-1
$\begingroup$

I agree that high amount of Low Quality posts are preventing to use much time for each review tasks, and thus produces a deleting habit.

But what is the point of closing/deleting posts, which has even received a bounty?

Ie. this answer of me received even a Bounty; Where does gravity get its energy from? ...but it was still deleted!

This Answer received also the Bounty; How can a bowling ball curve in both directions? ... it's also down voted and is proposed to be deleted, at the Comments is said;

This does not provide an answer to the question.

Though the person who asked, even provided me a Bounty for my answer!

I think the main problem is that some actively moderating persons are just down voting and closing questions in "Facebook-style"; 5 sec preview and Thumb up/down. I noticed this behaviour clearly in this deleted question; Mysterious temperatures of Mimas? where every one can see through it's comments how difficult it might sometime's be. The Question might got closed just because it used the word "mysterious" in it's title, though this was a direct phrasing used in the original source of the explaining picture.

Text from question;

But why conductivity should vary so dramatically across the surface of Mimas is a mystery.

Comment 3 from me;

@CuriousOne "But why conductivity should vary so dramatically across the surface of Mimas is a mystery."

Comment 5 from me;

@CuriousOne "What is the physical explanation for dramatical conductivity variations across the surface of Mimas?"

Then suddenly, when the word "Mystery" is away;

Why didn't you make THAT your question in the first place... – CuriousOne

It should be noted that this "CuriousOne" haven't ever asked a single question by himself. With this I don't want to attack against the persons of moderation, but it seems that there should be some mechanism to prevent this "Facebook-like" dalmatian-species-specific-moderation-style to reproduce.

This is part of the problematic I have talked before; Can we stop closing questions as "unclear what you are asking" for OPs above certain reputation?

My own deleted-examples about this "Unclear what you are asking" problem;
Capillarity, QED explanation?
Physics of craters in moons?
Also this question is rather "unclear" than "not Mainstream."

These "Unclears" are also about to be Deleted;
Why In Thermosphere is He and O divided as measured?
How is it possible that Thermosphere can maintain so much heat?
Numerical model for a Air core Vortex, why it's still so limited?

The Question;
1. Should it be prevented to close/delete posts which has received a bounty?

  1. Should it be more limited for a single person to give "unclear-close-votes".

  2. Should it be more limited for a single person mark questions as a "Low quality posts".

$\endgroup$
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ 1. No. 2. No. 3. No. $\endgroup$ – ACuriousMind Mar 13 '16 at 16:45
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Not asking questions shouldn't be a detriment, considering there is a rather noted mod who's not asked any. See also this post $\endgroup$ – Kyle Kanos Mar 13 '16 at 17:05
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Questions cannot receive bounties and answers cannot be closed. So "received bounty but got closed" is not a possibility on this site. If you're proposing changes to the site mechanics, a show of familiarity of the details of such mechanics would certainly help. $\endgroup$ – Emilio Pisanty Mar 13 '16 at 19:21
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ (That said, anybody with 75+ rep can award bounties; a bounty award means that that person found it useful, not any objective measure of quality. As the examples you give show, even answers which do little to address the question, or which contain plainly-incorrect facts can be awarded bounties if the OP is lost enough. The votes there are a much closer measure of the answers' quality as measured by this site's community of experts.) $\endgroup$ – Emilio Pisanty Mar 13 '16 at 19:26
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Also: the *How is it possible that thermosphere can maintain so much heat$ can't be deleted because the answer posted has >1 score, which automatically prevents deletion. Note that those with <10k rep cannot see the deleted posts, so many of the links will go over their heads. $\endgroup$ – Kyle Kanos Mar 13 '16 at 21:20
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Though, I'm not at all sure why you're including those extra links, as none of them are bountied answers that were deleted; it mostly seems that you wanted to add them to complain that others feel you make bad content. $\endgroup$ – Kyle Kanos Mar 13 '16 at 21:24
  • $\begingroup$ @KyleKanos Being unable asking a single question, shows the lack in understaning what "Questioning" is; “Don't think about why you question, simply don't stop questioning. Don't worry about what you can't answer, and don't try to explain what you can't know. Curiosity is its own reason. Aren't you in awe when you contemplate the mysteries of eternity, of life, of the marvelous structure behind reality? And this is the miracle of the human mind--to use its constructions, concepts, and formulas as tools to explain what man sees, feels and touches. Try to comprehend a little more each day.” $\endgroup$ – Jokela Mar 23 '16 at 9:23
3
$\begingroup$

Should it be prevented to close/delete posts which has received a bounty?

Any posted answer that does not answer the question should be deleted, regardless of upvotes & bounties.

I don't think either of your posts answered the questions asked. The one that was deleted made the preposterous claim that gravity doesn't exist and all mass is photons with frequencies less than 1 Hz when the question asked was Where does gravity get its energy? The post doesn't answer the question. In the second case, you're basically explaining what is occurring in the video OP linked and not giving an answer as to why it is curving.

Should it be more limited for a single person to give "unclear-close-votes".

No, anyone with sufficient reputation can and should vote as they think about the question. There is already a maximum of 24 votes allowed per day (24 hour GMT time), with a maximum of 20 reviews per day, any more limitation would, in my opinion, be a detriment to the system and the site. I would much prefer an increase in votes and reviews allowed per day.

Should it be more limited for a single person mark questions as a "Low quality posts".

Any single person with sufficient reputation can flag a post. After that, it goes to review for those with sufficient reputation to vote to delete the post; it takes 3 votes from those with >20k rep to delete or 6 votes from those with <20k rep. Again, the 20 reviews per day holds here as well.

For flagging purposes, a user initially gets 10 flags per day. This increases by 1 for every 2000 rep gained plus a bonus 1 for every 10 accepted flags. The maximum flag count one can accrue is 100 per day. I don't think I've ever come close to using the 100 flags I have available to me, so maybe I could see decreasing this, but on larger sites (e.g., Stack Overflow) it is probably very useful & not with implementing on a per-site basis.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

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