9

In connection with the moderator elections, we are holding a Q&A thread for the candidates. Questions collected from an earlier thread have been compiled into this one, which shall now serve as the space for the candidates to provide their answers. Every question was compiled, plus 2 pre-set questions from us. Some were slightly shortened.

As a candidate, your job is simple - post an answer to this question, citing each of the questions and then post your answer to each question given in that same answer. For your convenience, I will include all of the questions in quote format with a break in between each, suitable for you to insert your answers. Just copy the whole thing after the first set of three dashes. Oh, and please consider putting your name at the top of your post so that readers will know who you are before they finish reading everything you have written.

Once all the answers have been compiled, this will serve as a transcript for voters to view the thoughts of their candidates, and will be appropriately linked in the Election page.

Good luck to all of the candidates!


  1. How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?

  2. How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?

  3. We have a significant problem where a question lacks some critical details - the details required to formulate a good answer, absence of which may restrict few users from considering posting a detailed answer. Those details are usually the Android version and Android device name, but not limited to them. Consider the fact that users often have to invest/waste their time into seeking those details - the details, which should have been provided by the user already or could have been asked from them via technical means. There exists clearly a problem to deal with, so... What stance do you have on this issue? What do you propose or have proposed to deal with this issue?

  4. Moderators are given the power to unilaterally delete posts. Given this ability, how would you approach answers that are objectively low-quality (vague, short, etc) but are an attempt to provide an answer?

  5. Are there any existing policies or rules that you think should be amended or removed? Are there any new policies you would like to see added?

  6. You close a question that's clearly off-topic and the user comes to Meta, not to ask what they did wrong, say you're a [mean word here]. How do you react?

  7. Even though we've a clear consensus on Should users (non-Moderators) approve an edit made by a user posing as the author of the post? you can still find two or three regular reviewers who do not go by that consensus and wrongly approve such edits. Other problem is with reviewing where careless or superfluous edits gets approved, most likely to increase review count. How do you deal with such reviewers or with their reviewing? If you don't see a problem, please tell us why do you not find such reviews a problem at all.

  8. Like every other site, we also suffer from lazy answers. The problem has been discussed here: Half line answers -- what would be the best course of action(s) to deal with them? The problem is different from this issue which is about lazy guesses or lazy opinions. None of the solutions to the original problem have gained support (through votes) that can be considered as will of the community at large. Consider the fact that no consensus causes or may be causing ambiguity to users from flagging those posts - users, who are the major reason moderators are able to keep the site clean or keep a tab on quality of posts. What are you going to do with answers similar in nature to the examples listed in that question? What clear suggestion for dealing with those posts do you propose for ordinary users of this site?

  9. If you're a regular here, you would have soon realized that we have a huge quite an issue of crappy migration from one of the larger SE sites. That site deals with questions posted by enthusiasts and power users of computers. What is your stance on crappy migration? Do you have a preemptive solution? If yes, what is it? What do you suggest to regular flag raisers and close voters to do with such crap?

  10. How do you define Android independent questions? The only available answer to the linked question doesn't seem to solve the original problem stated in the question. Some extra thinking material can be found in the original question.

12

Izzy's answers

  1. How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?

Friendly, of course – as I always try to do :) Exact action of course depends on the case (what kind of flags? what causes them?). Following an analysis, I'd seek a personal word with him, together finding a solution/plan hopefully fitting all.

  1. How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?

As far as I've heard, there's a secret chamber for such cases. I'd see him there. Someone closes the door behind us – and we talk that over. Door will be opened if one of us is convinced.

Honestly: I was referring to the mods' chat room. I'd ask him there. Maybe he'd "missed a point" or I did. What I'd never do is simply reverting his action – that would be his task (unless he delegates it).

  1. We have a significant problem where a question lacks some critical details - the details required to formulate a good answer, absence of which may restrict few users from considering posting a detailed answer. Those details are usually the Android version and Android device name, but not limited to them. Consider the fact that users often have to invest/waste their time into seeking those details - the details, which should have been provided by the user already or could have been asked from them via technical means. There exists clearly a problem to deal with, so... What stance do you have on this issue? What do you propose or have proposed to deal with this issue?

As I've done in the past, I'd leave a comment indicating the missing details. Depending on how big the gap is, being a mod I'd additionally put it "on hold" as "being unclear". Especially for new users, I'd add to my comment that updating the post with the missing details and a "ping" to my person would be a quick way to get it re-opened again. No pun intended, but that should add weight to the comment (and engrave the fact in memory ;)

  1. Moderators are given the power to unilaterally delete posts. Given this ability, how would you approach answers that are objectively low-quality (vague, short, etc) but are an attempt to provide an answer?

Depends on. But in most cases I'll probably convert them to comments – while leaving a note (comment) on the original (then deleted) "answer" why I did so, and how to improve the post. For re-open etc. see previous question: My intention is never to punish, but rather to "enforce" quality while keeping useful information.

  1. Are there any existing policies or rules that you think should be amended or removed? Are there any new policies you would like to see added?

{to be filled with a later edit}

  1. You close a question that's clearly off-topic and the user comes to Meta, not to ask what they did wrong, say you're a [mean word here]. How do you react?

Being a coward, I'd ask one of my co-mods to close that Meta post (if it's off-topic anyway) or edit it (otherwise), keeping myself out. We don't need "personal vendettas" here – and I feel that would be the best way avoiding such.

  1. Even though we've a clear consensus on Should users (non-Moderators) approve an edit made by a user posing as the author of the post? you can still find two or three regular reviewers who do not go by that consensus and wrongly approve such edits. Other problem is with reviewing where careless or superfluous edits gets approved, most likely to increase review count. How do you deal with such reviewers or with their reviewing? If you don't see a problem, please tell us why do you not find such reviews a problem at all.

I've not much experience in this field, but I'd try to contact them (eg. by "drawing" them into a private chat) to explain. Just remembering one comparable case from the past, I can imagine convincing them hunting for some other trophy (badge, that is), and keep the ball lower here – if it looks like "badge hunting", that is.

  1. Like every other site, we also suffer from lazy answers. The problem has been discussed here: Half line answers -- what would be the best course of action(s) to deal with them? The problem is different from this issue which is about lazy guesses or lazy opinions. None of the solutions to the original problem have gained support (through votes) that can be considered as will of the community at large. Consider the fact that no consensus causes or may be causing ambiguity to users from flagging those posts - users, who are the major reason moderators are able to keep the site clean or keep a tab on quality of posts. What are you going to do with answers similar in nature to the examples listed in that question? What clear suggestion for dealing with those posts do you propose for ordinary users of this site?

Smells like #3, just for answers, mixed with #4 – so my approach would be similar here. As I've already suggested in my answer to that post, I'd encourage users to flag such posts (low quality), and as mod deal with them as described in #4: convert to comment, leave a reason, hope for the user to improve the post. If the latter happens in appropriate form, immedialy restore the answer.

  1. If you're a regular here, you would have soon realized that we have a huge quite an issue of crappy migration from one of the larger SE sites. That site deals with questions posted by enthusiasts and power users of computers. What is your stance on crappy migration? Do you have a preemptive solution? If yes, what is it? What do you suggest to regular flag raisers and close voters to do with such crap?

I've already been involved with this issue. Where possible, I'd seek out the mods of the corresponding origin site asking them to stop it. They are not always able to, e.g. if our site is a "regular target" and 5 users vote to migrate. In those cases I suggested them to "educate" their users. Migrated "crap" I'd immediately "return to sender" (aka "reject migration" – but don't nail me on a definition of "crap", as that's "primarily opinion based" :)

Of course this means I'd encourage users to flag such posts. And please don't forget I'm not the only mod (if elected, that is) – so this presents my opinion. If the majority of the mod team has a different stance, I'd seek agreement first.

  1. How do you define Android independent questions? The only available answer to the linked question doesn't seem to solve the original problem stated in the question. Some extra thinking material can be found in the original question.

That's a tricky one to answer "canonically". There are some questions where it's clear (e.g. "repair the glass of device X", or "clearly carrier-related issues"), some that are border-line, and some where that's pretty much opinion-based. In dubio pro reo for one, and some specifics for another (anyone tell me how handling a LiIo battery is not Android-independent? Still I agree this is an important topic for all Android users, so I see why we even have a tag for that. We don't deal with the "glass repair" though, as that doesn't even affect a majority). This one I cannot give a clear answer, but will have to decide per-case.

  • {to be filled with a later edit} – iBug Nov 6 '18 at 2:12
8

Dan Hulme

  1. How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?

I'd try to find out why the comments are so controversial and try to engage him in the ideal of keeping the site friendly. We don't have enough awesome answerers for the number of questions we have, so I wouldn't want to lose one, but we're fortunate at present that all of our good answerers work together well, even when we disagree. I think having that culture here makes it less likely that we'll have to face this kind of tricky situation.

  1. How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?

It depends. If it were a simple mistake (say, closing as duplicate against another question with a similar title but completely different content), I'd just talk to them (in mod chat) and establish the facts. It's just as likely to be my mistake or misunderstanding as theirs. Once we've reached a shared understanding, then we could decide together what corrective action to take.

If it were a matter of policy disagreement instead, such as closing a question that's borderline, I'd just accept the decision. We don't have to all agree about every question. If it becomes a recurring theme then I'd open a question on meta, in general terms rather than about the specific posts, to establish the community's consensus on the issue, and then try to get all the mods to abide by that.

  1. We have a significant problem where a question lacks some critical details [...] What stance do you have on this issue? What do you propose or have proposed to deal with this issue?

In the short-term, we need to keep up our campaign of commenting to ask for more details and closing when necessary. I think it's important to show the OP that we're not just complaining about their post: we ask for more details because that's how we will solve their problem.

Going forward, we need to find a way to improve this situation. We need to start by getting data on how many questions are like this, so that we can evaluate whatever solutions we try. My first idea would be to add some text to the "ask question" page to show users what information we expect: like you get on a bug reporting system. But that's something we need to go cap-in-hand to SE to ask for. Regardless of what we choose, if we can keep track of how many poor questions we're getting, we can try different ideas and find out which ones are effective.

I'd include app development questions in this category too. At least they're easier to spot and deal with when they do come up, but despite everything we've done so far to discourage them, we still get a handful per day. I think it's time to consider what the next step could be.

  1. Moderators are given the power to unilaterally delete posts. Given this ability, how would you approach answers that are objectively low-quality (vague, short, etc) but are an attempt to provide an answer?

I'm going to take this question together with:

  1. Like every other site, we also suffer from lazy answers. [...] What are you going to do with answers similar in nature to the examples listed in that question? What clear suggestion for dealing with those posts do you propose for ordinary users of this site?

I'd approach them the same way I do now. On the whole, I don't believe in deleting good-faith attempts to answer, even if they're unhelpful or lazy. Downvoting is an appropriate action for low-quality answers, but sometimes it's possible to edit and improve them to the point where they're high-quality. I believe that ending up with a high-quality answer on the site is a good outcome, regardless of who gets the rep. Editing to improve also helps the lazy answerer to see what we expect from answers on the site.

I'd like to take this opportunity to encourage users to do that more often, whether they're moderators or not. I know it sometimes feels like too much effort, but even if you only improve one extra answer, if we all do that we'll have a lot more good answers on the site.

  1. Are there any existing policies or rules that you think should be amended or removed? Are there any new policies you would like to see added?

I would like to see the app recommendation close reason removed. To my mind, the reason to disallow app recommendations is for questions like "What email app should I use?" which are opinion-based. We should keep closing questions like that. But I see a lot of questions closed which are of the form "I want to [automatically feed my cats with my smartphone]. Is there an app for this?" To my mind, that isn't a recommendation question, it's about solving a problem. Obviously the questioner would assume that the answer is an app, but more often than not they would be just as happy with a non-app answer (most commonly, some Tasker profile). I don't like to see those questions closed just because the questioner used the magic word "app".

When people ask actual recommendation questions, we'd close them as opinion-based, or too broad. If a question asks for an app but isn't opinion-based or too broad, why would we want to close it?

  1. You close a question that's clearly off-topic and the user comes to Meta, not to ask what they did wrong, say you're a [mean word here]. How do you react?

I'd let somebody else handle it. If the user has taken it personally, then any attempt by me to explain will make it about me vs. them, making the situation worse. If another moderator, or even better, a respected member of the community who isn't a moderator, can make a reassuring post, then it shows that a moderator is someone who acts out the will of the community, not just some kind of dictator. Of course, if it were a mistake on my part, or if the community consensus is to reverse my decision, I would answer the meta post myself. You can't delegate apologizing.

  1. Even though we've a clear consensus on Should users (non-Moderators) approve an edit made by a user posing as the author of the post? you can still find two or three regular reviewers who do not go by that consensus and wrongly approve such edits. Other problem is with reviewing where careless or superfluous edits gets approved, most likely to increase review count. How do you deal with such reviewers or with their reviewing? If you don't see a problem, please tell us why do you not find such reviews a problem at all.

History suggests that when I see reviews like that, I deal with them by getting annoyed for a while. But when I've cooled down, I think the best we can do is make a new meta post to draw the attention of the reviewers to our policy (without naming and shaming), or talk in chat if they're active chat users.

  1. If you're a regular here, you would have soon realized that we have a huge quite an issue of crappy migration from one of the larger SE sites. That site deals with questions posted by enthusiasts and power users of computers. What is your stance on crappy migration? Do you have a preemptive solution? If yes, what is it? What do you suggest to regular flag raisers and close voters to do with such crap?

This has two parts. First, to flaggers and voters: deal with migrated questions the way you would deal with any question. If it's off-topic, close it. If it's a valid question but shows no research effort or is not useful, downvote it. It looks bad to the questioner if their question gets migrated and then closed afterwards, but that's not on us, it's the fault of the people at the other site who migrated it.

Second, I think it's important to deal with this more generally by talking to moderators on other sites and encouraging them to get familiar with our on-topic criteria. SE sets a standard for moderators that you should only migrate to another site if you're an active user of that site (or if you've asked them first). I've gone out to SO before (as I'm a close-voter on that site too) and reminded them of their obligations, but this is going to be an ongoing process as people come and go on all those other sites. We just have to keep trying to get other sites' moderators to support the idea of not migrating crap.

  1. How do you define Android independent questions? The only available answer to the linked question doesn't seem to solve the original problem stated in the question. Some extra thinking material can be found in the original question.

Most of the candidates have discussed this issue in chat many times, as well as on meta, so I know that I take a relatively broad view of what's on-topic for us. To my mind, the main purpose of having on-topic criteria for questions is so that the questions on the front page look attractive to visitors, in the sense that the people we want on the site see the front page and think, "this site is for people like me". With that in mind, I'm inclined to be somewhat accepting of questions about battery charging, touch screens, SIM cards, USB-OTG when they are interesting to Android users. Often it's hard for a new user to know if their problem is specific to Android or a more general problem, and I don't think it's fair to apply on-topic criteria that questioners have no way to judge. I think it's reasonable to continue to reject questions about carriers, phone shops, or websites, because they're not relevant to our community.

I've noticed a recent trend to push the "Android-independent questions" close reason to cover questions that are about apps rather than about Android itself, or about apps that have an iPhone version as well as an Android version. I think if we followed this suggestion in the terms that are proposed, we'd be closing most questions on the site, as well as applying a close criterion that almost nobody can judge fairly. It seems to me that this drive is simply a pretext for closing certain low-quality (but valid) questions, but I think that abusing close-votes for low-quality questions would hurt the site in the longer term.

When I see each case and I consider whether to vote-to-close, I ask myself: if I saw this on the front page, would I think the site is for me? Can we help this person without hurting the site? That's something I apply not just for Android-independent questions, but also for other hard-to-judge borders like the line between automation (on-topic) and app development (off-topic). Often close-voters get into the mindset of rules-lawyering the on-topic reasons, considering whether the question matches a particular form of words, and trying to close questions to keep the site neat or improve our "unanswered questions" stats; but to me, those are all secondary to our main goals of helping out our fellow Android users and making the site welcoming to them.

  • 3
    I think your response to #5 is an interesting discussion, and one we should probably have regardless of whether you are ultimately elected or not. I would be curious to know: what do you think of questions along the lines of "Where can I buy <some thing>?" or "When will <some store> start selling <some thing>?" They are (intentionally) covered by the current close reason, but would you consider them to be opinion-based? Or would you consider them acceptable, and not requiring any action at all? (Or something else entirely) – eldarerathis Mar 22 '16 at 14:25
  • 1
    @eldarerathis You're right, that close reason does cover a lot more than just app recommendations, and the kind of questions you mention do fall into that but aren't quite opinion-based. The main problem with questions like that isn't anything about the questions themselves, but that they attract spam answers. We could try to adapt the existing question to be specifically about "shopping advice" rather than using the phrase "find or recommend an app", but I'm definitely open to other suggestions. I think we need to establish first what we're actually trying to achieve with that reason. – Dan Hulme Mar 22 '16 at 15:18
  • I second eldarerathis, you've made some good points here that the site ought to discuss. – Matthew Read Mar 22 '16 at 20:13
  • I "third" it (finally got what you meant in chat back then). Though I still tend to direct explicit app requests to SR (if matching that site's criteria), we shouldn't close a question just because of the word "app" in it (which is why I usually first check if it can be easily reworded to avoid close-voting for that reason – without violating the OPs intentions). – Izzy Mar 25 '16 at 21:17
3

Answers from Firelord


Q&A #1

You close a question that's clearly off-topic and the user comes to Meta, not to ask what they did wrong, say you're a [mean word here]. How do you react?

It is a time to act, not to react. An ad hominem attack should not be tolerated on this site, no matter who initiates it and to whom it is targeted to. I'll analyze the question and see if it is worth saving by an edit. If yes, I would attempt to remove content meant solely to criticize me as a person while still having the post criticize my action constructively. I'll also attempt to comment why I made an edit as well as also address the criticism to my action(s). OTOH, if I find the post not worth anything, I'll ask one or more moderators privately and let them know that I objectively don't find anything constructive their but it may not be interpreted correctly by site's users if I close the question unilaterally.


Q&A #2

If you're a regular here, you would have soon realized that we have a huge quite an issue of crappy migration from one of the larger SE sites. That site deals with questions posted by enthusiasts and power users of computers. What is your stance on crappy migration? Do you have a preemptive solution? If yes, what is it? What do you suggest to regular flag raisers and close voters to do with such crap?

You can find a brief of my stance here. I'll attempt to analyze through observation and via technical means whether the crap is coming occasionally or is regular from a site. If it is occasional or regular but comes from a moderator, hopefully, I would be able to sort things out privately with source site's moderators. However, if the crap comes regularly and from ordinary users who vote for migration, then I see three options worth trying:

  1. talking to source site's moderators about the situation, showing them hard facts so that they take the situation seriously, and kindly asking them to educate their site's users about migration;
  2. making my point (as a representative) on their meta. This should be done by having agreement from other moderators here;
  3. if the said steps doesn't work out well, I'll seek consensus on our meta whether it is time to ask SE to have us removed as a migration target from the involved source site. I won't prefer it over other options and it would be considered if situation goes beyond of our control.

Q&A #3

Like every other site, we also suffer from lazy answers. The problem has been discussed here: Half line answers -- what would be the best course of action(s) to deal with them? The problem is different from this issue which is about lazy guesses or lazy opinions. None of the solutions to the original problem have gained support (through votes) that can be considered as will of the community at large. Consider the fact that no consensus causes or may be causing ambiguity to users from flagging those posts - users, who are the major reason moderators are able to keep the site clean or keep a tab on quality of posts. What are you going to do with answers similar in nature to the examples listed in that question? What clear suggestion for dealing with those posts do you propose for ordinary users of this site?

I've my full support to Izzy's proposal here since the time his answer was posted. I'll convert the post to a comment if it attempted to answer but didn't meet the details we expect from an answer and if possible for me, I'll let the poster know what improvements could be made. In accordance with that, I'll expect users to flag those posts as VLQ.

Major caveats: 1) I won't act retrospectively. It would not go well for both the poster and me. 2) We must sketch out on meta how an answer should be evaluated. This is necessary, else, moderators would be burdened with unnecessary VLQ flags. Unless that meta post shows up and reaches a consensus, I'll act in accordance with status quo so that other moderators don't have to deal with the mess I could end up creating from this answer. The latter in turn means that without the meta post and a consensus, the situation remains the same: flag the post based on your experience here with the quality control.


Q&A #4

Even though we've a clear consensus on Should users (non-Moderators) approve an edit made by a user posing as the author of the post? you can still find two or three regular reviewers who do not go by that consensus and wrongly approve such edits. Other problem is with reviewing where careless or superfluous edits gets approved, most likely to increase review count. How do you deal with such reviewers or with their reviewing? If you don't see a problem, please tell us why do you not find such reviews a problem at all.

I'll follow the standard wisdom available throughout the SE network. If they've been consistent with poor reviews, I'll put a temporary ban on their reviewing and in any case, I'll talk to them privately to explain what needs to be improved and why (if exists) the ban has been put in effect. Communication matters here because I've no intention of losing a reviewer permanently just because I could not communicate well, but neither I intend to turn a blind eye to their poor reviews.


Q&A #5

We have a significant problem where a question lacks some critical details - the details required to formulate a good answer, absence of which may restrict few users from considering posting a detailed answer. Those details are usually the Android version and Android device name, but not limited to them. Consider the fact that users often have to invest/waste their time into seeking those details - the details, which should have been provided by the user already or could have been asked from them via technical means. There exists clearly a problem to deal with, so... What stance do you have on this issue? What do you propose or have proposed to deal with this issue?

I'm not comfortable with status quo at all. As a contributor, I find the current situation a waste of my time and I assume the same for other contributors as well. I want us to focus immediately on solving the problem instead of waiting for n amount of time for OP to show up and state I'm using X device with Y Android version or something similar required for a good answer.

I made a shallow attempt to find out what possible solutions the rest of the SE sites use to deal with questions lacking details. I presented my finding as a community wiki here. In plain words, I'm looking to address this issue through technical means.

Until a competing solution emerges, I'll have to stick to what I and others have been doing, that is, post a comment to seek details or alternatively, flag/close vote if lots of details are missing.


Q&A #6

How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?

They are valuable but not exempt from site's policies. Unless other moderators have already approached the user twice or multiple times to no avail or the user themselves don't go picking up a fight or engage in abusive exchange of comments, I would not go straight with a ban. I'll talk to them and sort things myself. This is a small community, so I can invest a bit of my time on a valuable user to sort things out. As with reviewing, I do not hope to lose them at all at first, but neither I'm willing to compromise with or ignore the situation.

If they don't show considerable improvement even after multiple attempts from both me and other moderators, I would appropriately suspend the account. Seems harsh, but I must take care of the interests of other users as well.


Q&A #7

How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?

The first step is the private conversation which should be held. What incredibly matters here is how I'm going to engage there. I cannot afford to ask in a direct manner like I'm somewhat used to now with users, since that would amount to questioning a moderator's judgement. Howsoever I approach the moderator, I would try my best to understand the opinion they hold for the question and I'll try to cordially put my view as well, if only their opinion doesn't convince me. If things sort out, you'll have the post opened/undeleted by me or them. Otherwise, the decision will automatically be left on the community to have the post re-open/undelete through appropriate votes.

I would not find it professional to call out the moderator on a meta. That's for sure.


Q&A #8

Moderators are given the power to unilaterally delete posts. Given this ability, how would you approach answers that are objectively low-quality (vague, short, etc) but are an attempt to provide an answer?

I would abide by my opinion expressed in the aforesaid answer meant to address the question about lazy answers.


Q&A #9

How do you define Android independent questions? The only available answer to the linked question doesn't seem to solve the original problem stated in the question.

There is no satisfactory answer I can provide given the nature of the question. However, I can share this observation: I've noticed that an issue becomes Android independent automatically for regulars once the issue involved doesn't remain limited to Android. This doesn't apply to all issues, such as with Google apps, but seems widely applicable on non-Google apps.

Unfortunate or not, until a new answer or discussion surfaces on the linked question, I'll continue to do and suggest what the regulars do: to rely heavily on experience for the judgement.


Q&A #10

Are there any existing policies or rules that you think should be amended or removed? Are there any new policies you would like to see added?

New policies: 1) guidelines explaining how both questions and answers here should be evaluated. That I hope would significantly lessen the conflicting opinions we end up with whenever a post's quality comes into attention on meta or chat. We can do this. Skeptics did that, as a good example.

2) I didn't bother to raise this issue because it is not a significant problem here but I still can find two-three users who do not seem to learn from their past experience with asking questions. They consistently continue to provide us non-(searched/researched) questions every time. It is not unheard of that moderators alone decides to put a temporary question ban on such users in said case. If the situation deteriorates, I'll put up a generalized question on meta for discussion instead of imposing my view through a ban.

Existing policies: I've already stated my stance on lazy answers, where while not written, the status quo seems to accept such answers in some while remove them in other cases. I've also stated my intention on dealing with new questions about the missing details. Once that is fixed, the content in the page How do I ask a good question can also be subsequently taken care of.


Strange feeling. 50% of the questions I answered here were posted by me!

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .