Can a question be "front paged" by staffers for reasons that are not closely related either to significant developments in physics or to edits (either to the question itself or to the answers to it), such as events widely considered to be depressing, or the arrival of a time of year when weather in the more populous of earth's hemispheres might leave a larger proportion of its population looking for indoor diversions as substitutes for athletic or other outdoor events? (I'm not necessarily objecting to such a practice, which would tend to increase the population involved in the site and, consequently, the questions and answers which might allow me to have some slight influence on the future development of science and the civilization based on it: I'm simply curious about whether such an arbitrary practice exists as a basic aspect of the physics site's functioning, as there has been at least one potentially influential question whose latest reappearance seems unmotivated by any individual user's requests for clarification of that question, or suggestions for improvements of it.)

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ at least one potentially influential question whose latest reappearance seems unmotivated: which question? $\endgroup$ Dec 17, 2021 at 7:54
  • 9
    $\begingroup$ This question belongs on the mother meta site. See e.g. What can cause a question to be bumped? $\endgroup$
    – Qmechanic Mod
    Dec 17, 2021 at 11:01
  • $\begingroup$ The question was, "Did spacetime start with the Big bang?", whose capitalization of "Big", but not of "bang", appears to me (as per my comments on the question) to implicitly favor one cosmological model (Mersini-Houghton's) and to implicitly disparage others (models, each both past- & future-eternal, that are theoretically susceptible to observational verification), for reasons related to competition between physical and religious versions of afterlife (which would perhaps belong on a philosophical site, but not on a physics site). $\endgroup$
    – Edouard
    Dec 17, 2021 at 16:50
  • $\begingroup$ Please understand that I am not so much criticizing Mersini-Houghton's reasoning (which has, nevertheless, produced a model immune from any verification) so much as I'm criticizing some flaw in the system that keeps front-paging the question concerned, for the past 10 or 11 years. Its reappearance during a major religious holiday's season and a demoralizing pandemic is remarkable, but might match the pattern of programming error that seems to be described through the references made in the answer. As for myself, though, I'm not looking for spiritual uplift on a physics site. $\endgroup$
    – Edouard
    Dec 17, 2021 at 17:01
  • $\begingroup$ Although the organization I'm addressing has provided an explanation consistent with a purely scientific approach, it would, frankly, be disingenuous of me to claim that I'm accepting that answer: The temporal coincidences I've mentioned render it probablistically implausible. $\endgroup$
    – Edouard
    Dec 17, 2021 at 17:22


You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .