Timeline for Request to consider undeleting an answer
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 6 at 1:56 | comment | added | Sam Hopkins | I disagree that Michael Frank's post is not an answer. The question asker themselves pointed out that they were confused about or didn't know the precise terminology that went into the result they were interested in. So clarification about this terminology qualifies as at least a partial answer in my view. I do not believe a post has to completely and definitively answer a question to qualify as an answer. | |
| Mar 5 at 7:54 | comment | added | Alex M. | And thank you, Stefan Kohl, for complimenting the "usual helpfulness" of my flags! | |
| Mar 5 at 7:54 | comment | added | Alex M. | @YemonChoi: I was the one who has raised the NaN flag, simply because the post under discussion does not even attempt to answer the question. It is only a long comment to a side discussion. It seems intended to answer the question that Matthew Daws' has raised in his comments about what "finitely generated" means. Upvoting the post under discussion (12 upvotes!) just to apologize to its author for the previous deletion is a wrong way to use the voting mechanism: Michael Frank's non-answer now has a bigger score than the accepted answer itself (7), which is ridiculous. | |
| Feb 27 at 23:22 | comment | added | Yemon Choi | Thanks Stefan for the prompt and open response. Hopefully all's well that ends well. | |
| Feb 27 at 22:29 | comment | added | Sam Hopkins | Thanks for the transparency here. If anything, the fact that the prevalence of AI junk answers sometimes leads to moderators deleting good, human answers is just another annoying facet of the rise of this AI junk. | |
| Feb 27 at 15:08 | comment | added | Christian Remling | In Stefan's defense, accounts posting AI-generated semi-nonsense seem to have sprung up like mushrooms lately (if a non-moderator can already notice...). | |
| Feb 27 at 14:24 | comment | added | Stefan Kohl Mod | @AndyPutman Done. | |
| Feb 27 at 12:21 | comment | added | Andy Putman | Given the circumstances, you might think about sending a personal email to the author of the post explaining the situation and apologizing. From what Yemon Choi said, it sounds like they are exactly the kind of user we want to attract and not drive away. | |
| Feb 27 at 9:01 | history | answered | Stefan KohlMod | CC BY-SA 4.0 |