it or is it not permitted to award an existing answer via a bounty? If not, then I would like to read the rules which state when it is and is not permitted to award an answer.
And as an observer, I've pointed out two things: 1. that I don't see a policy basis or precedent for disallowing bounties in that case, and 2. that it's hard for someone to infer that the text being repeated here that another bounty is not allowed.
ON THE OTHER HAND, I do realise you're not good at picking up context. Which is literally "This was a mod message that was sent because someone bountied an old question that wasn't really something that ought to be dredged up again"
Clearly. It turns out that, if I don't understand a sentence the first time, repeating it verbatim is unhelpful. It's like the old joke where someone says something confusing, the reply is "what?", and they repeat the same confusing thing again, verbatim.
@forest You were told (now, in this chat) explicitly not to bounty that question. I'd stop right there and not try to argue around what specific text implies that, etc.
@forest You were told (now, in this chat) explicitly not to bounty that question. I'd stop right there and not try to argue around what specific text implies that, etc.
@JourneymanGeek OK, then don't say it, but reaffirm it (e.g. "that is correct" in reference to the above). Right now, I wish to avoid being pushed into a situation with a loophole where I am permitted to do something, but where a non-binding hint tries to dissuade me.
Sure, it's not your fault. You just haven't helped alleviate my confusion. Sonic tried, but when I asked you if you could affirm what he said, you said "Nope".
To me, the message could have meant two things. 1) "We thought you might have bountied this by mistake or you regret the bounty, so we're canceling it for you", or 2) "We don't want you to critique the site or bring up issues with the site, so we're going to censor any attempt to do so".
@JourneymanGeek I know it's not your intent. Your messages are quite general and helpful in negotiating general cases, but it would be nice if you also related them to the specific case.
I noticed that @Tinkeringbell was also in the mod message. Perhaps she could give me an explanation that makes more sense than quoting a confusing message?
I dunno if I should put in my 2¢ but I think the point being made is: "It is water under the bridge, apologies have been made, wounds have healed. So it is preferred that NO bounties (or other bumps) be placed there. Thanks for respecting this request."
This isn't like official or anything. I'd only kick you if I felt you needed medical attention (which has happened... funny story that...) but seriously, get some rest.
@Tinkeringbell Basically, I was given a message that my bounty was manually removed, but I do not want it removed, and I was looking for clarification to see if I had broken the rules creating it.
The rest of the scroll log is pretty much unnecessary redundancy and circles.
The explanation it gave me was that I used the wrong bounty reason. It said nothing and implied nothing about rewarding existing answers or bountying to improve existing answers.
@JourneymanGeek Ha, that reminds me of a situation I read about a while ago. There was fairly young American boy participating in a chat room, where a 20-year-old Finnish woman was saying, "I'm having trouble breathing". After some further conversation, the boy got very concerned and called the local emergency number, and eventually contacts were exchanged and the Finnish authorities arrived at the woman's house and found her in critical condition, and she was saved
@JourneymanGeek If someone's complaining that they're having trouble understanding something a certain way, rather than repeating the same thing again and again, a pointer that would help them understand it the correct way would be a lot nicer.
@forest It's a useless bounty on a question about an extremely specific situation that was already resolved (see the update in the last sentence of the question). And I don't know why I have to say that because others already have.
Well I clearly misunderstood the purposes of bounties. I didn't know it was only for non-specific and unresolved situations. Perhaps someone should edit the bounty explanation page?
@forest A few circles in, you were given more and more explicit instruction not to put up another bounty on that question, and IMO you should have taken that and put a stop to the overall circles (not stating who's responsible for them, but just that you should stop them).
@SonictheAnonymousHedgehog I didn't put another bounty on it because I feel I would have my account destroyed for continuing to bring attention to problems with the company. As for the circles... I get that I should be the "bigger person" and stop the circle, but I admit I have a very hard time doing that. :/ Thanks for the feedback though. I'll certainly try to work on it.
@forest Bu this specific problem has already been resolved. If you want to bring attention to problems within the company, do so on an unresolved question.
Ugh, re-reading the mod message shows me "Now that the issue you were discussing in chat (presumably why you started this bounty) has been cleared up". I guess I'll have to bring that up later. :/
Hm, can someone clarify what inappropriate content constitutes? I was just suspended for explaining this drama to someone else in another room. I made sure that I did not post anything offensive or any curses. Am I permitted to discuss the event with other people?