Timeline for What is needed to succeed in keeping up the level of the site and retaining the good contributors?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 4, 2013 at 14:47 | comment | added | Todd Trimble Mod | @DanielMoskovich In the vast majority of cases, it seems posters who post those questions that MO rejects are not too fussy about the website, as they make absolutely no attempt to find out what MO is and if it's right for them; really they just want someone to answer the question. Abstractly I guess I see Mark's point, but in practice this is IMO way too fussy a procedure. The small number of people who object to having their question migrated to another site could just delete the question; heck, it's going to be closed anyway on MO. Usually migration is a favor and convenience; saves time. | |
| Nov 4, 2013 at 5:32 | comment | added | Daniel Moskovich | I am not enthusiastic about the migration option, because, as previously pointed out by Mark Sapir on another thread, it should require OP consent, given that the sites are entirely different. I think that, until the migration system is "repaired", we should close instead of migrate, but giving more weight to people who want to see specific questions remain open. | |
| Nov 4, 2013 at 3:34 | comment | added | Todd Trimble Mod | With regard to the practice of completely closing questions versus migrating them (primarily to MSE): I am generally sympathetic to what fedja suggests, except that some questions are just so badly written that I'd feel guilty just dumping such trash on MSE, which is already overrun (I like fedja's "overflown"!). I really don't feel much remorse if the poster can't take some minimal care writing something coherent; consign it to the ashes. | |
| Nov 3, 2013 at 17:58 | comment | added | darij grinberg | IMHO, the oblivion issue can be somewhat ameliorated by allowing tag-based email notifications, or tag-based views: e. g., I want to be notified of all "symmetric-functions" questions and all "young-tableaux" questions, and everything tagged both "rt.representation-theory" and "ac.commutative-algebra" I also want to see. At the moment I can just see the tagged questions as a list, but that's not very efficient. | |
| Nov 2, 2013 at 15:13 | comment | added | Todd Trimble Mod | That's a great idea, Dilaton! | |
| Nov 2, 2013 at 14:43 | comment | added | Dilaton | @PaulTaylor if the community considers the reopen meta list important and usefull enough, it could be tagged with a red "featured" moderator tag, so it would then appear in the right side bar on the main page and people who usually do not visit meta could see it too from the main page. I guess this would make this reopen mechanism more efficient (for questions that deserve it) by being more visible if needed. | |
| Nov 2, 2013 at 14:32 | comment | added | Paul Taylor | I have only just been told of this reopening mechanism and I will have forgotten the link by the next time I want it. If Andree Ehresmann had come here on my invitation to answer the Bourbaki/category question, how could she be expected to know about this obscure link? | |
| Nov 2, 2013 at 14:27 | comment | added | Joseph O'Rourke | "MO is coming close to justifying the second word in its name" :-). So true! At the moment there are six [on hold] or [migrated] questions taking up space on the Active front page. It would help a bit if these were not shown. | |
| Nov 2, 2013 at 14:24 | comment | added | Todd Trimble Mod | @PaulTaylor (1) Please go right ahead and invite outsiders to answer questions! (BTW, I was a little sad that the question about Bourbaki and category theory was closed, although there were some issues people had with the formulation (arguably not deal-breakers, IMO). (2) I wish you would at least be willing to try the mechanism, rather than reject it out of hand. | |
| Nov 2, 2013 at 13:58 | comment | added | Paul Taylor | This looks rather a clumsy mechanism to me and does not answer my example of inviting outsiders to answer questions. | |
| Nov 2, 2013 at 13:21 | comment | added | Todd Trimble Mod | Dilaton: requests for reopens is semi-efficient IMO (it is indeed useful). Maybe people like Paul Taylor should be using it more?: meta.mathoverflow.net/questions/223/requests-for-reopen-votes As for the other question: I'm not quite sure what you have in mind, but it might be worth posting as a separate question. | |
| Nov 2, 2013 at 13:11 | comment | added | Dilaton | For disagreements about close question, I though this request for reopen votes is rather useful and efficient, from what I observed how it works on Math SE? Concerning the flooding and flowing down of questions, maybe trying to devise and agree on a system of additional filter tags to categorize and partition the questions into a higher order structure than tags could help? | |
| Nov 2, 2013 at 13:05 | comment | added | Todd Trimble Mod | I agree that the "research-level" mantra is somewhat overdone and somewhat misleading, especially when applied to questions that could come up in graduate school classrooms. (I think it's more understandable when applied to questions about grammar school mathematics). | |
| Nov 2, 2013 at 12:48 | history | answered | fedja | CC BY-SA 3.0 |