Timeline for Is it appropriate to downvote answers for the sake of deleting a question?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
65 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 20, 2017 at 22:38 | comment | added | amWhy | BillDubuque, aka @Number about sockpuppet accounts, given your (mis)use of sockpuppet accounts, don't project what you do on most users. | |
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:22 | history | edited | CommunityBot | replaced http://math.stackexchange.com/ with https://math.stackexchange.com/ | |
| Mar 16, 2017 at 16:37 | history | edited | CommunityBot | replaced http://meta.math.stackexchange.com/ with https://math.meta.stackexchange.com/ | |
| Mar 16, 2017 at 16:37 | history | edited | CommunityBot | replaced http://meta.math.stackexchange.com/ with https://math.meta.stackexchange.com/ | |
| Mar 16, 2017 at 16:37 | history | edited | CommunityBot | replaced http://meta.math.stackexchange.com/ with https://math.meta.stackexchange.com/ | |
| Mar 16, 2017 at 16:37 | history | edited | CommunityBot | replaced http://meta.math.stackexchange.com/ with https://math.meta.stackexchange.com/ | |
| Mar 16, 2017 at 16:37 | history | edited | CommunityBot | replaced http://meta.math.stackexchange.com/ with https://math.meta.stackexchange.com/ | |
| Dec 28, 2014 at 10:43 | comment | added | user103816 | Why is "user61527" gone? I remember (s)he had more than 50k rep. | |
| Aug 14, 2014 at 11:17 | comment | added | TooTone | would you mind copying and paste the text of a few of those questions and answers? Otherwise it's impossible for users with <10k to form an opinion. | |
| Jul 10, 2014 at 16:29 | comment | added | quid | Why is there any need for coordination? As soon as there is one undelete vote, it shows up in the list of question with undelete votes. Those so short on time could just browse that list and add their votes where appropriate. (I conceed that the fact that deletions can become almost 'invisible' relatively quickly can be annoying.) But see with the coordination you exaggerated the problem. There is a dedicated list for question with undelte votes. Moreover, it could generally be a good idea to monitor deletions. There is not just this user but also others reasons for del. | |
| Jul 9, 2014 at 21:57 | comment | added | user61527 | @quid In order to counter the actions of this one single user, I would have to coordinate with at least two other $10$k+ users in order to cast undelete votes on hundreds of questions; there's also a time-limited component to this, since the auto-deletions by the community user are only listed for a short time (until they are superseded by *more* deletions) in the review tools. Nor do I believe that it's reasonable to require $\ge 3$ users carrying out so many actions just to counter the behaviour of this one. | |
| Jul 9, 2014 at 14:24 | comment | added | quid | @BillDubuque There is no speculation. I referred my perception of the situation. | |
| Jul 9, 2014 at 14:20 | comment | added | Bill Dubuque | @quid If you are having difficulty understanding others think, then It is much more constructive to ask what they think, rather than to make wild speculations about such. | |
| Jul 9, 2014 at 14:17 | comment | added | quid | @BillDubuque the phrase you have issues with starts with "It seems" so it should be quite obvious that I am referring my perception of the situation at hand, which you can find flawed or irrelevant or any number of things. But I do speak for myself. | |
| Jul 9, 2014 at 13:04 | comment | added | Bill Dubuque | @quid As one of the "others" you refer to, I can assure you that your guess is far off the mark. Perhaps you should let others speak for themselves. Meta works much better that way. | |
| Jul 9, 2014 at 12:33 | comment | added | quid | @BillDubuque I did not claim that they think they are pretty irrelvant, I only claimed that they are pretty irrelevant to them too. It is not uncome that people think or claim something is important to them while actually judging from their actions it isn't. | |
| Jul 9, 2014 at 12:22 | comment | added | Bill Dubuque | @quid I find it much stranger that you believe that those "complaining" think that the deleted posts are "pretty irrelevant". | |
| Jul 9, 2014 at 9:00 | comment | added | quid | On your edit: I find it strange that you claim it would be that much effort. It seems perfectly feasible. It seems rather that neither you nor the others complaining truly care about the deleted posts, which is a main point: at the end of the day, the deleted posts are pretty irrelevant. | |
| Jul 9, 2014 at 8:15 | comment | added | user61527 | @Thisismuchhealthier. It appears to be live now, and I've edited the question accordingly. Thanks. | |
| Jul 9, 2014 at 8:15 | history | edited | user61527 | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 682 characters in body |
| Jul 7, 2014 at 10:43 | comment | added | TooTone | If this isn't already asked in some way on Meta Stack Exchange, I suggest it should be asked there as it's (1) more general than math; (2) important to resolve one way or another. | |
| Jul 4, 2014 at 3:26 | comment | added | user147263 | You may be interested in the thread What should the system be deleting automatically that it already isn't? So far this discussion is about SO only, but Shog9 mentioned the possibility of extending some of the criteria to the rest of network. | |
| Jul 4, 2014 at 1:15 | comment | added | user61527 | For what it's worth, I will be using some of my votes to counter this campaign. Whenever I vote to close an (old) question, or see it appear in review, I will be looking to see if there are answers I feel are worth preserving. I encourage others who disagree with the scale and effect of the issue I've raised to do similarly. | |
| Jul 3, 2014 at 1:50 | vote | accept | CommunityBot | ||
| Jul 3, 2014 at 1:50 | |||||
| Jul 2, 2014 at 21:45 | comment | added | TooTone | this happened to me earlier this year before this specific user came on the scene -- downvote on my answer to zero shortly followed by automatic deletion of the question. At the time I found it a bit disappointing that someone had gamed the system, and I assumed it was a one-off. | |
| Jun 30, 2014 at 17:06 | history | edited | user61527 | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 159 characters in body |
| Jun 30, 2014 at 14:23 | comment | added | user14972 | ... or whether the user has overly divergent opinions about utility. While this was originally a useful abstract question, I feel the direction it has taken has dramatically changed its character. | |
| Jun 30, 2014 at 14:18 | comment | added | user14972 | I realize my opinion has been tainted by a poisoned well -- we assume it's just about circumventing the deletion process, but I can easily imagine a user truly thinking answers to bad questions aren't useful, and thus should be downvoted. I certainly think the majority are counterproductive, although I haven't taken the final step to cement my belief into downvoting them. And if said hypothetical user takes the time to go on a massive campaign to close and downvote deserving things, that's a good thing, and the only reasonable controversy would be whether the script is too generous. | |
| Jun 30, 2014 at 1:07 | comment | added | Asaf Karagila Mod | @gnometorule: You're a real gem, and that's the key idea. | |
| Jun 30, 2014 at 0:57 | comment | added | gnometorule | @AsafKaraglia: Shoot, busted! As you could have also seen by the great quality of my answers, I'm Bill's sock puppet. I give up already. | |
| Jun 30, 2014 at 0:47 | comment | added | Asaf Karagila Mod | @gnometorule: Both you and Bill have a user profile image which is not an identicon. Coincidence? I think not. | |
| Jun 30, 2014 at 0:34 | comment | added | gnometorule | Both OP and @Thisismuchhealthier. have an xkcd comic on their profile page...Coincidence? I think not. | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 21:07 | comment | added | Jyrki Lahtonen | FWIW: after a longish deliberation I decided to upvote this question. Initially I felt that this is yet another whining thread, but IMVHO it is a good thing that we have this discussion. It may not result in lasting changes in members behavior, but that's not necessarily the point. | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 20:42 | comment | added | Jyrki Lahtonen | I tend to agree, @Zlatan. I do have a number of answers I'm not proud of. Things I write out of sense of duty to keep the unanswered queue shorter in my "adopted" tags (finite-fields and coding-theory). Most of those can go without the community taking an incalculable loss. For my money the bigger deletion problem is that of the OP deleting (also unilaterally!) their question immediately I had given an answer (or sometimes a minute before). Those we can vote to undelete, so it is different. The feeling of getting used by a help-seeker doesn't wash away so easily, but them's the breaks. | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 20:33 | comment | added | user159761 | @JyrkiLahtonen whether you are at the receiving end or not, your opinion should be independent of that, I guess its not about your own interests. apart from that bongers and bill, if you really don't want to lose your work then concentrate on some few questions and write something substantial. or write a book, a paper whatever, this is much better than answering thousands of mostly boring questions. | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 20:27 | comment | added | Jyrki Lahtonen | It remains to be seen how I react, when I'm at the receiving end. Admittedly nothing I say at this time will convince anyone. @T.Bongers the fate of hints is a loss. I think that hints should be used more. It might be worth a separate thread. The official SE is against hints (as are many respected posters), but I feel differently. | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 19:54 | answer | added | Thomas | timeline score: 13 | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 19:43 | comment | added | user61527 | @JyrkiLahtonen You're right - a significant part of my argument is about the principle of whether a single user should be able to cause hundreds of these deletions. It also irritates me at times when the carefully written hints and answers I've put time into are removed via this process. | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 19:42 | comment | added | Bill Dubuque | @Jyrki I wonder if you will feel the same when some of your answers to (old) questions that do not meet his quality standards are similarly deleted in this manner. | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 19:41 | history | edited | user61527 | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 137 characters in body |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 19:31 | comment | added | Jyrki Lahtonen | I realize that you are largely arguing about the principle of things, but the evidence brought up does not convince me. I clicked throught the five links given here as well as the five links in Bill's answer. Let me simply state that I'm not gonna shed any tears for the lost threads. Their removal is IMVHO closer to good housekeeping rather than loss of valuable content. | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 19:06 | comment | added | user61527 | @ZlatanderZechpreller That is not at all what I'm saying. The "problem Bongers," together with your avatar (and what I understand as the English translation of your username) indicate that I shouldn't spend any more time replying. | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 19:05 | comment | added | user159761 | @T.Bongers: your problem is simply that my vote counts as much as yours, this is what annoys you. but I guess this is just democratic, problem Bongers? | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 18:59 | comment | added | quid | @BillDubuque if somebody actually intends to use many sockpuppets for deleting arbitrary threads I would "recommend" they just use spam/offensive flags. // T. Bongers: I do not want to continue this comment thread too far, my point is that downvoting to achieve deletion is part of the system (see my comment to Hurkly re automatic dv). Whether or not this is applied in a reasonable way in this case is something else. I do not know. I cannot see the threads. I do not want to decide. | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 18:56 | comment | added | user61527 | My point was that your appeal to the "vote of the majority" was baseless. If these deletions were taking place through the normal process of $3$ experienced users casting deletion votes against specific questions, then I would have no issue with this. | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 18:53 | comment | added | user159761 | @T.Bongers: how do you know that? I also downvote some questions, in fact several, because there are so many questions which are simply of no use whatsoever, e.g. math.stackexchange.com/questions/848919/… . Obviously several other people are of the same opinion. | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 18:53 | comment | added | user61527 | @quid I seriously doubt that the system was designed in such a way to allow or encourage a use of mere downvotes (by a single user!) to force question deletion. As I see it, there is a substantial difference between having strong or frequent auto-deletion of unanswered or poorly answered questions, and seeing good answers be downvoted for no reason other than forcing deletion. | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 18:49 | comment | added | user61527 | @ZlatanderZechpreller There is no "vote of the majority" involved in these deletions, but rather the actions of one specific user. | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 18:49 | comment | added | quid | @T.Bongers No, it does not! The system was explicitly redesigned to minimize casting of explict delete votes deferring this to more common types of votes. This is the entire point of the system being as it is. Before this change the number of delete votes one could cast was also higher. The reason the number is so low now is because one can do it differently too. | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 18:48 | comment | added | user159761 | @BillDubuque: what do you mean by complex dynamics? meaning that some people don't like getting their average and uninteresting answers deleted? we must accept the vote of the majority. Deleting some answers is totally ok, considering that every hundreds of new questions are asked | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 18:48 | comment | added | user9733 | @BillDubuque sock puppets is an entirely different issue. If you have evidence (or just reasonable suspicion) that a user is using sock puppets for this purpose, I'd strongly suggest to send SE a mail with the details. They are the only ones that can detect this, everyone else can just guess. | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 18:44 | comment | added | Bill Dubuque | @quid Because anyone with a few sockpuppets and half-decent programming skills can easily manage to force the Community user to delete any threads that they do not like, and the community has no way to undelete them without the help of moderators. Do you really think that this is what SE intended? Moreover, the SE platform has very poor tools for tracking such abuse. It is essentially under the radar. Users are being tricked into assisting this campaign without any clue of the organized campaign behind the scenes. | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 18:44 | comment | added | user61527 | @quid It circumvents the (apparent) design of the downvote vs. close vs. deletion system; being able to trigger a specific deletion vote is reserved to only the most experienced site users. The sheer volume of these deletions also seems to be substantially more than was intended; by proceeding in such a manner, a single user can cause $50$ questions to be deleted per day. It would take $3$ trusted users to delete a mere $30$. | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 18:40 | comment | added | quid | Please explain why it is gaming the automated process (also see my comment on Hurkly's answer). I can see that somebody does not like it and I do not consider it a good idea, but I fail to see how it is gaming the process. | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 18:32 | comment | added | Bill Dubuque | @T.Bongers There are better examples of deleted answer - see my answer. Please feel free to add them above. | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 18:27 | history | edited | user61527 | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 1942 characters in body |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 16:20 | comment | added | Bill Dubuque | @Zlatan Why do you believe that? Having joined only $7$ days ago, do you really think you have enough experience to understand all of the issues involved in the complex dynamics of this site? | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 14:37 | answer | added | Bill Dubuque | timeline score: 17 | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 12:19 | comment | added | user159761 | No downvoting to delete questions is perfectly ok, in fact must be encouraged | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 11:45 | comment | added | quid | It might be relevant to observe that it can only be relevant if OP of question did not accept. It might also be relevant that answers in situation where this could be relevant sometimes had gotten somehow sort of pitty upvote to prevent repeated bumping. (The 'might' is not rhetorical, it also might be irrelevant to some.) | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 10:06 | answer | added | Jyrki Lahtonen | timeline score: 35 | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 9:59 | answer | added | user14972 | timeline score: 39 | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 3:33 | answer | added | user147263 | timeline score: -19 | |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 3:29 | history | edited | user61527 | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 2 characters in body |
| Jun 29, 2014 at 3:17 | history | asked | user61527 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |