date
stringlengths 10
10
| nb_tokens
int64 60
629k
| text_size
int64 234
1.02M
| content
stringlengths 234
1.02M
|
|---|---|---|---|
2016/10/05 | 721 | 2,852 | <issue_start>username_0: In [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/77827/what-rights-do-students-in-the-u-s-have-re-gender-pronouns?noredirect=1#comment190504_77827), Cape Code says:
>
> I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it's about the legalese of a specific geographic region and not about academia.
>
>
>
The comment has, at the time of writing, 11 upvotes.The same can be said of any other legal related question. So, should we close all legal related questions as too localised?<issue_comment>username_1: I think it is not too localised. The particular example is regulated by US federal law, which makes it exactly as specific to a specific geographic location as "How does the US admission to PhD students work?", and less localised than anything tagged with, for example, Germany.
Laws provide a framework we have to work in, and set limits, duties, and rights in the academic practice that academics should be aware of (or may wonder about).
As long as the question doesn't require a lawyer familiar with the specifics of the case, I think it can stay.
Furthermore, even if the jurisdiction is not the same as mine, many countries' laws mirror each other, so knowing how things are in another place may help me find out how they are in mine.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: One of the reasons for which I voted to close this question and similar ones as off-topic is that I believe their off-topicness makes them *not useful*.
Apparently the OP wanted to advertise her/his self-answer but I doubt that this person or anyone else on this site is qualified to answer in a useful way. Besides, and especially in the American legal system, I think it's probably impossible to answer in a definite manner. Such questions about "rights to this and that" are typically controversial and not answerable outside a formal legal procedure.
So what would a random user benefit from another random user claiming that that this law grants them the right to something? Imagine I asked about students' right re concealed carry of firearms on campuses in the US. I could easily post my own answer citing constitutional articles and laws and claim either that students have that right, or not. It would be useless.
However, questions that are related to legal issue but really ask about what is the practice and reasonable expectations one can have in an academic setting are on topic.
I think this quote form [another thread](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2146/10643) summarized that sentiment quite appropriately:
>
> Most legal-issues questions on Academia.SE are not about the law per se, but rather about the de facto interaction of academic standards and practices with issues regarding the law. That sort of thing is completely within scope of this site.
>
>
>
Upvotes: -1 |
2016/10/05 | 1,346 | 5,447 | <issue_start>username_0: A [recent Meta question](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3484/73) noted:
>
> One of the community members has approached the moderators with a concern about gendered pronoun usage amongst our Academia members. Specifically, this individual felt that calling out gender in discussion—e.g., "he said…" or "as she commented…"—risks introducing bias and may affect the quality of the discussion.
>
>
>
I am not going to ask whether we should use gender-neutral language when speaking about a user who has not indicated gender through posts, avatar, username, discussions, etc. (That can be discussed at the above-referenced Meta question.)
My question is about what happens if a user, say, User A, doesn't follow that practice, when referring to User B.
**In such a case, can a flag be raised, either by User B (wishing to remain gender anonymous on the site), or by a bystander who is concerned that the gender assumption could affect the quality of the discussion?**
In other words, should moderators use their gentle influence, behind the scenes, in such a situation?<issue_comment>username_1: Suppose I am the hypothetical User B in this scenario. I have not previously indicated any gender preference, I wish to remain gender neutral, and User A has used male pronouns in reference to me in a comment, answer, or chat message. For example, User A might have written something like this on a comment on someone else's post:
>
> But in User B's answer, he said the opposite!
>
>
>
I have two options:
1. I can let it go, if it doesn't bother me. (Note that use of "he" for a general, gender-neutral third person [is still quite common](https://english.stackexchange.com/a/30461) in many contexts, and doesn't imply that the author assumes that the person they are writing about is male. Similarly, [use of "she"](https://english.stackexchange.com/q/28508) for a person of unknown gender also does not imply an assumption that the person is female.)
2. I can politely reply to User A in a comment, indicating my preference for the they/them/their pronouns. Then, after User A has replaced the comment or edited the post, I can delete my own. Note that this does not disclose my own gender identity, only my preference for gender-neutral pronouns:
>
> I prefer to be referred to with the "they/them/their" pronoun, rather than gender-specific pronouns. Would you mind deleting your comment and replacing it with one that says "But in User B's answer, **they** said the opposite!"?
>
>
>
I should also make sure to **assume good intentions**, as per the [Be Nice](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice) policy. I should not assume that someone who refers to me using a non-preferred pronoun is doing this with any malicious intent.
A flag would *not* be appropriate in this instance. Just as in "real life", if I am an adult who has a strong preference with respect to the pronouns that people use in reference to me, it is up to *me* to communicate that to others.
As for a "bystander who is concerned that the gender assumption could affect the quality of the discussion", I'm not sure what specifically you are referring to. (An example of an instance of gender assumption affecting the quality of the discussion might help.) Also, use of [he](https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/30455/is-using-he-for-a-gender-neutral-third-person-correct/) or [she](https://english.stackexchange.com/q/28508) in reference to someone whose gender is unknown is more generally indicative of someone's language preferences than of a gender assumption, as per the referenced answers on English.SE. This applies *especially* in an international community like this one, where members' first languages vary with respect to how gender is used.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Yes, it should be possible for User B or for a concerned bystander to raise a flag, requesting gentle but helpful moderator action in the situation described.
As in all flags, the moderators would need to evaluate the specifics of the case, including, User A's level of comfort with English, any underlying tension that may exist between the two users, any observed effects on the quality of the particular discussion, and any other specifics the flagger might care to note.
A user wishing to raise such a flag might not feel comfortable confronting User A publicly.
This flagging ability is one way (among others) the site can ensure that everyone is comfortable participating freely in a public place where issues are discussed about the academic world, which has historically been a very gender-circumscribed environment.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: There is absolutely zero practical way to force a user/commenter/answerer to go to the profile and check for a pronoun preference. It's just not how this system was meant to work.
Given that, I think there are just plain logistical issues preventing this proposal. People I interact with can tell me their preference, and I can do my best to remember it, but despite best efforts, I might not be able to. People come and go with high frequency, and given zero history of a new user, can't be expected to know a preference, and certainly should not be expected to go look it up.
I suppose if people feel really strongly about it, I think they need to approach meta.SE, and ask for a pronoun preference field to appear prominently.
Upvotes: 2 |
2016/10/06 | 713 | 2,845 | <issue_start>username_0: Few days ago my advisor shared on social media this platform, and also recommended for everyone at my uni to use it as a source of information and how something should be done in academia.
I am wondering how safe my private data and locations are here? do I need to delete my account? Is someone with experience in CS can break into StackExchange server and pick location and IP information?
Do you think I should use from now on only anonymous question option and not to use account?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I am wondering how safe my private data and locations are here?
>
>
>
Your private data should be safe. Moderators and staff can see it, but must not share it. Then, you give a location publicly. But maybe that's a false flag.
>
> Do I need to delete my account?
>
>
>
That's impossible to answer.
>
> Is someone with experience in CS can break into StackExchange server and pick location and IP information?
>
>
>
Well, likely there is no system of which one can say it is absolutely impossible to break in. But then, SE is sizeable and in that business for quite some time with plenty of users with "experience in CS." Thus, I'd say it should be as save as most anything. Why not worry about your emails instead? (Some info did leak in a encrypted form via the autogenerated indenticons, as it was the hash of some personal data, but this got plugged via salting the data.)
>
> Do you think I should use from now on only anonymous question option and not to use account?
>
>
>
That's hard to tell. If your name is actually Simon and you are actually in Macau, then this could help to identify you a lot. Thus, if it is important for you to be not identified, then you might change this.
You should also keep in mind that the content of your posts could be identifying that knows you or was part of the conversation. "Yesterday, my advisor said: {Something distinctive}." If your advisor reads this they might recognize it whether your account is anonymous or not.
Actually, think about it, specifically this post suffers this problem! It is rather self-defeating.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Looking over the [questions you've asked in the past](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41198/ssimon?tab=questions), I would say that you're significantly overreacting. Many people use this forum, including (possibly) your peers, your instructors, your collaborators, and your future employers. You seem to have maintained a professional air about you since you've started; keep it up and you should be fine.
In the event that you do want to post a more sensitive question, simply log out before posting it.
On a related note, feel free to visit (and upvote!) [this question](https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/281223/139256) on the main Meta site.
Upvotes: 2 |
2016/10/24 | 1,149 | 4,203 | <issue_start>username_0: I have used (stalked?) the StackExchange family of websites, and until recently, couldn't find a need to register: I usually found a similar question to mine, with an answer much better than I could think of. MUCH better.
I recently asked a question [How can I get the key to my professor's lab? [closed]](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/78350/how-can-i-get-the-key-to-my-professors-lab) to which I got several wonderful answers, but my question was closed as off-topic for understandable reasons.
Asking and answering questions is more art than science (is it?) but I don't know how to start becoming part of this online society.
---
Two questions I found particularly interesting:
* [I don't want to kill any more mice, but my advisor insists that I must in order to get my PhD](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/67897/i-dont-want-to-kill-any-more-mice-but-my-advisor-insists-that-i-must-in-order)
* [How to ask dumb questions?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/51631/how-to-ask-dumb-questions)
Two answers I found particularly interesting:
* [Two years into my PhD program, and Mom is dying of cancer. Should I tell my advisor about it?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/52386/two-years-into-my-phd-program-and-mom-is-dying-of-cancer-should-i-tell-my-advi/52387#52387)
* [How can I get the key to my professor's lab? [closed]](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/78352/63352)<issue_comment>username_1: I won't profess to know how to "master the art" of asking questions on SE. But I will answer based on my experience thus far with these sites.
Chiefly, the best way to learn the art of asking questions is... to ask questions. Just like most other things in life, it takes time and practice to figure out how to do ask a "good" question -- though the links @ff524 pointed out will help narrow that down. But ultimately, it takes time to figure out what questions have already been asked, what questions are appropriate, what questions are worthwhile (so to speak), etc.
*So username_1, what you're saying is that I should start blasting the site with questions and eventually I'll get better, right?*
Sure, and if you keep randomly entering letters into a word processor, you'll get [the complete works of William Shakespeare](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem). My point is: obviously I don't mean ask dozens of inane, silly questions -- but if you've been stalking reading SE sites already, then you have a fairly decent picture of what a truly awful question looks like. As for the questions in your mind that you aren't sure about -- ask away. Trust me, the community will let you know one way or the other ;-)
And over time, you'll get a better and better sense of how to ask good, useful, meaningful questions on SE.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: After re-reading your question, I add that it is well written in many respects and so I guess that you are on a good way. A bit more detail:
* In your question you give necessary background, a bit too much probably, but in this regard the question is fine.
* The part "vent off some steam on the Academia StackExchange" was probably not a good idea. I think "venting off steam" here is not appreciated in general. In case the remark was tongue-in-cheek: adding humor to questions is difficult to get right (cf. [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/9396/should-academic-papers-necessarily-carry-a-sober-tone) and [this duplicate](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/15571/sense-of-humor-allowed-in-academic-writing)) and often you are better off in leaving the humor out.
* When the question comes to the actual question, you are asking too many questions (I count three question marks), and also quite different ones. I suggest to think harder on what is the most important question for you, i.e. an answer to what question would help you most. In this particular case, I guess the question "What I am doing wrong?", while probably interesting, is not the one that is most important, since you focus on improving your situation and not focus on reflecting your behavior.
Upvotes: 2 |
2016/10/27 | 600 | 2,277 | <issue_start>username_0: A user is experiencing high anxiety about an academic issue. He has expressed clearly, multiple times, that (a) he is in agreement with everyone who has tried to reassure him, but that (b) his anxiety persists and is acute. He states that he has posted his question and deleted it twice and now here it is again for the third time: [Is it unethical of me and can I get in trouble if a professor passes me based on an oral exam without attending class?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/78853/32436)
I wrote an answer which has disappeared along with one of his deletions. I would like to recover this answer and repost it at his new question.
Can the moderators merge his multiple threads, so my answer would show up? (I'm not sure if "thread" is the correct word.)
Or should I just have flagged his question to try to do this? I don't think my request would fit in the flag box....<issue_comment>username_1: [Here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/78826/11365) is your answer. You have [enough reputation to see deleted posts](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/moderator-tools) so you can copy and paste it yourself into the new question.
In general: you can see your own [deleted recent answers](https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/226810/254250) on your profile page, and if you have more than 10k rep, you can use the [deleted:1](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/145060/enable-searching-with-deleted1-for-10k-users) search operator to see your own deleted questions and answers.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: One thing you could have raised a flag for would be for the questions to be merged. In general, deleting and reposting questions is frowned upon. Users sometimes do this to avoid loss of reputation from down votes or to bring more attention to the question. In this case, it seems like the user is simply anxious. Which would bring your deleted answer back. That said, the questions are long and you answer is the only answer. When I looked, I decided not to invest the time sorting it out. Another option would be to undelete the old version and close the new one as a duplicate. These options seem like they might further stress out the user with little benefit to us as a community.
Upvotes: 2 |
2016/11/17 | 955 | 3,909 | <issue_start>username_0: We've had a few cheating-related questions lately ([this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/79732/73), [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/78853/73), tangentially [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/73597/73)). Almost all of these end up yielding a number of answers to the effect of "I think X, because Y". While the reasons are good, they're really individuals expressing their personal ethics, rather than being definitive. The tough part is that they're not definitive because in these instances there often *isn't* a definitive answer.
So, that said, my question is: **should questions related to students cheating (where the answer isn't explicitly defined in their academic integrity policy) be closed as "primarily opinion-based"?**<issue_comment>username_1: I suggest that **Yes**, these questions should be closed.
My primary motivation here is that the voting-based nature of Stack Exchange will result in some answers being given more votes—sometimes many more votes—than others. Unfortunately, given that there is no "correct" answer in these instances, the votes really just indicate how many other anonymous internet denizens happen to agree with that answer, making the entire question simply a morality poll. The specific, appropriate answer may differ based on local norms, the individual's personal beliefs, and subtle nuances that people outside the questioner's culture may not recognize as important.
As such, rather than allowing the poll to occur, I suggest is that the user would be better served by being explicitly told to consider it themselves and ask individuals within their own social and cultural circle, rather than relying on the wisdom of the masses.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> should questions related to students cheating (where the answer isn't explicitly defined in their academic integrity policy) be closed as "primarily opinion-based"?
>
>
>
No, this is far too general and comprises almost the entire cheating tag.
I agree, however, that we should take care that these questions are asked in a way that makes them a good fit for this format. For example:
* Questions should not just ask whether something is ethical or not, but for ethical arguments for and against something or for an ethical analysis. The asker has to make the decision, not we; but it is valid to ask us for aspects to consider when making the decision.
* Questions should specify an ethical framework or paradigm (e.g., fairness, avoiding disproportionate measures) on which answers should be based.
* Questions that aren’t actually about determining the ethics of a situation, but for example about possible legal consequences or similar should specify this.
(Also see my answer on [“Attitudes of academics towards X?” On or off topic?](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3405/7734).)
Of course, the questions should not be off-topic for other reasons, like depending on individual factors. I would close at least [I used a solution that I happened to already have on my laptop on an exam. Did I cheat?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/79732/7734) for this reason.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: No, such questions usually can be answered, and should not be closed.
Ethics questions should not be answered based on the answerer's *personal* ethics anyway, but rather, based on their understanding of the *consensus* ethical standards of the overall academic community. Ideally, explanations should be given that help the asker understand academic ethics.
If an answerer believes there is no consensus on a question, then they can answer "no consensus" and explain why not. They should not take this as an opportunity to air their personal opinions on the question itself.
People may disagree on whether there is a consensus, or what it is, but votes can help resolve such disagreements.
Upvotes: 3 |
2016/11/28 | 773 | 3,273 | <issue_start>username_0: Here's a specific example: I wrote an answer to this question: [How to professionally handle sexist remarks by a student?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/80561/would-you-call-a-student-out-on-being-sexist/80565#80565)
The OP only included one tag. I can think of at least one more tag but I'm hesitating to add it. Since I contributed an answer, maybe it might look as though I have a conflict of interest?<issue_comment>username_1: Adding an answer makes the question jump to the top of the front page. That means this is a great time to edit the question to add tags or fix any formatting issues.
Tags are really important for future users to find questions, so if in doubt add an existing tag. If the tag you want to add does not exist, it is worth asking on meta or chat about it.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: IMHO, this is totally fine. I've noticed many posts where answering users edit the tags of the question in various Stack Exchange sites. I find many of them useful too.
As long as the additional tag is relevant to the question, there is nothing else to worry about.
---
For instance, I skim through the live stream of incoming questions in Stack Overflow looking for Python topics. Many times, I see posts related to Python but don't have the tag. I add the tag and also answer the question. There are many expert users subscribed to this tag too. I've seen occasions where a better answer is posted in the same question afterward. This helps both the OP and the community. I would not rule this out as a probable conflict of interest.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Askers are notoriously bad at tagging their questions, choosing a useful title, and so on. If you answer a question, you are probably best qualified to edit it – not only because you apparently feel qualified to answer on the topic but also because you looked more at the question than any other user.
While you technically have a conflict of interest regarding tag-related badges, you have to perform a lot of biased tag edits to actually see an effect and all you get at the end is a stinking badge. Moreover as tag edits bump the question, they draw attention and can be supervised by other users. In general, once you gain a privilege on a Stack Exchange site, you are trusted to handle it responsibly. Almost every privilege can theoretically be abused.
You also technically have a conflict of interest by bumping the question or increasing its visibility (through added tags). However, as long as you perform the edit temporally close to answering it, the bump does not really change something as the question is on the front page anyway. Even tag-only edits to old questions are fine unless you do some systematic or binge tag editing (in which case, you should announce and ratify your plans on Meta first). As for increasing the question’s general visibility, this is a generally encouraged thing, as long as it does not lead to questions bugging people where they shouldn’t. Again, you are trusted to handle your privileges responsibly.
Finally note that the [Explainer, Refiner, and Illuminator badges](https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/239898/255554) explicitly encourage editing questions that you answer.
Upvotes: 3 |
2016/11/29 | 6,506 | 27,123 | <issue_start>username_0: I find the reaction to [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/80561/10643) quite unreasonable. The responses were overwhelmingly negative and focused on trying to prove that OP is wrong in assessing whether a given situation was possibly sexist or not. The reaction was similar to what happened to an [older, very similar question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/17739/10643). That one was much better received, and the [meta post about it](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/834/10643) also indicated questioning the premises in the question was not the right way to go.
(Quite ironically ff524 was the first to question the premises in a comment, while she was the "victim" of a similar treatment 2 years ago.)
In the case of the first question, edits to the question to remove possible ambiguity were even less favorably received. I don't really understand why. I think one should stick with answering the question, possibly pointing out a potential false positive, and not just questioning the premises.
To that extent, **how should we deal with these types of questions/situations in the future?**<issue_comment>username_1: >
> What is happening with that question about handling a potentially sexist behavior?
>
>
>
Briefly: People don’t read or are incapable of sticking to the actual question. It’s a problem that we see an all sorts of question. Sometimes it’s not even a problem, because the asker clearly needs something else than what they asked for – **but this does not apply here.**
>
> Quite ironically @ff524 was the first to question the premises in a comment, while she was the "victim" of a similar treatment 2 years ago.
>
>
>
In this case, addressing a problem with the premises in the comments is exactly the right way to go in my opinion. It does not address the actual question (hence it should not be an answer), but it points out potentially relevant information to the asker. Whether this information is actually relevant is something the asker has to decide¹, but we cannot just leave such a problem unmentioned.
However, given that the asker is now obviously aware of this potential problem and has entirely removed the respective parts from the question, **all comments pertaining to this should be removed.**
>
> I think one should stick with answering the question, why not while pointing out a potential false positive, and not just question the premises.
>
>
>
For answers to this question, I agree. **Every answer that does nothing but addressing issues with the premise should be deleted for failing to address the question.** Note that this is not deleting an answer because it is bad or incorrect; it’s deleting an answer because it does not even attempt to answer the question at hand – it may be an answer to another question, but then almost everything is.
I wish to state that this is not a chameleon question – the question was clearly stating that it was not about this specific situation:
>
> So I am not necessarily soliciting an answer specific to my situation, but in a more general setting.
>
>
>
Thus, everybody posting an answer addressing the premises was entering the risk of having their answer deleted anyway.
---
¹ after all, it could just be that the asker forgot to report a detail relevant to her allegations (but not to her question) as her report was intended to be “without disclosing too much of it”.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_1: The more I look at this question, the more I think that plainly deleting answers or parts of answers that do not address the actual question won’t suffice to resolve the situation.
Most answers have been voted upon on account of their attack of the premises instead of the solution they provide to the actual problem (if any). Hence the mess could only be resolved by resetting all votes (which is not possible even for moderators and would yield more confusion and disturbance than anything else).
I therefore suggest the following course of action:
* Let the asker **re-post the question** in its current state (without explicit premises).
* Under all answers addressing the actual question, leave comments inviting the authors to re-post their answer on the actual question.
* **Delete the original question** after locking it for a week or so for reference.
For future similar questions, we should take care to emphasise the focus early by editing the question accordingly and deleting non-answers quickly.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: For future similar questions, in my opinion we should **put the question on hold** immediately (with reason "unclear what you are asking"), so that it can be edited and improved by the OP without receiving inappropriate answers. Sometimes *putting it on hold* only means *putting it on hold*, not *closing it*, and this is one of those cases.
(As noted by @djechlin, it is a good idea to state explicitly in the comments that it is only a temporary closure while we wait for an edit, not to discourage the OP.)
The alternative is doing some major edits on the question ourselves without waiting for OP: this is appropriate in some cases, but it is a more dangerous practice to suggest in general, because there is always the risk of turning the question into something completely different than what the OP was trying to ask.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: You should challenge the premise because that is what intelligent people do.
The OP gave background to a situation. She had nothing more to add when questioned about this background. So to those answering the question we took the background as complete and fact.
The question "how to deal with sexism?" is not a question, or at least one appropriate for this site. You would need to have an example of sexism in the workplace to be able to relate it to the standards of this site. There are hundreds of ways to deal with this at a school, each different depending on the circumstances.
The OP never delivered though. She had a chance to convey to the readers why she thought there was sexism - (maybe there is and she doesn't explain things well). So to answer the question correctly you would have to state your opinion about the OP's situation. And my opinion was there was no sexism described and the OP's behavior seemed sexist.
The OP still had a chance to add information or dispute anything. Instead she started editing and taking away the facts of this case. But even without the facts in the last edit, we still know what they are so we answer the question as complete as we can.
To the contrary of others I think the question originally was valid. It was a microcosm of a teacher/student relationship and where things can go wrong. Now the question is so vague it is unanswerable. The question's edits should be rolled back. This is like someone asking on math stack - what is 2x6? and then editing it to say- what is 2x ? We know the answer is 12, editing the question doesn't help us unknow what was there.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: **It would be a mistake to reason from this to some sort of general rule about answer scope or challenging premises, because that's not the real issue here.**
[It is widely accepted at Stack Exchange](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem) that we should be free to try to solve the underlying problem rather than answer the question as asked. Sometimes this leads to disagreements or disputes, and occasionally the premise of a question may be challenged inappropriately. But overall, I think this is a very good principle that increases the quality of the Q&A resource. It would be a mistake to abandon or weaken this principle in hopes of addressing a perceived problem in a single question or small group of questions.
Anyway, I don't think the challenges to the premise are really the problem. The simple fact is that this question was about a politically charged issue, and unfortunately that will divide people and bring out the worst in almost any forum. This site is no exception. There is no easy solution to this. In fact, not everyone will even agree about what the problem is, or that there is one.
I think the best options available right now are:
* **Remove content based on being "not nice" where appropriate.** In this case, the top answer challenges the premise, but is quite reasonable in tone. There are a lot of other answers that are much more antagonistic, while not really adding anything substantive. I see nothing wrong with deleting some of those answers.
* **Edit questions to make them less controversial, and focus on a clearer answerable question, when possible.** This was done here, to be about a hypothetical, unambiguous situation. It didn't really work to reduce the controversy, though, perhaps partly because of the combative way the OP responded to criticism in the edits and comments.
*p.s. I find the criticism here of everyone who challenged the question's premise to go a bit far. The original question really did present a situation where reasonable people could disagree whether it was sexism. The OP's rationale for believing the student was sexist was given, so those challenging her were not simply speculating. And it's not clear to me that all of those challenging the OP had bad intentions. Keep in mind that an accusation of sexism could have harmful consequences both for the OP and the student.*
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Really simply the issue was this:
OP: "So something sexist happened. I'd like to ask a question about dealing with sexism in general..."
Everyone: "That really wasn't a sexist thing that happened." [lots of answers]
OP: "Actually I don't want your opinion on whether it was sexist, I was hoping we could just look past. So given that..."
Everyone: "that wasn't sexist, you sexist idiot." (Peruse the answers if you think I am exaggerating.)
The tone really did lower here. And lower, and lower, and lower. Disagreement with the OP's stance toward the situation became justification for really denigrating tone.
This is somewhat of a hole in what the philosophy of requiring context can provide. Sometimes you just don't want to have to justify the situation in the first place, *especially* on a sensitive topic such as sexism, and you just want to get to the advice of anyone who is willing to see the situation *your* way.
[But this is addressed pretty thoroughly in another question on meta](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/844/18072):
>
> I think that examples in potentially subjective questions encourage people to pass judgment on the examples.
>
>
>
**As a proposal**, create a [subjective-example](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/subjective-example "show questions tagged 'subjective-example'") tag, with description something like
>
> This tag is for situations where discussing the specific situation or example would invite unconstructive criticism of the example itself. Questions should generally include descriptions of specific situations, but there are exceptions where details would invite excess speculation or criticism. When using this tag, question askers are encouraged to use their judgment for what details to omit and question viewers should take care to honor this judgment.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: Should we ignore the premise?
-----------------------------
Let us consider the following, exaggerated, cases:
In the first, a question is posted, reading
>
> If someone's life is in imminent danger due to a threat of a third person, am I justified in using lethal force agains that third person?
>
>
>
and in the second case, the text posted is
>
> Today, I overheard someone saying they wish my friend didn't come back to teach next semester. The person saying this looked as if full of anger. I feel like this person is going to assassinate my colleague any moment, and I think I need to take drastic steps to prevent my colleague from harm.
>
>
> In a general setting, if someone's life is in imminent danger due to a threat of a third person, am I justified in using lethal force agains that third person?
>
>
>
The first question is already an extremely complicated one, and even though it is commonly discussed in law classes in a general setting, no one answer could provide a complete and unambiguous solution. This is why courts of law are needed.
Now, in the second case, one might argue that the question is exactly the same, since the first paragraph is entirely irrelevant to the question for being introduced with the words "in a general setting". Clearly, though, the person asking the question did *not* think the story in the first paragraph was irrelevant, even if claimed otherwise, since if it really were, there would have been no point in including the background story. Providing background to complicated problems, especially problems involving people, is a useful thing to do, because it allowes answers that are better suited for the situation which is *actually* at hand. It also allows people to point out that the question asked may not be "the right one to ask", given the background. The question has not been asked "in a vacuum", but in the context of a real-life situation.
Also, since people are involved, one has to acknowledge that the answers given may have very real consequences to one or more parties. Pretending to not know about the real situation at hand is naive at best, in my view.
So, if you, the reader, are convinced that the background should be ignored, since what is asked for is a general answer, would you think it right to ignore the fact that the situation at hand in no way warrants use of lethal force, and answer in the second case with "Yes, if someone's life is in imminent danger due to a threat of a third person, one is justified in using lethal force"? Provided one knew this was the case in the applicable jurisdiction, of course.
What should we do about that particular question and its answers?
-----------------------------------------------------------------
If we ignore for the moment the question whether answering just the generic question is doing the asker any service, one may argue that there is now a disconnect between the edited question and the answers. I would agree, but propose that the solution is not to delete/edit the answers, but rather to roll back the edits to the question. If someone is indeed interested in an answer to the generic question so much, another question can be posted, without destroying the valid answers that have been given so far.
After all, if I edited this meta question to be about the best sushi in town, you wouldn't delete the answers given here and demand discussion of sushi, would you?
Upvotes: 6 <issue_comment>username_6: I feel like the combative answers (and the ensuing combative replies by the OP) are more problematic than the original question. If you look at the original un-edited post, its tone is fairly neutral and it describes the author's specific situation and then very explicitly asks a general question:
>
> So I am not necessarily soliciting an answer specific to my situation,
> but in a more general setting. If you witness a student engaging in a
> sexist behavior, would you call him/her out? How would you do this
> without making the student feel intimidated?
>
>
>
It also seems problematic to me that we're potentially *retroactively* identifying this as a question worthy of being put on hold. It's not unusual to see bad questions on hold within hours, if not minutes. This lends further evidence to me that the problem is in the answers, not the post. Also, from the [help center](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-ask):
>
> But if you give us details and context, we can provide a useful answer.
>
>
>
Context is explicitly encouraged. However, it's not necessary to attack the OPs perception of the situation while still addressing both the actual question and the problems entailed in the context, which I tried to do in my answer.
In the future I think it would be useful to:
* Flag and delete answers that *only* address the context, and not the question
* Point out early in comments to the OP that context in a situation like this may distract from answers to their question. Or maybe that should be in the help center?
And then the bigger problem seems to me the way we moderate comments. I rarely see comments subject to much (perfectly possible I'm just missing that, so correct me if I'm wrong), other than getting moved to chat when there are too many. And yet here, most of the mess is in comments - there are only a handful of answers that ignored the question and only talked about the context. Just looking over [our own guidelines](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment), I feel like there's grounds to delete a ton of these comments.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: I know I don't have much rep here, but I look up to this site as I work my way up college, and it was honestly pretty embarrassing to see the comments on that post. I left a few comments, but they're gone now, as they probably should be.
What frustrated me was *two dozen people don't need to question the OP!* I know it's nice to think that academia has no problems with sexism, but we all know that's not true.
Yes, it was easy to point to the older professor and say "Oh, well he was older, that's obviously 100% of the reason why the student respects him more than you! No sexism!"
But what annoyed me was that so many people felt the need to weigh in and make comments like "Wait ... where's the sexism here?" It didn't read like people questioning the premise in a rhetorical sense, it read like a bunch of people getting very defensive of accusations of mild sexism in a university probably hundreds of miles from them.
I know it would be frustrating as a man to be accused of sexism - especially when it is absolutely not clear the student was being sexist - but that's how the community should have responded, by politely pointing out other factors, not by dogpiling on the OP in an effort to prove how *absolutely unimaginable* it would be that a little bit of sexism occurred in the ivory tower.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: @username_5's answer (and my guess as well) in a nutshell: people were questioning the premise because they were worried that if they were to answer the question literally, their answer would be misapplied to a situation that doesn't fit it. I find this a reasonable worry given the original post, and would probably have done the same.
Lots of answers on various StackExchange sites question the premise of the question (e.g., a student posts their homework, but the question makes it clear that the student doesn't understand the underlying definitions). This happens particularly often when the question is ambiguous and muddles up different issues. What we've seen here is a case of muddling up, although the political forcefield surrounding the issue has expectedly poisoned the discussion (though, compared to what we've been hearing just a few weeks ago, this was an exceptionally constructive debate).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_9: I think the answers to the original question were appropriate to the specific situation presented: it would be a bad idea to assume sexism was the reason for the student's actions.
Now the OP has a different question: what to do when there *is* sexism.
The best way to ask that is as a *separate* question, not an edit of the old question. A new question could be phrased something like:
>
> I've had [some interactions with a student](https://academia.stackexchange.com/revisions/80561/1) (link to rev1 of old
> question) that I'm worried are signs of or due to sexism. If future
> interactions with this student provide clear evidence of sexism, what
> should I do?
>
>
> I can't yet confirm or rule out sexism, but I'd like to be prepared in the unfortunate case that my suspicions are confirmed.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_10: As originally written, the question was:
>
> So I am not necessarily soliciting an answer specific to my situation,
> but in a more general setting.
> If you witness a student engaging in a sexist behavior, would you call
> him/her out? How would you do this without making the student feel
> intimidated?
>
>
>
If this were the original question and no other context was presented, it would be difficult to answer because it is so open-ended in the "more general setting". What is "sexist behavior"? How was it "witnessed" (did others see it)? Did the student make direct remarks? What is physical? The context in which this occurred would be very important for moving forward. Depending on the severity of the remark and the context, different actions might be appropriate. Sexist behavior of any kind should not be tolerated but there is still a (debatable) scale, perhaps:
>
> implied sexism > direct verbal sexism > institutional sexism >
> physical sexism.
>
>
>
Each of these cases should be treated differently. So when the question is asked without context, I would have asked context to be presented. Without the context, the answer may not be applicable to the real life situation.
In this case the background was originally given. The background of the question suggested to me that, on the scale above, it was implied sexism and even then, perhaps not even true based on the details given. Therefore, it seemed necessary to (politely) inquire into the nature of the context or question the premise of the question in more detail.
While the post itself was well-meaning, there were a few comments in the background that made me question the premise. First, the question author states:
>
> It feels sexist to me (I am female).
>
>
>
This suggests that the remark might have been sexist but the author is not sure. However, the next few comments:
>
> I feel that I would be bullying the student if I were calling him out
> on his sexist remarks
>
>
> (which, he is probably not aware of)
>
>
> even the young people can have sexist views, and that this will
> probably happen again in the future
>
>
> If you witness a student engaging in a sexist behavior
>
>
>
All of these suggest the post author has already made up their mind which does not seem like the best conclusion given the story. We weren't there, of course, so all we can go off of is what is written in the background. It seems reasonable to me to question the premise because it suggests the author has gone from "there may have been sexist remarks" to "there were sexist remarks". We should never discourage individuals from reporting sexism but we should also not encourage false accusations of sexism. False accusations are not professional. In an attempt to ensure that the author receives the best possible outcome to the situation, questioning their underlying assumptions is valid to me. This situation would be far more straightfoward if the student directly stated a sexist comment.
I do not approve of attacking the post author or aggressively trying to change their mind. But I see nothing wrong with politely engaging in a discussion to clarify the context. Additionally, the post author referred to the all posters as "collectively dyslexic" and was also aggressive with their comments and edits (some of which were later removed) which inflammed the situation further.
In conclusion: **The premise is being challenged because if the premise is incorrect, it may not be necessary to take action at all.**
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_11: The general question
--------------------
If the question had no context, it would be Too Broad and need to be closed immediately. I cite the [What types of questions should I avoid asking?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask) page:
>
> Your questions should be reasonably scoped. If you can imagine an entire book that answers your question, you’re asking too much.
>
>
>
I consider this to be self evident. These kind of open ended posts don't make good questions for SE's Q&A format.
Asking, "How do I handle sexist remarks in general?" is as vague and open ended as going to DBA and asking, "How do I index my columns, in general?" or to SO and asking, "How do I parse files in general?" or to SciFi and asking, "How do Sith win battles, in general?" The only reasonable answer you can give is, "It depends on the specifics."
The specific question
---------------------
So the general question is unanswerable, but the user decided to provide some context *anyway*. On the other hand, the specific situation described *is answerable*. So as an SE user, you're left with two possible actions:
1. Edit out the specific situation and close the question.
2. Edit out the general question and answer in the specific context.
The first option throws away a perfectly good question. The second option salvages the question and creates a useful resource, but if you believe no action should be taken in this case, it probably requires a frame challenge. At a bare minimum, you'd have to say, "You shouldn't do anything because there isn't sufficient evidence of sexism here. Taking action is likely to be detrimental to everyone involved." But that isn't much different than the frame challenge.
So the answer to, "Why don't people stick to the question?" is, "Because they were trying to salvage the question and make it a useful resource." The only real failing on that front is that no one dared to edit out the "general" bits. Any issues with rudeness or arguing are a completely separate matter.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_12: It's not about academia!
========================
The question is stated in some academic context, but that quickly becomes a backstory of the sexism related problem in the question. That is fine.
Sexism as a concept is not the problem. Differences in opinion are not the problem.
Sexism is hard to discuss
-------------------------
It is all about communication, discussion of differing opinions on the topic. And sexism is a topic that is hard to discuss, with a long, well known tradition.
So we can assume that the academia-related parts of the original question were actually meant as a context to express the communication in, a backstory.
So the original question is not much about academia, but about communication of a difficult topic in the first place.
**My proposal is to move the question over to
[Interpersonal Skills SE](https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/)**.
They routinely help solving communication about sexism. Not only the one in the question, but also the much more intense one in the comment discussion.
That flareup will not even start there. In part because they are beta, and somewhat small. But with high density of competence.
There, communication about sexism is one of the easier topics. They routinely handle things like family problems between three persons.
Upvotes: -1 |
2016/11/30 | 722 | 2,518 | <issue_start>username_0: In 2016, Stack Exchange will continue its tradition of the ["Winter Bash"](http://winterbash2016.stackexchange.com). Winter Bash is an annual event that can run on any Stack Exchange site that chooses to participate. Users earn “hats” for their gravatars by completing certain tasks (analogous to badges). Certain actions trigger the user receiving a hat, which their gravatar can “wear”. We track everyone’s progress earning hats in a leaderboard that looks something like this:
Stack Exchange sees Winter Bash as a a fun and lighthearted way to celebrate the amazing people who make the sites awesome, as the year draws to a close. Two things to note:
* **Any user can opt out** (clicking an option in your profile means you won't see *any* hat at all - not on your own avatar and not on any other user's).
* Apart from the wearing of hats by avatars, the site is otherwise unaffected (there is no “holiday” theme of the site's design, for example)
* After the promotion ends, the hats disappear, as if they were never there.
---
This being said, we (as a community) also have to choice to opt out entirely and have the Winter Bash completely disabled on Academia Stack Exchange (no hats for anyone). In [2014](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1369/poll-should-academia-se-participate-in-the-2014-winter-bash-holiday-hats-prom) and [2015](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2082/poll-should-we-participate-in-the-2015-winter-bash-holiday-hats-promotion), we chose to participate.
To decide whether we will participate in the Winter Bash 2016 Edition, **I've created a “poll” below this post**, with two comments. **Upvote one of the comments according to your preference.** If you want to discuss further, leave an answer or comments to other answers.
The poll will close on Friday December 9.<issue_comment>username_1: I'm voting yes because there don't seem to be any downsides and the hats are funny. But frankly it seems targeted mostly at the super-hard-core users. "Mere mortals" seem to get 2-3 hats and perhaps a slight sense of being less-than-adequate :-\
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I vote yes. Because well, Yes is positive and there is a whole lot of negative going on as of late. And maybe cos I am hoping maybe I could get a funny hat?
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: The "Ayes" have it, 58 to 9. We shall have hats!
YAY HATS!!
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
2016/12/05 | 2,001 | 8,373 | <issue_start>username_0: Regarding: [Am I being a "mean" instructor, denying an extension on a take home exam](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/80951/am-i-being-a-mean-instructor-denying-an-extension-on-a-take-home-exam)
Discussion has been extensive and the tone has been ramping up. But that's not what motivates my Meta question. Rather, I am writing because I see several red flags suggesting the OP is behaving like a provocateur. I don't know the gender of OP but for simplicity I will use *he*.
Here are the red flags I see:
1. **OP has been increasingly argumentative.** OP has posted a question on Academia SE. If he is not happy with the analysis and opinions other users have shared, he is free to take them on board or ignore them. Nothing is accomplished by arguing, around and around. When he has disagreed with someone, he has added no documented or documentable information, or new logical points, he has only just cranked up the volume.
As an example, OP wrote a comment in response to the answer by Mayou36 which clearly stated he wasn't interested in other users' opinions. I'm afraid I can't quote the comment, because I neglected to copy it before I flagged it, and it has now been removed.
Currently visible example: "this answer is just trying to demonize me."
2. **OP has been hypercritical of one of his students, which is tangential to his question.** This has gotten now to the point of a personal attack on an individual student, who is under age. (To be clear: I am *NOT* saying that personally identifiable information about the student has been revealed.)
3. **OP's "case" against the student keeps growing, *ad infinitum*.** The OP has been gradually adding scattered additional information about the original question through multiple comment threads. Although the best case scenario is to include all relevant information in the original question, I appreciate that more is sometimes elicited through comments. Then OP should add it to the question, either by incorporating it into the text of the question, or by creating an addendum at the bottom of the question.
More and more disorganized diatribe about the student keeps getting added here and there and everywhere. Examples: "The student did refer to his other classes as 'a joke;'" "I know the school and I can confirm that it is an inner city school with extremely low standards and they teach 99% to just pass the standard exams... I've even heard they give mult choice tests where the answer is always the longest response."
My question: what can be done in such a case, where an OP is baiting SE participants and attacking an individual, who is under age? How can we make clear that provocateur-like behavior is unacceptable on Academia SE?<issue_comment>username_1: I have not followed the question in question very much, but I think a more general answer is more useful and desired anyway. I answer under the assumption that your assertions on the situation are true, but this is not to be taken as an assessment of that specific situation.
There are several mostly separate issues here:
### OP has been increasingly argumentative.
>
> When he has disagreed with someone, he has added no documented or documentable information, or new logical points, he has only just cranked up the volume.
>
>
>
This is a typical issue. Do not let this provoke you. If you feel that no new arguments have been added, state this in a friendly manner **once**. Should the opponent to continue to comment, ignore them. If you feel that the comments degrade into noise or offensive territory, flag them.
### OP has been hypercritical of one of his students, which is tangential to his question.
>
> This has gotten now to the point of a personal attack on an individual student, who is under age.
>
>
>
If the attacks happen in the question or answer, edit them to a more neutral description, stating this as an edit reason. Should these edits be rolled back by the author, flag the respective post for moderator attention, and leave it at that.
Should the attacks happen in a comment, this comment is probably leading nowhere anyway. Flag for deletion. Should the comment be relevant, include the information in the respective question or answer and make it neutral on the way. Then flag the comment for deletion.
Sidenote: I do not think that the underage aspect should affect any of this. Whether somebody deserves to be talked about in a condescending manner is irrespective of age.
### OP's "case" against the student keeps growing, *ad infinitum.*
>
> Then OP should add it to the question, either by incorporating it into the text of the question, or by creating an addendum at the bottom of the question.
>
>
>
Addenda should be avoided. There is no reason to document the history of a question as the edit history already does this.
Apart from this, it does not sound as if the information in question is any relevant, so just ignore the respective comments or flag them. Should they be relevant, edit them to the question yourself (see above), then flag.
Should the question change to an extent that the current answers are invalidated, ask the asker to stop editing / adding information. Should this not work, flag for moderator attention.
### General reaction to provocative behaviour
Slightly increasing provocations are the hallmark behaviour of trolls¹ who feed on aggressive reactions from regular users. The best behaviour is [not to feed the troll](https://communitybuilding.stackexchange.com/q/1512/444): Stay calm and friendly, assuming good intention, in face of first provocations. Most trolls show their real face if they run against this. If this happens, stop reacting, and flag possibly inappropriate content. Should the provocations stop, there was no troll to begin with or they have retreated. Either way, the good guys win.
---
¹ Just to be on the safe side, I repeat that this is not to be taken as an assessment of the example situation.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In this case, my preference would be to close the question. I am not sure what the actual question is and whatever it is, it doesn't seem like a good fit for our site. Given the up votes, as a moderator, I am not going to act unilaterally. In this case, closing the question as "unclear what you are asking" would probably resolve the situation.
Sometimes when discussion type questions are not getting closed, you can bring attention to them in chat, like I have.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: For what it's worth, I don't find the OP's site behavior to be problematic.
Fundamentally the OP *did* invite critique by posting the question in the first place. (This also serves as a passing comment on another meta question, which I believe is calling me to task for being overly critical of the OP's behavior, including use of the word "obnoxious." But that's almost literally what he asked for: critical discussion of his behavior.) This means that he was fundamentally more open to hearing other perspectives than someone who would not seek to post such a question.
In my dealings with the OP in the course of my answer and other comments, I felt like he was for the most part taking in what I was saying. He was also defending himself, which seems perfectly natural. I know very few people who respond to criticism (even criticism they invited) without some defensiveness.
Is (again, as the question directly asks!) the OP being a bit "mean" with regards to the student? Well, the gist of my answer (already one of my most popular answers on this site, which is a bit weird but so it goes) is **yes**. But again, the possibility of that is what brought him here in the first place. I don't agree that the OP is engaging on a "personal attack" on his underage student. I would presume that the student is not active on this site or reading this question, and if he is then I don't see how this would cause him any particular distress. In fact the OP doesn't say anything truly *personal* about the student; he just describes him *as a student*. Again, I emphasize that much of my answer urges the treatment of students with more compassion, fairness and professionalism than the OP seems to have evinced in the situation...but I still don't see anything *out of line* or *inappropriate* here.
Upvotes: 3 |
2016/12/05 | 1,819 | 7,440 | <issue_start>username_0: Stemming partially from this meta thread: [Why are we challenging the premise rather than answering the question (question on potential sexist remarks)?](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3549/why-are-we-challenging-the-premise-rather-than-answering-the-question-question)
And especially this comment by @Wrzlprmft:
>
> "@Fomite: For whatever it’s worth, most of the problematic comments
> and answers come from users attracted to the question via the hot
> network questions and not directly from our own community."
>
>
>
Does the Academia community actually benefit from being in that listing? As far as I can see, the primary benefit is a sudden influx of users, but do we have evidence that they stay? Growth from that listing is only useful growth if the visitors go on to continue to be members of the community. I'd be happy to hear from individual users here who found us via Hot Network Questions.
As far as I can tell, the primary detriment is the questions that end up on the Hot Network Questions listing tend to drop fairly dramatically in quality, become more controversial, etc. I can say, as a fairly active user and contributor to the site that the questions and answers that have made me consider throwing in the towel have *all* been Hot Network Questions.
For the sake of "Meta-votes are Agree/Disagree" clairity, I'd suggest an Upvote is "HNQs are helpful" and a Downvote is "HNQs are unhelpful."<issue_comment>username_1: On meta.SE I proposed a mechanism to opt-out specific questions, either by smarter algorithms that watch out for polemical questions or by moderation tools. (I will link to this question there.)
[The "hot" questions algorithm should use logic to avoid controversial questions](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/287786/the-hot-network-questions-sidebar-should-not-include-heated-questions)
I am upvoting your question to reflect my view that there *are* problems with HNQ but I would rather work toward salvaging the feature.
Truthfully though - I think there are bigger "respect" problems on SE and I do not think the umbrella community can escape developing better tools to deal with these problems. HNQ woes are a bit more on the "symptom" side of the scale. I am brooding putting together a larger post on this topic but naturally such a thing must be done very carefully :) but for now you may keep this sentiment in mind.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't believe an objective answer to this question is possible. The system does not track information about hotness points, questions on the HNQ list, or the use of the HNQ sidebar: [Add an audit log to record when particular question enters and leaves hot list](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/238445/add-an-audit-log-to-record-when-particular-question-enters-and-leaves-hot-list)
A number of times, one of our question has been featured on the HNQ list that I thought was neither representative of our community nor a particularly good question. This has happened enough that I proposed a feature be to prevent question from being added to the HNQ list: [Allow mods or gold tag badge holders to prevent question from being on hot network questions list](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/284929/allow-mods-or-gold-tag-badge-holders-to-prevent-question-from-being-on-hot-netwo)
Without the data, I am not sure how to quantify the affects on our community of these "bad" questions being featured on the HNQ list. I think that there have been "good" questions featured and that publicizing our good side is a good thing. What I would like to see is more of our good questions make the HNQ list.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: From what I've seen: At best, they've been slightly helpful. At worst, they're a temporary nuisance.
* **Moderately helpful** – As Massimo pointed out, he came to this site through the network questions. This isn't so terribly unusual; I would guess that for every fifty network questions, we gain one user who didn't know we existed. We've been on there a lot lately, so over time that sort of thing does prove useful to the community. It also gives people an exposure to what Academia is like, although sometimes the questions are slightly (often?) more inflammatory than they need to be.
* **Temporary nuisance** – Network questions always bring a lot of people, who leave all sorts of often bizarre comments and answers. These people rarely, if ever, return, and don't really add much to the community, or even that question. They frequently cause all sorts of automatic flags to get set off (tons of comments, tons of answers, low quality new user posts) which are a stupid and a pain. These questions also often end up with a bunch of cruft (old useless comments, bad answers), which leads to all sorts of flags being raised on these questions months or years later.
Someone posted the following to Meta a while back: [What is the Goal of "Hot Network Questions"?](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/219922/what-is-the-goal-of-hot-network-questions?noredirect=1&lq=1) This was one of those questions where the question had a lot more upvotes than any of the answers. My theory is that this place is more like Facebook and Twitter than the admins care to admit, and the only goal of Hot Network Questions is to keep people entertained, thereby keeping them on the site, thereby showing them more ads, thereby making a profit. Whatever the reason, they're there, they're probably not going away anytime soon, and while pontificating is fun it's probably not going to change anything.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: While I agree with the existing answers on and in particular that there should be some mechanism to avoid problematic HNQs, I would like to mention another advantage of HNQs:
They allow good posts (questions as well as answers) to get more attention than they normally would, which in turn results in upvotes and badges. And at the end of the day, this is one of the central mechanisms of Stack Exchange: You get to know how many people found your contributions helpful and are rewarded (with reputation, badges, and sometimes hats). When a post of mine gets massively upvoted due to being a HNQ or an answer to an HNQ, this does not only mean reputation and badges but also (well, at least most of the time) that a large audience learnt something from my contribution, be it some hard information or a way to look at things. And that’s extremely rewarding and motivating.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_5: Obviously personal anecdotes aren't a good way to make rules, but I can say without a doubt that I only found Academia SE through the hot network questions sidebar.
I was only ever engaged on Stack Overflow, which I think is a fairly typical gateway to Stack Exchange in general. In fact, it seems to me computer science, and fields that make a lot of use of computer science, are very heavily represented on Academia in proportion to other fields. This observation would fit that hypothesis.
So, I feel like it's a pretty solid positive despite the increased moderation necessary on the questions that become sacrificial lambs by ending up there. After all, closing the community off from the influence of "outsiders" doesn't sound like a desirable thing to do. Maybe the question can be addressed by improving moderation tools on protected questions?
Upvotes: 2 |
2016/12/08 | 508 | 1,850 | <issue_start>username_0: For this question, [When referring to races, should 'black' and 'white' be capitalized? (MLA)](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/81218/32436), please restore the "ethnicity" tag which a moderator removed. As my answer shows, this question will be viewed and answered in different ways depending on the reader's racial identity and affinity.
(Should I have flagged the question instead of writing a Meta question?)<issue_comment>username_1: I removed the [ethnicity](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ethnicity "show questions tagged 'ethnicity'") tag because, as I noted in the edit summary, the question is
>
> not about "interacting with people of different ethnicities"
>
>
>
which is what the tag excerpt says the tag is for.
I also left a [comment](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/81218/when-referring-to-the-race-should-black-be-capitalized-mla#comment201094_81248) just now explaining why I *don't* think that the question is "answered in different ways depending on the reader's racial identity and affinity".
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In this case, meta is better than a flag since disagreements about edits are best resolved by the community and not by moderators acting unilaterally.
While it was a moderator who removed the tag, it wasn't "moderation", but rather just a user tidying up how they thought best. Had you put the tag back and the user, who happens to be a moderator, removed it again, another moderator would have stepped in and temporarily locked the post and asked on meta for help resolving the edit "war". By coming here first you prevent people feeling attacked and make life easier for the moderators.
As for the tag itself, I agree with this [answer](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3591/929) that it is not needed.
Upvotes: 2 |
2016/12/09 | 849 | 3,257 | <issue_start>username_0: This question is motivated by an interesting [answer](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3562/32436) to another Academia Meta question.
My question is, if I see "dogpiling" going on, i.e. more and more people are jumping on a bandwagon, ganging up on a user, may I flag the answer? If so, for what reason? Perhaps I could flag it as "not an answer," because it reiterates a previous answer, without adding anything new?
The now famous question about "Should I call out a student who may have behaved in a sexist way?" is not the only situation where I have seen dogpiling. Another recent example would be [Am I being a "mean" instructor, denying an extension on a take home exam](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/80951/32436)
---
**Edit**:
I found an example of helpful moderator action which was apparently triggered by some "not an answer" flags. Of course I don't know whether the flags were appropriate, whether they were accepted, etc. I'm just posting this example to further the discussion. (Note, I was mistaken in something I wrote in a comment. In this example, the moderator did not delete the answer. The answer was in fact auto-deleted.)
Here is a link the the answer: <https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/81033/32436>
The body of the helpful moderator comment below the answer:
>
> This has been flagged by several users as "not an answer". I'm inclined to agree; most of this post is about criticizing the OP's activities on this site, rather than offering an answer to the question. The part of this post that is an answer doesn't add anything over other, better answers that offer the same point of view but more details and explanation. I suggest editing to remove that last part, and elaborating on the first part if you have something to add over the other answers. Otherwise, I recommend deleting this.
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: Flags are intended to alert moderators that they need to take action. In that case, there isn't really anything that we, as mods, should do. You are free to leave a comment along the lines of "OK, folks, enough already", which may or may not have an effect. However, raising a flag is definitely not going to solve anything.
Please do not simply flag using an unrelated flag as we'll simply end up declining it, wasting your time and ours.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Expanding on username_1's suggestion of leaving a comment, I sometimes leave the following comment:
>
> It's not clear what this answer adds over previous answers that already address these points.
>
>
>
and, if the author of the answer is new or not a regular contributor, I might also include in the comment:
>
> Answers on Academia.SE are expected to offer a fresh take, rather than just reiterate existing answers; see [What are we generally looking for in answers](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1545/).
>
>
>
I invite anyone who witnesses dogpiling to "steal" this formulation (or some variation of it) and leave this comment yourself :)
Also note that *comments* that just repeat things that have already been said *should* be flagged. The appropriate flag depends on the situation, but I find that "too chatty" is often suitable.
Upvotes: 2 |
2016/12/09 | 1,959 | 8,210 | <issue_start>username_0: A controversial [question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/80561/32436) was substantially rewritten, but not before a number of answers were posted and discussed at great length. Is it appropriate now to flag the existing answers that don't answer the question in its rewritten form (i.e. flag as "not an answer")? If not, what should, or could, be done instead?
If moderators already provided guidance about this in the following related Meta question, I apologize and would be glad if someone could please remind me what the conclusion was (it was a *very* long thread): [Why are we challenging the premise rather than answering the question (question on potential sexist remarks)?](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3549/32436). (Is *thread* the right word?)
*(Not sure whether this other question is relevant: [What to do about old questions whose answers are now invalid](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1699/what-to-do-about-old-questions-whose-answers-are-now-invalid))*<issue_comment>username_1: There has not been a strong consensus on the linked meta post on what to do with the existing answers. Many people think that the answers should stay as they are; many argue that they should be deleted. A large number of users have argued that the edits to the question should be rolled back; a large number of other users think the question is better in this current form. It's hard to tell where people stand, also, because some answers to that meta post contain multiple points, and people voting on them may agree with some parts and not others.
Given this disagreement, unilateral moderator action seems inappropriate, so don't flag them.
If at any point you are able to show a strong consensus on meta for deleting them, then they could be deleted. A "strong consensus" would be if you
* Posted an answer here saying they should be deleted (and not containing any other proposals),
* and it got a large number of upvotes and few downvotes,
* and there was no competing answer suggesting to keep them, or a competing answer got much less support than yours.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: As someone who arrived in that thread after the edits, the first few top voted answers verge on nonsensical.
I view the *Question* as the thing of paramount importance, and as such I'd support removing answers that were effectively made obsolete by refinement.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: For what it's worth, good answers should usually be standalone in the first place. At worst they should become obsolescent, but never wrong. If crucial context is added to the original question, hopefully, the answers are self-explaining enough so as to sound like good answers to the more general question missing the crucial context.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_1: (takes off moderator hat, puts on regular user hat.) I support the following, as an approach that helps people keep their contributed content roughly as they intend it to look:
* Keep the question as is. Clearly, the current form is what the OP wants, and most of the answers do address the general question (even if some *also* refer to the specific example that has now been removed).
* Not forcibly deleting any answers. Authors of answers are of course still free to delete their own answers, if they want.
* Add a little bit of context to answers that refer to previous versions of the question, so that the answers make sense. For example, include in the answer a brief quote of the relevant part of the previous version of the question, when it is necessary to understand the answer. But keep the content of the answer as intact as possible while editing.
(*If* this approach wins substantial community support: Any user with edit privileges can help with this, and add a comment referencing this meta discussion. No need to flag for a moderator!)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: **It depends**: there are rewrites, and there are rewrites. **Rewrites which improve a clear, on-topic question (which is not an XY question) are fine. Adding (or preserving) a reasonable level of context is good, too. Rewrites which delete all context, mutate the question into something it never was, and thereby invalidate answers, are not fine.** If the rewrites actively contradict each other, that's even worse.
That question is one of the worst examples of rewrites mutating the original question beyond recognition. The original #1 edit essentially said *"Student objected to my teaching methods and not my male colleagues, I feel this is sexist"*. OP's #5 edit changed this to *"IF A STUDENT COMMITS A CLEAR SEXIST BEHAVIOR IN FRONT OF YOU..."*. Totally moves the premise. The OP's own version was not clearly anything, other than an annoying weak student raising bogus objections, by email. Hence, solutions would presumably address those behaviors, not the chain of assumptions about motive. To do otherwise is an XY problem. "commit" is loaded language. Then #9 says *"I never said that it /was/ sexist; it occurred to me (based on previous interactions with this student etc) that this was probably sexism."*. Again, changes the question, and more missing context. We're now up to revision #12 on the mutating question, and we have all sorts of topics being injected like racism. The question has become a wish object for people to inject whatever perceived type of bias they want to conjecture about or analogize to. No relation to the original question! It's an irredeemable mess. (I hope it's no longer on HNQ and attracting wildly offtopic answers from newbies).
I have to say that the OP's behavior in edits #6, #8 and #9 damage her credibility and don't invite us to take her conjecture at face value. So we end up with three different conflicting versions of a he-says-she-says, which might in any case be irrelevant to addressing the original question #1 that was asked.
v#1 of the question should have been quickly put on hold for being unclear; or certainly by edit #5 which deleted the facts, changed the context and invalidated all the answers. If either of those had been done, this situation wouldn't have arisen. **It's now way too late to fix the question.; it should belatedly be put on hold.** Blaming the answers is an irrelevant sidebar.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: This site is supposed to be about questions and answers, not feelings and emotions. That is the reason behind the very robotic up/down tick system and the UX of the Q&A. Input in, answer out. The site is not a free-range forum, if it was the comments wouldn't be wiped, especially those that provide more insight.
There are several sites this meta question would never come up and an example is mathematics. Imagine a person posting an equation that needs to be solved (overly simplistic):
>
> 2a + y \* 4b -7c = r
>
>
>
Suppose they ask if "a" can equal "1" while giving the number possibilities to the other variables. And then people answer... No it can't be one.
Then the person starts rolling back one variable at a time until "a" could theoretically be "1". Well the question is nonsense. It should be rolled forward with the intent it was made. I am positive these edits on mathematics would be rolled back.
I am not sure what the deal is here. Is it the word "sexism" that keeps it from being rolled back? Has this site taken be nice too far? Was leaving a question alone given more concern than the answerers? I don't know. But common sense says you don't let the OP divulge less information as the question timer clicks down when they didn't get the answer they wanted. **If the OP wanted the current question answered that would be a new question, which should be closed due to lack of information.**
*My proposal = Roll back the question to the point where it had the most information.*
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: With the question being as strongly edited as this one, I would consider that the new version is effectively a new question to be treated as such.
A rollback with the suggestion to post a new question with the revised text is my recommendation (regardless of the quality of the original question).
Upvotes: 3 |
2016/12/14 | 755 | 2,715 | <issue_start>username_0: I've noticed that there are two tags: [code](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/code) and [software](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/software). Could someone please explain what is the difference between them? Wouldn't it make sense to merge them?<issue_comment>username_1: The tag wiki excerpt for [code](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/code "show questions tagged 'code'") says:
>
> Concerning computer code written or used in the context of a research project or other academic endeavor. Includes questions on licensing, ownership, sharing, distribution, and formatting of academic source code
>
>
>
Questions with this tag are specifically about things having to do with the source code itself, like
* [Study of code share practices in science](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/81554/study-of-code-share-practices-in-science)
* [Advisor professor asks for my dissertation research source code](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/79101/advisor-professor-asks-for-my-dissertation-research-source-code)
* [How to submit code (visual studio projects, C#, OpenCL) with my IEEE paper submission](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/78000/how-to-submit-code-visual-studio-projects-c-opencl-with-my-ieee-paper-submi)
The tag wiki excerpt for [software](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/software "show questions tagged 'software'") says:
>
> Queries related to various software used in academia. Questions shall not address highly technical aspects of the software but shall address features/issues highly relevant to academia.
>
>
>
Questions in this tag should be about the software, not the code, like:
* [Software for extracting data from a graph without having to click on every single point?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/7671/software-for-extracting-data-from-a-graph-without-having-to-click-on-every-singl)
* [Lab colleague uses cracked software. Should I report it?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/79603/lab-colleague-uses-cracked-software-should-i-report-it)
* [Popular proprietary program or obscure open source substitute for reproducible research?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2381/popular-proprietary-program-or-obscure-open-source-substitute-for-reproducible-r)
These seem like distinct tags to me - I don't see any benefit in combining them.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The problem with the 'code' tag is that in the social and behavioral sciences, "code" means something different.
You might argue that in academia, that "computer code" is the minority form of coding.
Upvotes: 2 |
2016/12/21 | 708 | 2,487 | <issue_start>username_0: On [my answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/81220/12454) to the question [When referring to races, should 'black' and 'white' be capitalized? (MLA)](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/81218/12454), another user has posted an up-voted (5 at present) [comment](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/81218/when-referring-to-races-should-black-and-white-be-capitalized-mla/81220#comment201152_81220) that contains new information. Another user has suggested that they should write it up as a separate answer but they have not done so to date (9 days later).
Should I incorporate the information from the comment into my answer, giving proper credit to it, or just leave it as it is?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, you should incorporate information from comments into your answer if you think it will improve the quality of your answer!
Also see (on Meta SE):
* [Should I incorporate useful comments into my answer, or just upvote them?](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/58915/should-i-incorporate-useful-comments-into-my-answer-or-just-upvote-them)
* [Should I revise my answers based on comments? If so, how to properly attribute?](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/279989/should-i-revise-my-answers-based-on-comments-if-so-how-to-properly-attribute)
* [Comment subsumption etiquette](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/142409/comment-subsumption-etiquette)
* [How to encourage people to edit answers instead of posting additional information in comments?](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/69394/how-to-encourage-people-to-edit-answers-instead-of-posting-additional-informatio)
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: You *can* incorporate information from comments into your own answer, provided that you make it clear who wrote the comment. In fact, the footer of every page on a Stack Exchange site says:
>
> USER CONTRIBUTIONS LICENSED UNDER CC BY-SA 3.0 WITH ATTRIBUTION REQUIRED
>
>
>
Since comments are user contributions, using them in your answers requires proper attribution according the the rules set out in the [Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 licence](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/).
**Note**: I included the quote from the footer to point something out that many Stack Exchange users overlook. The intent is not to say this should be attached to every (partially) quoted comment. (Copied from a comment, since comments are ephemeral.)
Upvotes: 3 |
2016/12/23 | 1,678 | 7,000 | <issue_start>username_0: Allow me to ponder on the future of Academia(.SE):
I don't claim to be an integral or representative user of this site, but I've noticed I personally haven't been using Academia as much lately. This is probably a natural phenomenon for many users across the SE sites, and isn't necessarily a problem for the sites if they are getting enough new active users (and may be a boon, if you're getting less of me :).
The above was sort of a disclaimer to this observation, which is my main worry: it seems to me that when I have been browsing new questions here, most of them are either duplicates (if not in the technical sense, at least morally so) or about some specialized issue I am not so interested in. I think this partially accounts for my decrease in activity here. It seems to me that this may be more of an issue on Academia than some of the other sites (because there are a lot more possible questions of "broad interest" and/or questions are more focused on changing developments).
If this observation is true, then it seems likely that either usage (measured in some sense) of Academia will eventually peter off or questions will tend to become more and more specialized.
First:
>
> Do other people see a similar issue with the questions being asked here? (mostly duplicates/very specialized) Or is there any data for or against this? (Surely we can get data about numbers of questions that are or aren't duplicates; being "too specialized" may be hard to measure directly, but we could try to measure "broad interest" by counting question votes inversely scaled by the growth of the site.)
>
>
>
Second:
>
> If this issue is in fact real, is there anything we can or should try to do about it?
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: Some of these questions are probably answerable with the [data explorer](https://data.stackexchange.com/). Moderators also have tools to look at site analytics. Our site "graduated" from being a beta site in April of 2014. This was during a period of intense growth as measured by most, possibly all, meaningful metrics including number of posts, votes, views, visits, users, and posters. This growth continue for about a year after graduation. Since April of 2015 our growth has slowed, but I see no indication that we are shrinking.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I've also dipped significantly in my use recently, but I don't think that's related to sustainability of the site so much as personal ebb and flow in attention and whether Academia.SE is currently beating out other options for entertaining myself.
I do suspect that we will see a lot of "the core questions" getting answered over time, but I don't think that's going to end up with the site ending up being "done" and pointless. A lot of what we talk about here is about relationships and organizations, and there is never a shortage of interesting human complexities in such things.
Bottom line: I think Academia.SE will become unsustainable around the same time that relationship advice columns become unsustainable. At that point, we can all just live on [airborne bacon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_pig).
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: At its base this doesn't seem all that different from StackOverflow to me. If you look back, questions from 2009 about how to do a very basic thing in Python would get 2000 upvotes and a stream of updated answers over the last 7 years. If you follow the current queue of questions, you'll see instead that they tend to be very specific and that garnering 2 upvotes and 1 answer isn't at all unusual
Does programming change more than academia over time? It seems obvious that it does, and SO will always benefit from an influx of questions about whatever is newest. But the fact remains that there are still dozens of new questions per day about things that have been around "forever", such as Python. They do seem to get more specific, and I would guess the rate of duplicates has risen also. So I still think it's generally a good comparison where their "core questions" are asked and answered, but the site remains very active.
And just like SO questions about Python (or other older languages), despite diminishing returns I'm skeptical the community will ever reach a point where there simply aren't any more good questions.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I see no real threat with specialized questions, as long as they are actually answerable in similar level of detail.
What typically does happen rather more often is that you get questions asking for advice, given a particular situation; majority of which are specialized to the extent that it's difficult to give a satisfactory and factual answer without knowing the people involved and situation in detail. Thus majority of the answers boil down to "*talk to your supervisor*" or "*check with the department administration*", something along those lines.
My personal involvement at Academia.SE has also decreased over the past year, partly because of my stress over changing jobs, hunting postdoc etc, and partly because I feel rather disillusioned by academia altogether and I find that many of frustrating attitudes/statements about life in academia are also perpetuated here e.g. "doing research is a way of life, not a job" or the notion of citations and publications being fair.
I realize that a lot of those things that I would like to have feedback on and discuss with other academics are not a good fit for the Q&A format of the site, and that's totally fine. That's why people get a drink and chat after work :)
It's just that there aren't many practical and factually answerable questions about academia, I think. At least, I haven't come up with anything lately... Instead, I think there will be many graduate level questions about interaction with students, teachers or otherwise faculty, about positions and salaries etc.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: >
> it seems to me that when I have been browsing new questions here, most
> of them are either duplicates (if not in the technical sense, at least
> morally so) or about some specialized issue I am not so interested in.
>
>
>
Honestly, one the front page I feel very similarly at times. There are days when I don't have the patience to deal with questions that look very much like "Have you tried asking your advisor?" or are on extremely specialized subjects.
But in my perspective, the site has *always* been populated by a large number of these questions. They're part of the inherent nature of the site, in the same way "How do I do this embarrassingly simple thing in Python" is part of SO.
There's also ebbs and flows in my participation in communities. I used to be *very* active on CV, but I'd drifted a bit. There's times here where the site is up all day, and times I haven't checked in a week. And I've definitely seen some sites that have hit unsustainability - I think Academia is pretty far from that point.
Upvotes: 2 |
2017/01/14 | 864 | 3,396 | <issue_start>username_0: As you probably have noticed, the question [What to do with a student coming to class in revealing clothing, to the degree that it disrupts the teaching environment?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/83082/what-to-do-with-a-student-coming-to-class-in-revealing-clothing-to-the-degree-t) has attracted 16k views and 19 answers.
I don't believe there is really 19 different things the OP can do in this situation. Actually I believe there's three: tell her to stop, tell the other students to control their hormones, and tell his higher-ups to take the matter off him. Yet, new answers keep flowing in. At this point, I believe that most of the new answerers just want to chip in and tell the world their opinion but they haven't even read what the other people have written.
Given that the question is already protected, and we cannot close it because it is on-topic (and it's actually a good question for Academia.SE), what else can we do to stop the flow? Is there a "second level of protection", or something more radical that we can do to stop the flow of answers? Or maybe the SE philosophy is "let them answer and downvote them"?<issue_comment>username_1: The next level would be to lock the question but this seems extreme. The real problem in my opinion is that the question is on the hot networkquestion list. We need better control of that. I proposed [Allow mods or gold tag badge holders to prevent question from being on hot network questions list](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/284929/allow-mods-or-gold-tag-badge-holders-to-prevent-question-from-being-on-hot-netwo)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I sometimes leave this comment on answers that don't add anything new:
>
> It's not clear what this adds over existing answers that suggest the same approach, such as [link to answer that suggests same approach]; can you edit to clarify? On Academia.SE, we are generally looking for answers that offer a "fresh take": see [What are we generally looking for in answers?](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1545/)
>
>
>
It's not exactly "something more radical", but it at least helps inform such users about our expectations.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: It is true that most of the answers are just emotional responses, but locking the question might deny probable legitimate answers to be posted in the future. @gnometorule seems to have a good trivial suggestion for this matter; downvote answers you feel that are bad and move on.
Also, I feel that your comment under the question is a good solution already: telling them to check all answer posts before attempting to post another answer. It helps people think twice before posting an answer (It sure prevented me from posting an answer).
My thought about this would be to have an option called 'duplicate answer vote', but not sure how well that would work out.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: A moderator or garden variety good Samaritan with foresight and courage could have edited "revealing" out of the title. I think that word caught the eye and kapow, the views started to climb and then skyrocketed.
Easy for me to think of this now....
**Edit**:
I will be more specific. Example:
>
> What to do with a student coming to class in distracting outfit, to the degree that it disrupts the teaching environment? h
>
>
>
Upvotes: 0 |
2017/01/16 | 1,460 | 6,089 | <issue_start>username_0: Following up [a recent meta post](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3616/how-sustainable-is-academia-se) wondering about the direction this site is taking, I wanted to discuss the possibility of changing one of our current habit, which is to close "technical" questions as off-topic.
While some are clear cuts, say someone asking about the content of an algorithm, some are actually effectively about the academic process. One example are questions pertaining to good practice when designing a study. We might then benefit from a "study-design" tag.
A few examples:
[Creating a research questionnaire with repeating sections](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/18675/creating-a-research-questionnaire-with-repeating-sections)
[What tradeoffs are there between internal and external validity?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/59212/what-tradeoffs-are-there-between-internal-and-external-validity)
[Is it possible to "validate" a simulator without comparing it with the actual tool?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/73432/is-it-possible-to-validate-a-simulator-without-comparing-it-with-the-actual-to)
Yes these questions are field-specific, but a lot of the existing one are as well. Apparently we're capable of dealing with that.
with the pool of clever and successful academics participating to this site it would be great to leverage that knowledge. Also, it would be a refreshing change to all the questions along the line of "someone stole my work/my GPA is not so great how do I still get into grad school/something mildly entertaining happened in class" for which we now have a comprehensive set of answers.
In a typical meta fashion, vote this question up if you're in favor, down if you're against.<issue_comment>username_1: In principle I agree with you, and I upvoted your proposal.
In practice, I'm worried about how we could ensure uniformity of treatment between different disciplines, when people might not understand the potential generality of a certain relatively technical question related to a certain field, and where to draw the line of technical but not-too-technical.
Will we be spending time reminding people, in comments or here in meta, that certain questions are on topic?
Just to give an example from the recent past, several people would vote to close questions about writing style and formatting. These are somehow technical questions related to what is clearly a major activity of ours. How can we ensure uniformity of views with more borderline questions?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I have a concern about "procedural" issues, not about the idea you're proposing:
By this point, some votes have accrued on this question. But they are not so useful for moderation purposes, since you have not clarified what kind of question you're referring to:
1. I doubt all of the people voting on this question have the same thing in mind, so it's hard to point to this post as evidence of "consensus" for something.
2. I (and other users) use meta posts as a reference (in comments) when I see close votes on a question that I think should stay open. I couldn't use this post as a reference to explain why a particular question should stay open - it's too vague.
Moving forward with this suggestion, can you (or someone else) open a new meta post with a much more specific "type" of question you think we should be more tolerant of, with an example? You can look at [closed questions](https://academia.stackexchange.com/search?q=closed%3A1+duplicate%3A0) for ideas - if we are actually getting and closing questions of the type you're referring to, there should be some examples in there.
(Ideally, answers to this new meta question should explain why the category of question is good for the site, if in favor, or bad, if opposed. That way the post is useful as a reference for purpose #2. Then votes on the answers can show consensus - purpose #1.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: My feeling is *No*. There are a couple reasons I think this way:
1. Academia is, in many ways, a site about the *practice* of academia, the process of being an academic, etc. rather than highly technical questions about narrow aspects of research. I *like* that, and there's not actually firm evidence in the question you link in your question that Academia isn't "sustainable" with that scope. Stepping away from that has the potential to dilute what people are interested in coming here for with technical questions, effectively decreasing the signal:noise ratio. This has happened on other sites I have been on - for example, when CrossValidated took in the machine learning questions from a failed site, my interest dropped pretty dramatically as I had to do far more sifting to find questions I was interested in. This risk is, IMO, higher on Academia, as you're not just talking about "one adjacent" fields, but all fields.
2. Academia *does not* have good field coverage. There are *lots* of people in CS, Applied Math, etc. There are *some* in the biological sciences. There are vanishingly few in say, Medieval History. This is important not only for "can someone answer this" but for field specific norms. An economist and I might be able to answer the same question, but we'd answer it differently, and potentially miss field-specific nuances (for example, epidemiology as a field is pushing pretty hard against p-values). You can already see this happening occasionally (for example, the LaTeX vs. anti-LaTeX soapboxing).
3. It serves the technical sites poorly. At least one of those questions is more suited to CrossValidated. The StackExchange network is best served by directing people to the site with experts, rather than trying to take on those questions on more generalist sites, which at best ends up fragmenting "Where can I find answers to questions about X" and at worst results in lower-quality answers. Because many of us are probably decent Python programmers does not mean we should be answering programming questions when SO exists.
Upvotes: 4 |
2017/01/17 | 1,115 | 4,540 | <issue_start>username_0: How can someone ask a question regarding research in academia without being accused of "shopping"? To my knowledge, academia is a broad category that covers many topics with education. Dedicated to research, education, and scholarship. So it would seem to be a reasonable conclusion to post a question asking for articles or sites for research on a thread for academia. To me it seems that academia has become a group of self righteous, condescending, tyrants who refuse to help anyone who has a question unless it fit into "their mold". So is academia filled with pedagogues? No. Academia is filled with hypocritical tyrants. End Rant. Ban me if necessary, put the post on hold or close it. It will only prove my point more.<issue_comment>username_1: Like all sites in the Stack Exchange network, this community *focuses* on the subset of questions that we believe we have the expertise to answer really well. Therefore, questions that are outside the scope of this site will be put on hold.
In particular, although we are academics, we do not answer questions about every field that is studied in academia! For answers to questions about Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Math, Computer Science, English, Cognitive Science, Finance, Economics, Politics, etc... you will have to go to their respective Stack Exchange sites. Instead, on Academia we answer questions that are *not* about the content of the field of study: questions about applying to graduate school, about the process of submitting a paper to a journal for publication, about applying to postdoc and faculty positions, about teaching at the university level, and other things like that. Thus, [your question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/83373/relevent-change-in-the-finance-field) was outside the scope of this site.
As with the other Stack Exchange sites, you can find out more about the scope of the community in the help center, on the page titled [What topics can I ask about here?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic). This page lists some of the categories of questions that are welcome here, as well as some of the categories of questions that are not. Every Stack Exchange site has a page like that; you are encouraged to peruse it before posting.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: >
> To my knowledge, academia is a broad category that covers many topics with education.
>
>
>
Academia.SE is a community that covers a number of topics related to the academic world. Not all the academic topics, though. And the list of accepted topics can be modified with well crafted proposals. I let you judge whether yours is a well-crafted proposal or not.
>
> So it would seem to be a reasonable conclusion to post a question asking for articles or sites for research on a thread for academia.
>
>
>
We do not substitute advisors, colleagues and research work. And for specialized topics many other communities give suggestions or articles, books etc.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> How can someone ask a question regarding research in academia without being accused of "shopping"?
>
>
>
To take your particular situation as an example:
>
> How can I find out about recent changes in a particular field?
>
>
>
[A similar question](//academia.stackexchange.com/q/3420/7734) already exists and in fact we have an [entire tag](//academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/literature-search) for similar questions. However, “ask on Academia SE” is not an answer to this question. Note that this is crucially different from asking for specific resources for your particular field, which would be off-topic – as it is not about academia but about a specific academic field. As a litmus test questions that can only be answered by somebody in your particular subfield are off-topic here (and should be asked on a Stack Exchange pertaining to your field instead).
Moreover, asking for specific resources would be indeed what we call a shopping question, because it effectively asks us to evaluate resources, which is something that we do not like to do as we would like to keep a neutral stance on such questions, there is no definite answer (and what is a good answer is opinion-based), such questions tend to attract tons of answers, and some other problems. As many other Stack Exchanges have similar rules regarding such questions, it is possible that asking for specific resources will not be well received on the Stack Exchange for your field of interest.
Upvotes: 2 |
2017/01/23 | 1,220 | 4,967 | <issue_start>username_0: I would like to know why there is intense focus on not offending people? Sure, people should not go about intentionally offending people, but someone will be offended by something somewhere, someday, even if we don't intend it.
I have seen this occur in everything from questions ranging from professors asking how to discipline their students, to people asking about addressing potential cases of sexism. Everyone seems to put being non-offensive to anyone, above figuring out how the original issue can be solved.
[Example answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/83655/63231)<issue_comment>username_1: *I'm in the same boat as those commenting that I don't fully understand the question, but I'll hazard an answer all the same.*
Many, many people have thin skin (i.e., get insulted easily). I'll venture to say that *most* people have thin skin. To that extent, when resolving a disagreement, the "lets be frank" approach is very likely to cause someone to be insulted. As practiced negotiators know, insulting your negotiation partner is a pretty poor strategy.
To that extent, when working through a disagreement, unless you are confident the opposing party will NOT be insulted—a rare situation—its always a good idea to be cordial and polite, to ensure that you can focus the discussion on solving the disagreement.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> I would like to know why there is intense focus on not offending
> people? Sure, people should not go about intentionally offending
> people, but someone will be offended by something somewhere, someday,
> even if we don't intend it.
>
>
>
There are two major reasons, in my mind:
1. Inoffensive approaches are often more productive than a theoretically more direct approach. "Don't offend someone" is not a side-goal, it is an aspect of the main approach. Offending someone is often extremely counter-productive, and will crater the proposed solution no matter how good it is.
2. While "someone, somewhere, someday" might be offended by anything, trying to minimize this probability is still a worthwhile thing to do, especially when you have a specific concern (in contrast to your hypothetical someone). Something, somewhere, someday will kill me. I still wear my seatbelt.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I think this might be an interesting discussion, but the example you gave seems far separated from the type of "not offending anyone" that your post implies (referring to discipline and sexism).
Part of the original question for the answer you linked was:
>
> Is there any moral (or even legal) problem in criticizing other people's figures on my website? Should I expect any sort of retaliation if I decide to do that?
>
>
>
In that context, avoiding offending someone is clearly a way to:
1. Avoid legal issues - if there is a gray area, posting praise of a figure is probably less likely to solicit negative attention from the authors that could lead to threats or actual legal action
2. The issue of retaliation is most easily avoided by not offending anyone; this way, you aren't depending on the people you criticize taking the moral high ground.
Therefore, it solves the original question to be non-offensive, rather than putting up a barrier to solving the problem as you suggest.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Many a time have I wished to just call a student or colleague stupid. In my opinion, there are three factual reasons (ergo disregarding morality, politeness, religious beliefs, etc.) why one might wish to avoid it, regardless of how strongly they believe it to be the case:
1. The practical reason is to avoid lawsuits.
2. The historical reason is that it is a natural extension of the mid 80's and onward culture/mentality that everyone is "special", and that there are many kinds of intelligence, not just academic intelligence. Interestingly, people have come to interpret this as "everyone is special, hence everyone is intelligent". It is raw human bias, because people never want to admit what the perceive as their own shortcomings (like we don't like being called fat, or short, or bald), and distort other theories and facts to satisfy themselves. In defense of this position, note how different the culture was before the 90s, where negative reinforcement was the norm. While I disagree with the reason, society is experiencing a shift towards positive reinforcement, and that is a good thing.
3. The social reason is that language has power. Saying things out loud, makes them true, to an extent. For instance, in English, German, and many other languages assume a male gender for many professions, such as policeman, fireman, cameraman. As trivial as it may seem, things like this have been shown to cause subconscious bias in the entirety of society in the long-term. By changing how we use the language, we modify how the population who use it perceive things after 1-2 generations.
Upvotes: 2 |
2017/01/27 | 502 | 1,712 | <issue_start>username_0: A particular old [question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/77464/32436) was bumped to the homepage by Community. Was this done automatically by the software? Was it a person? Why was it bumped? It makes no sense to me.
I read a Meta [outline](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1272/32436) of reasons for bumping, and none of them fit.
I thought that maybe the bump had resulted from an edit, but the question doesn't seem to have been edited.<issue_comment>username_1: Visible on the question right now:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/1q9D4.png)
The system automatically "bumps" questions that have answers where some are sitting at a score of 0 and none are accepted or score *more* than 0. This gives folks a chance to review the answers and vote on them or post better ones.
In this case, it worked - over the past 13 hours, one of the answers has been upvoted.
### See also: [How can we make the purpose of Community "bumping" more obvious?](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/279203/how-can-we-make-the-purpose-of-community-bumping-more-obvious)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: As pointed out by @zaq in a comment to an answer that has since been deleted, [this answer](https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/184511/287826) explains that to be automatically bumped, a question should
* be open (not locked or closed)
* score no less than zero
* have been inactive for 30 days
* have no accepted answer, no answer scoring more than zero, and at least one non-deleted answer with a score of 0
Automatic bumping cannot occur more frequently than one per hour.
Upvotes: 2 |
2017/02/02 | 1,238 | 4,531 | <issue_start>username_0: It is a bit late into this new year, being that we're already in the second month, but we are now cycling the Community Promotion Ads for 2017!
### What are Community Promotion Ads?
Community Promotion Ads are community-vetted advertisements that will show up on the main site, in the right sidebar. The purpose of this question is the vetting process. Images of the advertisements are provided, and community voting will enable the advertisements to be shown.
### Why do we have Community Promotion Ads?
This is a method for the community to control what gets promoted to visitors on the site. For example, you might promote the following things:
* the site's twitter account
* academic websites and resources
* interesting campus story blogs
* cool events or conferences
* anything else your community would genuinely be interested in
The goal is for future visitors to find out about *the stuff your community deems important*. This also serves as a way to promote information and resources that are *relevant to your own community's interests*, both for those already in the community and those yet to join.
### Why do we reset the ads every year?
Some services will maintain usefulness over the years, while other things will wane to allow for new faces to show up. Resetting the ads every year helps accommodate this, and allows old ads that have served their purpose to be cycled out for fresher ads for newer things. This helps keep the material in the ads relevant to not just the subject matter of the community, but to the current status of the community. We reset the ads once a year, every December.
The community promotion ads have no restrictions against reposting an ad from a previous cycle. If a particular service or ad is very valuable to the community and will continue to be so, it is a good idea to repost it. It may be helpful to give it a new face in the process, so as to prevent the imagery of the ad from getting stale after a year of exposure.
### How does it work?
The answers you post to this question *must* conform to the following rules, or they will be ignored.
1. All answers should be in the exact form of:
```
[![Tagline to show on mouseover][1]][2]
[1]: http://image-url
[2]: http://clickthrough-url
```
Please **do not add anything else to the body of the post**. If you want to discuss something, do it in the comments.
2. The question must always be tagged with the magic [community-ads](/questions/tagged/community-ads "show questions tagged 'community-ads'") tag. In addition to enabling the functionality of the advertisements, this tag also pre-fills the answer form with the above required form.
### Image requirements
* The image that you create must be 300 x 250 pixels, or double that if high DPI.
* Must be hosted through our standard image uploader (imgur)
* Must be GIF or PNG
* No animated GIFs
* Absolute limit on file size of 150 KB
* If the background of the image is white or partially white, there must be a 1px border (2px if high DPI) surrounding it.
### Score Threshold
There is a **minimum score threshold** an answer must meet (currently **6**) before it will be shown on the main site.
You can check out the ads that have met the threshold with basic click stats [here](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/ads/display/3661).<issue_comment>username_1: [](https://twitter.com/StackAcademia)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: [](http://www.physicsoverflow.org/)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: [](http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/90327/geomatics-and-remote-sensing?referrer=8G2asYAyI_To9RoVf1VtPg2)
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: [](http://writers.stackexchange.com)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: [](http://chemistry.stackexchange.com)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: [](https://orcid.org/)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: [](https://cseducators.stackexchange.com)
Upvotes: 3 |
2017/02/06 | 584 | 2,352 | <issue_start>username_0: The question ["How to deal with instructor forcing me to do an uninteresting optional exercise?"](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/84437/how-to-deal-with-instructor-forcing-me-to-do-an-uninteresting-optional-exercise) has been locked recently. The question is kind a of mirrored question to [How to deal with uninterested students during an optional exercise session?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/84388/how-to-deal-with-uninterested-students-during-an-optional-exercise-session) and I think that both questions are a good and especially, both have great answers. However, the first question was has received several downvotes and also quite a few upvotes (currently being at -6 total). I imagine that the downvotes are partly due to the somehow offensive phrasing "some internet people".
My guess is that the question has been locked because of the heavy downvotes; [here](https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/22229) you find some reasons why posts should be locked (heavy downvotes are not exactly on the list…). As a locked question, there can't be up- and downvotes on the question and also no edits or comments can be made. I have the feeling, that the question should have been better received and would like to edit it (tone down a little), comment that I find the question reasonable and also upvote it. I could have flagged for moderator attention, but thought, I could learn more if I asked on meta.
Specifically:
* Is asking on meta equally good as flagging?
* Why was this question locked? (I have some guess, probably would have done the same, but I am curious.)
* How to proceed with the question?<issue_comment>username_1: It says in the lock notice:
>
> This post has been locked due to the high amount of off-topic comments generated. For extended discussions, please use chat.
>
>
>
That question in particular was locked due to (now-deleted) comments that degenerated into schoolyard name-calling. (The downvotes may have been a reaction to those same comments.)
The lock will automatically expire in five days, and you can edit it then.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It is locked for 5 days to let things cool down. Specifically the number of off topic comments. After the timeout it will automatically unlock. At that point you will be able to edit it.
Upvotes: 2 |
2017/02/21 | 1,176 | 4,359 | <issue_start>username_0: Academia gets quite a few questions from people in academia who want to communicate something to someone, but are just not sure how to say it. Often this is a student trying to tell something to a professor.
* [What sentence is suitable for thanking a professor?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/85417/what-sentence-is-suitable-for-thanking-a-professor)
* [How do I politely ask a professor to contact another professor he knows to accept me as PhD student?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/52580/how-do-i-politely-ask-a-professor-to-contact-another-professor-he-knows-to-accep?rq=1)
* [How to tell a professor at a foreign university politely and impressively that I can’t cover the costs of living for my PhD?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/59768/how-to-tell-a-professor-at-a-foreign-university-politely-and-impressively-that-i?rq=1)
* [How do I turn down an internship offer by a professor because I have a better offer in a corporate research lab?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/41741/how-do-i-turn-down-an-internship-offer-by-a-professor-because-i-have-a-better-of?rq=1)
* [How do I explain to a prof who is not happy with my actions which were simply a mistake due to miscommunication?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/65302/how-do-i-explain-to-a-prof-who-is-not-happy-with-my-actions-which-were-simply-a?rq=1)
**What advice can we offer for asking, answering, or moderating such questions?**
A few potential issues:
* In many cases the asker is simply nervous - perhaps they are intimidated by the idea of talking to a professor, or have bad news or a sensitive request and are worried about the reaction, or are anxious about their language skills, etc. They may be looking for reassurance rather than help with wording.
* Sometimes newcomers to academia seem to think there are magic protocols to follow, and seem to be unaware that academics generally communicate just the same as everyone else. (To which we have JeffE's classic response: "Pretend as though he were human".)
* Cultural factors may come into play. Etiquette, polite wording, etc, vary much more between cultures than inside/outside academia. An answer that's applicable in the US may not work at all in Japan, for instance; but maybe that distinction doesn't really have anything to do with academia.
* Language issues may come into play. Perhaps the asker is not writing in their native language and is unsure whether they are clearly expressing themselves, or whether the tone of their wording is appropriate. Again, this might not really have anything to do with academia.<issue_comment>username_1: Most of these questions should be closed as off topic.
"How to write an email" kind of questions are not actually about academia, they are basically [boat programming questions](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/14470/what-is-the-boat-programming-meme-about) asking "how to communicate with other people?". These questions are additionally often very specific to a certain situation and unlikely to be helpful to other people. Valid questions would rather be more general and ask for example if and how communication is different in academia.
Academia.SE is also not an email writing service, we should not offer help with wording emails etc at all.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: This sounds to me like a good opportunity to create a community wiki question with a name like: "What should I do if I am feeling anxious about communicating with my professor?"
This would be a good one for marking all of the general "What are the magic words?" questions as duplicates.
Another large family of communication questions, however, are really not about the communication but about diagnosing and addressing problems in professional relationships. Those generally merit individual consideration and answers, and it would be important to *not* consider them as duplicates. After all, "Professors are human too" also covers quite a wide range of complicated problems.
---
Edit: I've now created a draft Q&A for this; please feel free to improve:
[How should I phrase an important question that I need to ask a professor?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/90725/how-should-phrase-an-important-question-that-i-need-to-ask-a-professor/90726#90726)
Upvotes: 3 |
2017/02/24 | 2,211 | 8,937 | <issue_start>username_0: The [March for Science](http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/52641/scientists-march-on-washington) is an event/protest/rally being held on April 22 2017. The main march will occur in Washington DC, but there will likely be marches all over the world. There is an [SE chat room](http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/52641/scientists-march-on-washington) dedicated to the march. As many of our community members are scientists and/or support science, I was wondering if we wanted a community event countdown to be shown on the main page. As the event is somewhat political in nature, I wanted to check with the community before creating an event. The countdown timer is not overbearing and is just a small item on the side bar.<issue_comment>username_1: **Yes, we should.**
It is somewhat political in nature, but it has been endorsed by major organisations, such as the AAAS (which publishes Science magazine) and the [American Geophysical Union](https://eos.org/agu-news/agu-endorses-the-march-for-science-in-washington-d-c) (AGU), and the American Statistical Association (ASA):
[*Major U.S. science groups endorse March for Science*](http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/02/will-they-or-won-t-they-what-science-groups-are-saying-about-joining-march-science), Feb. 23, 2017, Science, DOI:10.1126/science.aal0697.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't think this warrants a community event countdown. That feature is intended for Academia.SE chat events, not just events of interest.
I think a regular [community ad](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3661/community-promotion-ads-2017/3692#3692) is a much better way to promote this kind of event.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The main issue I have with this march is that I don't understand to whom the protest is addressed. Going through marchforscience.com, it seems to be mostly geared toward governments, especially the newly elected US government, but when I read the [Our Principles and Goals page of the march](https://web.archive.org/web/20170227165517/https://www.marchforscience.com/mission-and-vision/) it looks to me that most of the issues being raised are caused by researchers themselves.
>
> Science that serves the common good: Scientists work to build a better understanding of the world around us. Science is a process, not a product -- a tool of discovery that allows us to constantly expand and revise our knowledge of the universe. In doing so, science serves the interests of all humans, not just those in power. We must protect the rights of every person to engage with, learn from, and help shape science, free from manipulation by special interests.
>
>
>
How can every person engage with, learn from, and help shape science, given that most papers, code and data isn't freely publicly available? That's the responsibility of researchers.
OK for the "free from manipulation" part, thouh governments are just one of many entities that may try to manipulate researchers' results.
>
> Cutting-edge science education: We support science education that teaches children and adults to think critically, ask questions, and evaluate truth based on the weight of evidence. Science is not a field that should be understood only by a small few -- every person, from every background, deserves an education that encourages scientific learning alongside the arts and humanities. Science works best when scientists come from diverse perspectives, and we must work to encourage and support a new generation of scientists that increasingly includes historically underrepresented groups.
>
>
>
The US government is not responsible for the insane tuition fees that the private universities charge in the US.
>
> Open and honest science communication and inclusive public outreach: Gag rules on scientists in government and environmental organizations impede access to information that is a public right. Our tax dollars support this scientific research and withholding their results limits the public’s ability to learn from the important developments and discoveries that we have come to expect from our scientists. In addition, scientists often rely on the public to help identify new questions that need to be answered.
>
>
>
If researchers want to make the research funded by the taxpayers available to the taxpayers they should quit publishing in paywalled venues.
>
> Evidence-based policy and regulations in the public interest
> Science observes and asks questions about the world. Our understanding is constantly changing, presenting us with new questions and answers. Science gives us the ability to examine these questions, enabling us to craft improved policies and regulations that serve our best interests. Political decision-making that affects the lives of Americans and the world at large should make use of peer-reviewed evidence and scientific consensus, not personal whims and decrees.
>
>
>
OK.
>
> Funding for scientific research and its applications:
> De-funding and hiring freezes in the sciences are against any country’s best interests. We believe that the federal budget should reflect the powerful and vital role that science plays in supporting our democracy. We advocate federal funding in support of research, scientific hiring, and agency application of science to management. This funding cannot be limited to environmental and medical fields -- scientific support must be inclusive of diverse disciplines.
>
>
>
OK but keep in mind hundreds of millions wasted by researchers every year just to pay for paywalls, because researchers keep publishing in paywalled venues.
>
> Humanize science: Science is first and foremost a human process -- it is conducted, applied, and supported by a diverse body of people. Scientific inquiry is not an abstract process that happens independent of culture and community. It is an enterprise carried out by people who seek to expand our knowledge of the world in the hope of building a better, more informed society.
>
>
>
Since the goals are redundant, I'll also repeat myself: if researchers want a "better, more informed society", they should make their research output (papers/code/data) freely and publicly available.
>
> Partner with the public: We join together as scientists and supporters of science to embody the importance of partnerships formed between scientists and the broader community. Science works best when scientists share our findings with and engage the communities we serve in shaping, sharing, and participating in the research process. We also look to the public for inspiration about what new questions need to be asked about the world around us. The lines of communication must go in both directions. If scientists hope to discuss their work with the public, they must also listen to the public's thoughts and opinions on science and research. Progress can only be made by mutual respect.
>
>
>
I don't think the government's intervention is necessary here.
>
> Advocate for open, inclusive, and accessible science: We strive to break down barriers in our own community. A career in science should be an option for anyone and everyone who is passionate about discovery. Likewise, the process and results of scientific inquiry should be open to all. Science can ably and accurately inform the decision-making of all people, from the choices we make as consumers to the policies we adopt through public debate. By bringing scientists to “teach-in” at the National Mall and in public spaces around the globe, we voice our support for science being freely available.
>
>
>
Again, the lack of openness is mostly an issue caused by researchers, not the governments.
>
> Support scientists: We gather together to stand up for scientists, including those in public service. We pledge to speak up for them when they are silenced, to protect them when they are threatened and to provide them with support when they feel they can no longer serve their institutions. Scientists in both public and private sectors must be allowed to communicate their results freely, without misrepresentation or distortion and without the fear of retribution.
>
>
>
OK
>
> Affirm science as a democratic value: Science is a vital feature of a working democracy, spurring innovation, critical thinking, increased understanding, and better, healthier lives for all people. By marching in Washington, DC and around the world, we take one of many steps to become more active in our communities and in democratic life. We hold our leaders -- both in science and in politics -- accountable to the highest standards of honesty, fairness, and integrity. We gather together to send a message: we will all work to ensure that the scientific community is making our democracy stronger.
>
>
>
OK. (finally they indicate that leaders in science - not just politics - are also responsible)
Upvotes: 1 |
2017/03/20 | 2,145 | 8,405 | <issue_start>username_0: Probably half of the question have some sort of bickering on what's appropriate. There are questions as open ended as "What should I do with my academic career" being up voted, when there's an infinite number of potential answers, and no one can guarantee that the response is going to be helpful. Then there are other similar questions being down voted as too broad.
For example [Should I prefer PhD programs with "higher quality" students?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/86672/should-i-prefer-phd-programs-with-higher-quality-students)
Is a shopping question on what phd program to select. +4 up votes.
Right below it <https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/86669/phd-is-75-done-in-russia-any-options-in-europe-uk-citizen>
Another shopping question on what phd program to select. -4 down votes.
There are social etiquette questions about how to answer emails that have almost nothing to do with academia being highly prioritized.
[How to deal with an inappropriate greeting in an email?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/86352/how-to-deal-with-an-inappropriate-greeting-in-an-email)
And another question about how to respond to emails dealing with research paper submissions being down voted and ignored.
[What to do when you have not received a response three weeks after submitting minor revisions?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/86742/what-to-do-when-you-have-not-received-a-response-three-weeks-after-submitting-mi)
If the purpose is to form a consistently high standard, how are you ensuring that you're meeting that goal? Because that goal appears to be different depending on who's viewing your question.
If the purpose is to exclude rude and offensive behavior and to create a welcoming environment, I don't really see that either. Obvious insults may be quickly deleted but the questions are frequently met with inconsistently enforced rules, dismissive links to solutions that only tangentially answer the questions, or just snark. And a simpler rule set "No cursing, no racism, sexism, etc." could just as easily create that sort of environment.
This question is about as basic meta as it gets. How to check internal measurements of standards. Every serious company has constant checks on their standards. Hospitals aren't willy nilly winging their prescriptions for instance. And everyone is probably willing to admit more precision is better than less, and more solutions are more valuable than few solutions. No one wants enough variability in their anesthesia to kill them. Democracies where voters get to decide value are never perfect. Elevating individuals to judge others always leads to flawed decision making. This is a simple question "How are you measuring whether your judges are doing their job?" or "How are you ensuring that your democracy is meeting the needs of the community?" that every organization has to answer. The most meta of questions to be asked. And from what I've seen I expect it to be down voted.<issue_comment>username_1: ### Your examples
>
> For example [Should I prefer PhD programs with "higher quality" students?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/86672/should-i-prefer-phd-programs-with-higher-quality-students)
> Is a shopping question on what phd program to select. +4 up votes.
>
>
> Right below it <https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/86669/phd-is-75-done-in-russia-any-options-in-europe-uk-citizen>
> Another shopping question on what phd program to select. -4 down votes.
>
>
>
There is a crucial difference between those questions. The first one is asking whether a certain aspect is a relevant criterion to select a program; the second one is asking for a *specific individual program.* Or with other words: The first question is asking *how* to shop; the second question is asking *what* to shop. The latter what we call a shopping question. I tried to make [a FAQ on this](//academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3657/7734), explaining what makes a shopping question and why they are bad, but it did not receive much attention yet.
>
> There are social etiquette questions about how to answer emails that have almost nothing to do with academia being highly prioritized.
> [How to deal with an inappropriate greeting in an email?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/86352/how-to-deal-with-an-inappropriate-greeting-in-an-email)
>
>
>
I disagree that this has nothing to do with academia. Sure, such a situation could occur elsewhere, but then you would evaluate it differently (academia’s e-mail etiquette differs from business e-mail etiquette) and the ways to react to it are different: If a representative of a company was rude to me, I can report this to their superior; in a student–teacher relationship, this is not possible.
Note that this question got an insane amount of attention and hence votes due to being a [hot network question](//meta.stackexchange.com/tags/hot-questions/info).
>
> And another question about how to respond to emails dealing with research paper submissions being down voted and ignored.
> [What to do when you have not received a response three weeks after submitting minor revisions?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/86742/what-to-do-when-you-have-not-received-a-response-three-weeks-after-submitting-mi)
>
>
>
This question is hardly comparable to the previous one, because it is about an entirely different situation. The problem with this kind of question is that we have dozens of it and there is little to answer for us. In fact, this lead me [to propose to make a canonical question on this](//academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3707/7734).
### Your general question
>
> If the purpose is to form a consistently high standard, how are you ensuring that you're meeting that goal? Because that goal appears to be different depending on who's viewing your question.
>
>
>
That is indeed the goal. We are ensuring to meet that goal by requiring five close votes on a question, allowing users¹ to vote on posts, and allowing users¹ to participate in improving questions. Also there are mechanisms to reöpen questions.
Of course, this system is not perfect, but it is a viable compromise between fairness, a working community, and effort.
>
> How are you measuring whether your judges are doing their job?
>
>
>
If anybody¹ has the feeling that our closing behaviour needs changing or a specific question was wrongly closed or left open, they can take it to Meta. Of course only a portion of users care enough about their issues to actually do this, but even regarding this, there are very little complaints, e.g., if you compare to other Stack Exchange sites.
In addition, review decisions are public and 10 k users have access to statistics on closure and similar that allows to find problematic patterns.
Apart from this, the community seems to work insofar that it still thrives and we are not drowning in complaints. You may see this as a self-fulfilling prophecy, but if this community weren’t working, we would become subject to natural selection. Nobody forces you to participate if you do not like this.
---
¹ who passed a small reputation threshold, which exists to avoid the system being gamed and to ward off spam and similar
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: There appears to be no meta data on the quality control checks.
And all responses appear to be reinforcing the idea that there is nothing checking against self centered expressions of ego in an isolated community.
Upvotes: -1 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: >
> How to check internal measurements of standards.
>
>
>
During our beta period there were a few [site-evaluations](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/site-evaluation) when users were asked to rate how we were doing. There is also the [data explorer](https://data.stackexchange.com/) that lets users dig into the AC.SE database to see how things are doing. Finally, diamond moderators and SE staff have access to site analytics that go way beyond votes and page visits. For example, one metric allows us to see where anonymous users are coming from and how they are voting (these votes do not show up in the vote total).
In other words the health of the site is measured on a bunch of metrics at all levels of the game (users, moderators, and staff).
Upvotes: 1 |
2017/03/25 | 1,117 | 4,281 | <issue_start>username_0: We get a considerable amount of questions, where the asker submitted a paper to some journal and gets impatient because it appears to be stuck at a some stage:
* [What to do when you have not received a response three weeks after submitting minor revisions?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/86742/7734)
* [Article awaiting reviewer invitation 6 months after submission](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/18543/7734)
* [What should I do, as my submitted paper is still under review after 1 year?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/66219/7734)
* [Is it okay to inquire about the status of a paper when the online submission system shows no update three months after submission?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/24162/7734)
* [Three month delay in reviewing the revision of paper, Editor doesn't even answer the email](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/34648/7734)
* [What to do when two months after submitting a major revision, its status is still "Editor Assigned"?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/72608/7734)
* [Is it rude to remind an editor about a manuscript submission still waiting for an invitee after 2 months?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/80043/7734)
* [Will it be ok if I politely enquire about a paper which is under review for 8.5 months](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/85280/7734)
(Note that this selection is probably above average in quality. I remember many bad questions of this kind which I fail to find, be it because they were deleted, badly written or downvoted into oblivion.)
Most of these questions are not duplicates of each other, because they differ in detail. Yet there is a lot of overlap between the answers, which could be covered in a canonical question and answer. It could cover such basics as:
* How do I find out whether this is normal or not?
* How do I decide when to act?
* How should I act?
This would have the following advantage:
* Basic questions of this type where we can answer nothing but general advice can be closed as a duplicate of the canonical question. This avoids us reïterating the same advice again and again and is more helpful to the asker. Some askers may even find this question before asking and get help immediately.
* Questions that are about a special, interesting situation can focus on this. We can refer the asker to the canonical Q&A to cover the basic information.
* Typical comments can be avoided or at least reduced by asking the asker to read the canonical Q&A first and editing their question accordingly. Such comments include:
+ >
> What is your field?
>
>
>
+ >
> Wait at least half a year.
>
>
>
(which is bad guidance in some fields with quicker review processes)
+ The typical replies to such comments.
Thus, I am proposing to create such a canonical question and answer. If you think that an existing question is already suitable for this purpose, please suggest it.
---
This is a [feature-request](/questions/tagged/feature-request "show questions tagged 'feature-request'"), i.e., you can indicate approval or opposition by voting on the question.<issue_comment>username_1: I think that a canonical Q&A should refer to the field.
From what I have seen the amount of time the review process takes can vary widely between fields. Astronomy and Astrophysics papers (from personal experience as well as speaking with others) can make the transition from submission to acceptance (without revision) within a few weeks, but quite commonly from submission through the review process, submitting revisions and then acceptance for publication usually within only a few months. But this is the exception as other fields can take months upon months. I have colleagues who work in marine sciences - underwater acoustics, current modelling, hydrodynamics, etc. - and in biological sciences who are quite happy if they get a paper to publication in under a year.
Of course, long review process times are a separate issue to lack of response from editors.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I created a question as proposed:
[Is my paper under review for too long and if yes, how should I react?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/88355/7734)
(I just forgot to post it here.)
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer] |
2017/05/03 | 1,423 | 6,075 | <issue_start>username_0: Recently, [my question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/88915/which-academic-conferences-have-more-4-000-attendees) was closed for shopping. However, how shopping is [described](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2038/defining-shopping-questions) on meta does not seem to match my question. The meta question I link to outlines three possible characteristics of a shopping question, each of which my question does not satisfy.
It seems like there are two very different types/interpretations of shopping questions (1) asking for a list of objective facts related to academia [such as my question on #of attendees at academic conferences] and (2) asking for a subjective list of rankings for comparison.
>
> "Shopping" questions, which seek recommendations or lists of individual universities, academic programs, publishers, journals, research topics or similar as an answer or seek an assessment or comparison of such, are off-topic here
>
>
>
Note that the word "shopping" applied to (1) is a bit offensive, it implies the question asker didn't simply google the question and is asking for an opinion, which is simply not correct. There seems to be a lot of disagreement as to whether questions of type (1) are shopping. For example, [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/46914/list-of-2013-us-national-merit-scholars/46915#46915), which is nearly identical in flavor to mine was reopened on Academia Stack Exchange after a [meta conversation](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1808/why-was-this-question-closed-for-shopping) which classified it as not shopping.
If we are to say that any question that asks for an answer in list form, regardless as to the reason one would want a list, the close reason should be more explicit and include a "for any reason in it". Should we have two close reasons *list asking* and *shopping.* The description of the *list asking* close reason could go something like as follows
>
> "List asking" questions which seek a list of objective facts, with entries of the list each likely contributed by a different community member, are not well suited for this site. This is because each answer would be an equally valid yet incomplete part of the complete list. Questions of this form are unlikely to receive a complete list/answer by a single user. Therefore it is difficult to upvote and downvote the partial answers to such questions. **While such questions may be well researched and on topic, other formats are more appropriate for this type of question.**
>
>
>
I think shopping has too negative of a connotation if we are going to use it to close questions of people who have demonstrated considerable research behind their question.<issue_comment>username_1: I agree that **this question is not a shopping question** as no reasonable person would choose conferences by that criterion and hence the close reason was badly chosen. Note that I consider it irrelevant that the criterion for answers is objective; “What is the most visited conference for theoretical underwater basket weaving?” still is a shopping question. (The phrasing of the respective close reason [was chosen with exactly this in mind](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1741/7734).)
However, the wrong choice of close reason is about the only problematic thing about this. In particular:
* **I do not see that we need to redefine *shopping.*** Just that a close reason was misused in one case, does not mean we need to redefine it.
* **We need no new canned close reason.** Bearing exceptional cases, sites can only have three canned close reasons. These should be used for the most common cases and mainly exist to prevent close voters from having to type/paste/script-insert a custom close reason every time they are closing such a question. Questions that ask for lists and that are not shopping questions are very rare.
* **The question should not be reöpened.** As you already noted, the problem is that every answer matching the criteria is equally valid. While this can be solved by having a single community-wiki answer, this does not solve the problem that this platform is not suited to provide the required maintenance.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I think is a broad sense, the question is a shopping question. In my mind shopping questions come in two flavors:
The first asks for help choosing between a list of potential "products". In general, for these type of questions, the criteria for defining "better" are undefined or personal. In the presence of an objective set of criteria, these questions might be a good fit. For example, a question with a back story involving a desire to be taught by Fields Medal winners could then aspect the objective question "Is MIT or Cal Tech better in terms of number of classes taught by Fields Medal winners". This would be an okay question in my mind with a small number of potential answers (someone might answer the total number of classes, another might be number of professors, one might include cross listed classes, etc). It also highlights the fact that shopping questions are not necessarily because the asker is lazy, sometimes the relevant information is hard to find.
The second asks for products that meet a given list of criteria. These tend to lead to lots of answers with a single "product" or a community wiki answer with the complete list. An example of such a question would be "Which universities have classes taught by Fields Medal winners". While not asking for an opinion about which is better, these still feel like shopping questions since compiling the options is part of shopping. Your question falls within this category
The [question you link](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/46914/list-of-2013-us-national-merit-scholars) as a counter example is slightly different in that it is not asking for individual "products", but rather if someone has already gone through the effort of compiling a list of "products".
Upvotes: 0 |
2017/05/12 | 561 | 2,454 | <issue_start>username_0: The question [How do academics with teaching responsibilities, etc. find the time to do research?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/89362/) was originally asked on mathoverflow in the context of the working life of a professional mathematician, and was then migrated to academia.SE. (I am not wholly convinced that this was the right decision, but so be it.)
The question has been edited significantly now, so that it is a generic question. I wondered what the community's feelings are, on whether this was the right move or not. My concern is that there are some features of a mathematician's research life - priorities, opportunities, teaching loads, likely career path - that are not always in line with other STEM subjects, let alone what happens in the humanities.
Is there a case for having a question like this which is specific to math(s), or at least to STEM? There were some initial answers by mathematicians which seemed useful/relevant in the specific context, but are probably less applicable to academia as a whole.<issue_comment>username_1: I edited the question to its more "generic," current form. Full disclosure: I am an engineer, not a mathematician.
My main motivation to edit the question was that the answers in place prior to my edit seemed to apply perfectly well to me, too, and the question in its original form only mentioned mathematics as a bit of extraneous information; all of the other details in the original question seemed to apply to a wide range of academics, not just mathematicians.
If my edits are way out of line, feel free to rollback the question to its previous version. Then we can have a meta discussion about why we need a version of this question for every discipline :-/
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If the answers to the edited question turn out to miss something fundamental to mathematics, then I guess you could ask a new question specifically about mathematics.
If you do so, you should
1. link to the original question
2. explain why the answers to the more general question are not satisfactory; in other words, what is the peculiarity within mathematics that makes a separate question worth it.
Alternatively, if the answers simply miss something important that is present more widely, than adding a bounty is one way of emphasising the missing thing.
Editing the scope of a question with plenty of answers is probably not ideal.
Upvotes: 1 |
2017/06/06 | 726 | 2,867 | <issue_start>username_0: Here's a [question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/90483/32436) written by a newcomer with a small starting rep. It currently has a total negative score of -7, and four close votes (including the one I just cast). It was written 13 hours ago and has not yet been closed. Jeesh!
Granted, the question has *problems!* But it's hard for people to learn how to pose better questions when this level of negative voting occurs.
It would be different if it were an established participant who was asking something outrageous like, How can I take revenge on my competitor and steal his best grad student -- or something like that. I did once see an outrageous question posed by someone with a pretty good rep, that got a lot of downvotes. That can happen, and my point is that Nikki's question is not in that realm.
Friends, can't we be reasonable and stop downvoting such a question when it gets to -3, and instead focus our efforts on closing the question swiftly and painlessly?
**Edit:**
I will change my suggested floor to **-4** based on the answer by @strongbad.<issue_comment>username_1: We definitely should be nice to new users. This includes welcoming them and explaining what can be improved about their questions and answers. As for not down voting them, large negative scores, especially in the absence of close votes, have little positive influence and a pretty big negative influence.
That said, it is worth noting that questions with a [score of -4 or worse](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/117119/how-many-downvotes-to-push-an-active-question-off-the-active-list) are hidden from the active page. Assuming a question has a close vote, giving it a score of -4 will get it off the active page. This has the advantage of decreasing the visibility until higher rep users handle it through the close review queue.
Additionally, [closed questions with non-postive scores](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5221/how-does-deleting-work-what-can-cause-a-post-to-be-deleted-and-what-does-that) are automatically deleted by the community bot.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I am a newcomer and that post was mine. When I find the website for the first time. It made the best first impression on me. I thought that was a great way to ask questions in a friendly manner. I did not want to hurt anyone or waste your time. I am just a newcomer. on that post, I mentioned that I am not a native speaker, instead of giving me a piece of advice you just told me you need to work on your writing before going and studying there. I was in the middle of very important talk with my professor, instead of guiding you just teased me. I know that I made mistakes. I am going to leave this website. I want the admin to remove my account. Thank you for stopping me. I WON'T be active here anymore.
Best wishes!
Upvotes: 3 |
2017/06/14 | 715 | 2,956 | <issue_start>username_0: the question came up to me when seeing following answer: <https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/90807/74774>
This is edited by the mod Eykanal, removing over half of the (I admit, quite funny) post. I do understand the reasoning, as the sarcasm didn't add anything and last portion of that post looks like an answer.
But I'll be honest. If this was on stackoverflow, I'd have voted to delete the answer for being not an answer. Especially because even after removing the sarcasm part it doesn't really give an answer on the question OP asked. Which was **how** to solve the issue (emphasis mine). On SO this should be a comment, not an answer. But different house, different rules...
This made me wonder how strict one should be when evaluating answers. Should it specifically answer the actual question asked, or is it allowed to leave a more general comment on the nature of the problem?<issue_comment>username_1: Thanks for posting this question. This is a constant struggle on these sites.
On the one hand, people in a community setting want to enjoy themselves. That involves conversation, jokes, sarcasm, poking fun, off-topic comments, the like. Those things are very important for a strong community; no one wants to participate where it's just a bunch of dead fish in a room.
On the other hand, the goal of the site is to be informative, helpful, and easy-to-use. This *necessarily* means that much the off-topic stuff should be removed, because someone visiting the site from the outside (1) may not get the jokes and (2) has to wade through inane stuff to get to the useful stuff.
Most of the time, this isn't a big issue. Conversations take place in comments, and after they're done—or after two days, whichever comes first—we move them to chat. People make jokes, we laugh, and then make sure it doesn't affect the answer itself, editing if necessary.
This is one of those unusual cases where (1) the joke was integral to the answer, (2) the joke was potentially confusing to new visitors, and (3) the question was on the Hot Network Questions list. With all that in mind I took the rather drastic step of heavy-handed editing and then sat back and waited for someone to ask about it. I appreciate your doing it politely :) I would love to hear people's thoughts as to whether I did the right thing or not.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I personally feel that our community has expressed little patience with sarcastic questions/answers. This means removing that part of the answer, especially on a HNQ post, in a timely manner is important. I also believe that the answer probably should be deleted as NAA. As mods, there is a big difference between editing an answer where everyone can see what we have done and anyone can roll it back and deleting an answer. As the answer has 21 up votes and only 1 down vote, I would want to see a well discussed justification before deleting the answer.
Upvotes: 2 |
2017/06/17 | 607 | 2,211 | <issue_start>username_0: In this question, [How to withdraw an under review manuscript from a journal when you decide you want to submit to another journal with a higher impact factor?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/90898/how-to-withdraw-an-under-review-manuscript-from-a-journal-when-you-decide-you-wa), the asker is told pretty clearly—in multiple ways—that it's totally unacceptable to withdraw your paper for this reason. Indeed, some might think the answer apparent, but the OP obviously didn't, and came to the Academia Stack Exchange to seek some help.
One of the responses' fist paragraph was the following:
>
> Editors are reading these sites too. Like me and the editor who posted this link on a large editor list serve I'm included in. I'll be keeping an eye out for your papers (as will they) and save you the trouble of wasting me and my reviewers' time by desk rejecting your papers as they come in.
>
>
>
Is this type of thing... allowed?
If so, why? I think this sets a pretty crappy precedent.
(There are also some good points mentioned in the comments to that response that I won't replicate here; I flagged the post, but will [reluctantly!] unflag it if the consensus is that this is allowed, and ok.)<issue_comment>username_1: I do not consider this answer acceptable because it violates [be nice](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice), in particular:
* >
> Be welcoming, be patient, and assume good intentions.
>
>
>
* >
> Don't be a jerk. These are just a few examples. If you see them, flag them: […] Harassment and bullying. If you see a hostile interaction, flag it.
>
>
>
Threatening or scaring users, in particular with consequences outside of this site, clearly violates this. This answer should be deleted as soon as possible.
>
> Is allowing it, in effect, discouraging questions?
>
>
>
Sure, but there are far better reasons to delete this post.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The threats were inappropriate and definitely a violation of our be nice policy. I have deleted the answer. If a 10k+ user thinks they can salvage the answer, please edit and flag for attention so it can be undeleted.
Upvotes: 4 |
2017/06/22 | 729 | 3,041 | <issue_start>username_0: Perhaps this is a meta meta question, but I wonder whether experience and reputation on other SE sites should not be taken into consideration when granting certain privileges, such as those to review close votes, for example.
Consider, for the sake of argument, a relatively new member of Academia SE who is a long serving academic and also a high-rep member of another SE site, where they possess, say, review privileges and know the general gist of SE very well.
One way to implement this would be to use a formula based on a combination of SE sites, say Academia SE rep + 10% of rep elsewhere on SE.<issue_comment>username_1: I like to think of the [privileges](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/privileges) granted by reputation falling into two categories: participation and moderation. The system provides a 100 rep association bonus to users of other sites. This seems to allow existing SE users to fully *participate* in a new site immediately, but only provides limited *moderation* privileges (a new user can flag things). As sites should ideally be able to handle the moderation load with existing high rep users, it doesn't seem like there is a need to provide other privileges. Is there one that is obviously missing?
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There's already a mechanism that gives privileges to "high" rep users of other sites. It's called the [association bonus](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/whats-reputation):
>
> If you are an experienced Stack Exchange network user with 200 or more reputation on at least one site, you will receive a starting +100 reputation bonus to get you past basic new user restrictions. This will happen automatically on all current Stack Exchange sites where you have an account, and on any other Stack Exchange sites at the time you log in.
>
>
>
This bonus unlocks nearly half of all the privileges (notably upvoting, commenting, and flagging).
I think it unlocks only so much for a reason. Close voting in particular makes sense as a privilege. If a question needs closure, a user with 101 reputation can flag it, pushing the question into the queue where other users can decide if it should be closed. If the question shouldn't be closed, the flag gets declined, and enough of that gets you flag banned.
Consider this: I got the ability to close vote on one site through nothing but a single answer (because the site is in beta and the question I answered was in the HNQ). As a new user, I'm unfamiliar with the meta discussions where the site decided what's on and off topic. There's nothing to stop me from voting to close the wrong questions, with little to no feedback that I'm doing it wrong. My experience on other sites doesn't change any of this. That's why I don't vote to close on that site at all.
---
Also, [people have discussed](https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/238420/323179) making it so that the bonus doesn't count towards upvoting, although nothing has been decided or done yet.
Upvotes: 2 |
2017/07/07 | 903 | 3,290 | <issue_start>username_0: Following on from this [answer](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1499/929), I think a discussion of our custom close reasons would be helpful. We can currently only have 3 custom close reasons. If we want more we would have to ask/beg the SE team to [create more](https://meta.askubuntu.com/questions/6994/can-we-have-more-than-3-custom-close-reasons-pretty-please) for us. While it would be desirable to know the usage of the custom close reasons, [usage data are unavailable](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/194378/how-can-i-search-for-custom-off-topic-close-reasons).
The idea for each answer to have:
* Proposed text of a custom close reason
* A description of the kind of questions it would apply to
* Some examples to demonstrate the need for this close reason
* Links to any discussion threads on meta relevant to this close reason<issue_comment>username_1: **Close Reason:**
>
> This question appears to be off-topic because it seems to seek specific advice for a very specific situation, and it's likely that only someone with a good understanding of your situation will be able to provide an objectively correct answer.
>
>
>
**Description of Questions:**
Stealing from the [previous discussion](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1093/time-to-expressly-ban-i-want-to-do-x-heres-my-life-story-questions):
Every SE site seems to have a particular genre of questions that are essentially unanswerable. I've come to believe that the questions we get wherein someone asks, with an accompany tale of their career, coursework to date, interests, etc. "How do get into a top program in X" or "Should I apply to the University of Y".
These questions have, in my mind, three problems:
1. Many are too specific - they only generalize to someone specific.
2. They're *also* too broad, because they're not actually asking an actionable question.
3. They're inherently unanswerable. The people who know (the admission committee of University of X's Department of Y) won't answer, and no one else knows.
**Example Questions:**
[Another student used my completed work, what should I do?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/43839/another-student-used-my-completed-work-what-should-i-do)
**Previous Discussions:**
[Discussion of the need](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1093/time-to-expressly-ban-i-want-to-do-x-heres-my-life-story-questions)
[Discussion of the text](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1120/new-custom-close-reason)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_1: **Close Reason:**
>
> Questions about problems facing undergraduate students are off-topic unless they can also apply to graduate or post-graduate academicians as described in What topics can I ask about here?
>
>
>
**Description of Questions:**
**Example Questions:**
**Previous Discussions:**
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_1: **Close Reason:**
>
> Questions that cannot be generalized to apply to others in similar situations are off-topic. For assistance in writing questions that can apply to multiple people facing similar situations, see: What kinds of questions are too localized?
>
>
>
**Description of Questions:**
**Example Questions:**
**Previous Discussions:**
Upvotes: -1 |
2017/07/18 | 591 | 2,276 | <issue_start>username_0: In academia.SE the upvotes of the questions and answers have some points associated. However, there are no points associated with the comments on the questions or the answers.
Why am I asking this question?
* Few answers just combine the ideas mentioned in the comments and those answers keep getting upvotes there by increasing the points of the user.
* Though comments get many upvotes, no points are being awarded to the user.
* This is demotivating for the new members of academia.SE site.
What could possibly be done? (any one of the following would do.)
* Award at least 1 point for each upvote of a comment. This will keep the users entertained and motivated to give their best in answering the questions from corners of the world.
* Award some point (nonzero) to the user with a comment with 5 upvotes.
* Award a bronze or silver or gold reputation badge based on the number of upvotes on comments.<issue_comment>username_1: [Comments are often abused.](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/292011/drop-not-constructive-combine-noisy-reword-rude-and-other-comment-flag) There's no agreement on how to use them and they often end up playing host to side discussions, critical commentary, or (more often than not) memes. On the moderating side, comments are treated as ephemeral... once a discussion topic is over, there's a good chance off-topic comments will get deleted.
To that extent, rewards for comments simply encourages what is often bad behavior. The system is designed to encourage good questions and answers. Everything else is just there to help that first part work as well as it can. As such, I don't think this suggestion is a good idea.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Two points:
1. >
> This is demotivating for the new members of academia.SE site.
>
>
>
I don't think so. A new user can't even comment on anything except for their own questions and answers. Commenting is a privilege that has to be earned (50 rep). You only need 1 rep to answer or ask and this emphasizes what this site is for: Useful answers for relevant questions.
2. There are two badges for comments, namely
* **Commentator** [Bronze]: Leave 10 comments
* **Pundit** [Silver]: Leave 10 comments with score of 5 or more
Upvotes: 0 |
2017/07/21 | 439 | 1,619 | <issue_start>username_0: Subject line says it all -- I do not recall seeing any questions here about K-12 education here, but I also do not know if there is a better Stack Exchange site for that purpose.<issue_comment>username_1: No. Per the [help center](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic), only university-level education is within the scope of this site.
>
> This site is for academics of all levels—from aspiring graduate and professional students to senior researchers—as well as anyone in or interested in research-related or research-adjacent fields.
>
>
> If you have a question about...
>
>
> * Life as a graduate student, postdoctoral researcher, university professor
> * Transitioning from undergraduate to graduate researcher
> * Inner workings of research departments
> * Requirements and expectations of academicians
> * **University-level pedagogy**
>
>
> ... then you're in the right place!
>
>
>
There is a proposal on Area 51 that may be of interest to you: [Primary and Secondary Education](http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/110775/primary-and-secondary-education)
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Depending on the specific nature of your question(s), you *may* be looking for the [Math Educators](https://matheducators.stackexchange.com) or [CS Educators](https://cseducators.stackexchange.com) sites.
As those site names imply, though, they are about specific subjects, not all of K-12 education, and they tend to be more focused on the problems facing educators as people than issues relating to the field of education broadly.
Upvotes: 1 |
2017/07/23 | 932 | 3,661 | <issue_start>username_0: I have seen multiple questions and comments deleted, closed, and moved without much justification. Why can't the moderators etc. just let the people ask and answer the questions peacefully and without censoring unless there arises a serious problem? Just let people talk. Look at how the New York Times publishes pretty much all of the submitted comments. I have posted to the New York Times for 5+ years and none of my comments has ever been censored/blocked/deleted by the editors. It's called freedom of speech and freedom of association.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Why can't the moderators etc. just let the people ask and answer the questions peacefully and without censoring unless there arises a serious problem?
>
>
>
Most content that is deleted on Stack Exchange is deleted because it simply doesn’t belong where it is posted (and not due to censoring).
This is necessary as, no matter what you do, there always will be people who ask questions that do not fit the topic of a site or cannot reasonably be answered within this format, use answers for asking questions or similar, and use comments for dumping their opinion and having discussions.
The success of the Stack Exchange model is based on keeping the site clean from such misplaced content.
That this is a good thing is demonstrated quite well by most of the rest of the Internet, where relevant information is often buried under tons of garbage and comments are a write-only area for those who have a desperate need to share their opinion.
For example, comments on news pages may be less moderated, but then I hardly ever read them and if I do, I usually quickly regret it.
>
> It's called freedom of speech and freedom of association.
>
>
>
Nope. Please read [this educative cartoon](https://xkcd.com/1357/) (which is about even stronger cases, but still gets the general gist).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> I have seen multiple questions and comments deleted, closed, and moved
> without much justification. Why can't the moderators etc. just let the
> people ask and answer the questions peacefully and without censoring
> unless there arises a serious problem?
>
>
>
Because the StackExchange network is expressly meant to be a curated source for information, not a free-wheeling discussion of whatever happens to wander in.
>
> Just let people talk. Look at how the New York Times publishes pretty
> much all of the submitted comments. I have posted to the New York
> Times for 5+ years and none of my comments has ever been
> censored/blocked/deleted by the editors.
>
>
>
"Don't Read the Comments" is one of the great rules of the Internet for a reason - the lack of a curated comments section leads, very, very often, to a rambling cesspool of insults, digressions, spam, and any signal gets swiftly lost in the noise.
>
> It's called freedom of speech and freedom of association.
>
>
>
Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Association only apply to the government (and a specific government at that) - the Academia StackExchange site is not obligated to indulge any post that wanders in.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: The moderators here work quite hard for a position that pays nothing. They work in academics, and thus have too much spare time to waste. For example, look at this:
>
> [What happened to my comment?](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3772/what-happened-to-my-comment)
>
>
>
Moderator @ff524 deleted the valid comments because she didn't like it (not related to her research?). No other moderator on any other StackExchange site would have done that.
Upvotes: -1 |
2017/07/24 | 1,311 | 4,707 | <issue_start>username_0: ### Statistical background
*The following is extracted from the [question close stats](https://academia.stackexchange.com/tools/question-close-stats) (10 k only).*
In the last three months:
* the *undergraduate* close reason¹ was used 18 times (that’s only about 3 % of all closures).
* 84 questions were closed with a custom close reason (i.e., typed by the close voter). This includes:
+ 21 close reasons that indicate that the question is about the subject of an academic discipline and not about academia itself
+ at least 39 instances of blanket close reasons like: “This is not about academia.”
### Proposal
Let’s replace the *undergraduate* close reason¹ with a more general *out of scope* reason.
Instead of the standard phrasing for such a close reason², the latter shall also explicitly mention common cases and provide helpful links (as possible within the 400 available characters), for example:
* questions about the subject of an academic discipline,
* questions about non-academic education,
* questions specific to undergraduate students.
The detailed phrasing shall be addressed in answers to this question.
*Note that we have only three slots for custom close reasons available.
As all of these are currently used, introducing a new close reason requires abolishing an existing one.*
### Does this mean a change of our scope?
Canned close reasons mostly exist to streamline close voting and to leave helpful information for the asker.
They do not define our scope.
Should this proposal be accepted, the kind of undergraduate questions that is off-topic now will still be off-topic – close voters may just have to type this reason themselves.
---
¹ which is as follows:
>
> Questions about problems facing undergraduate students are off-topic unless they can also apply to graduate or post-graduate academicians as described in [What topics can I ask about here?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic)
>
>
>
² which would be:
>
> This question does not appear to be about academia, within the scope defined in the [help center](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic).
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: As a wording for the new close reason, I propose:
>
> This question is **not within the scope** of this site as defined in the [help center](//academia.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic). Our scope particularly excludes [the content of research](//academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1486/7734), [education outside of a university setting](//academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2059), and [problems *only* faced by undergraduate students](//academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1360).
>
>
>
Note that unless I am very much mistaken, this can be implemented adhering to the character limit (400) by replacing the help-centre link with `[help]`.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: As I argued in the question [What kind of undergraduate questions are not really generalizable to graduate education? (An "Academia varies more than you think" perspective)](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3300/20058),
the boundary between problems faced by undergraduate students and those faced by graduate ones is not universally well defined.
About a year ago I wrote that question because I had the feeling that the *undergraduate* close reason was frequently misused without really taking into account the variability of academia and the advice given in [the highest voted answer](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1363/20058) to the question [Why does AC.SE exclude undergraduate students?](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1360/20058)
As shown by the stats reported by username_1, the undergraduate close reason is now a small fraction of all closures: for this reason and for the risk of misusing it, I propose to remove the undergraduate close reason altogether.
By slightly shortening username_1's proposal, I suggest:
>
> This question is **not within the scope** of this site as defined in the [help center](//academia.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic). Our scope particularly excludes [the content of research](//academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1486/7734) and [education outside of a university setting](//academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2059).
>
>
>
Further, I suggest to change the text in the help center, by removing the sentence
>
> Undergraduate-specific issues that could not apply to graduate or post-graduate academicians
>
>
>
and substituting it with a short, more specific, list of undergraduate-specific issues that we consider not generalizable (at the moment, the only proposal was [Strong Bad's](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3301/20058)).
Upvotes: 2 |
2017/07/31 | 827 | 2,889 | <issue_start>username_0: An ad that one of my advisors shared contains a sentence that is against law and working ethic, and I am surprised to see an associate professor request from a postdoc to stay more than 10 h per day.
I need advice how to report this behavior and what legal consequences this professor can face. Is this a suitable place?<issue_comment>username_1: As a wording for the new close reason, I propose:
>
> This question is **not within the scope** of this site as defined in the [help center](//academia.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic). Our scope particularly excludes [the content of research](//academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1486/7734), [education outside of a university setting](//academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2059), and [problems *only* faced by undergraduate students](//academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1360).
>
>
>
Note that unless I am very much mistaken, this can be implemented adhering to the character limit (400) by replacing the help-centre link with `[help]`.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: As I argued in the question [What kind of undergraduate questions are not really generalizable to graduate education? (An "Academia varies more than you think" perspective)](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3300/20058),
the boundary between problems faced by undergraduate students and those faced by graduate ones is not universally well defined.
About a year ago I wrote that question because I had the feeling that the *undergraduate* close reason was frequently misused without really taking into account the variability of academia and the advice given in [the highest voted answer](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1363/20058) to the question [Why does AC.SE exclude undergraduate students?](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1360/20058)
As shown by the stats reported by username_1, the undergraduate close reason is now a small fraction of all closures: for this reason and for the risk of misusing it, I propose to remove the undergraduate close reason altogether.
By slightly shortening username_1's proposal, I suggest:
>
> This question is **not within the scope** of this site as defined in the [help center](//academia.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic). Our scope particularly excludes [the content of research](//academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1486/7734) and [education outside of a university setting](//academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2059).
>
>
>
Further, I suggest to change the text in the help center, by removing the sentence
>
> Undergraduate-specific issues that could not apply to graduate or post-graduate academicians
>
>
>
and substituting it with a short, more specific, list of undergraduate-specific issues that we consider not generalizable (at the moment, the only proposal was [Strong Bad's](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3301/20058)).
Upvotes: 2 |
2017/08/06 | 650 | 2,231 | <issue_start>username_0: I have been trying to publish my Master's thesis, I am sure It's an idea that what spreading. I would like to know if i can publish the thesis here on this site, and if so please how can I go about it?<issue_comment>username_1: This is a question-and-answer site, not a publishing platform.
If you want to publish your master’s thesis, the best way is to convert it to a proper journal article (or conference paper, if that is a thing in your field). Your supervisor is probably the best person to advise you on this.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: In addition to the amazing answer by @username_1, I have the following to make you **aware** of few things:
Many publishers, mostly 'unknown' and 'business oriented' ones do take advantage of the weak situations of the Graduate students by claiming that they would publish the whole thesis as a book.
One such example is Lambert Academic Publishing (LAP) whose status to be called as a legit publisher is highly questionable. Even I was about to get trapped by them. Have a look at the following questions:
* [Is Lambert Academic Publishing a reputable company?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2513/is-lambert-academic-publishing-a-reputable-company)
* [Be alert: LAP s[c|p]am](http://chemistry.ws.gc.cuny.edu/2014/06/03/be-alert-lambert-academic-publishing-spam/)
* [Your Thesis and the Predatory Publisher](https://library.bond.edu.au/news/46287/your-thesis-and-predatory-publisher) (you must read this)
Another example is OmniScriptum. [Read the blog here.](http://www.guide2research.com/tutorials/avoid-omniscriptum-to-re-publish-your-thesis-and-other-scientific-papers)
Be careful, it is your hard work produced as a thesis. You might lose copyright, ownership, and then left with nothing. Look how much they are earning from your hard work ([a sample e-shopping site](https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_c_1_8?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=lambert%20academic%20publishing&sprefix=lambert%20%2Caps%2C358&crid=23PVVFINIYF47)).
If you want slightly faster publication (i.e. the time to get published), target high tier conferences in your field. (I am assuming here that you belong to Engineering fields)
Upvotes: 3 |
2017/08/23 | 1,465 | 5,435 | <issue_start>username_0: ### Proposal
Currently [the definition of our scope](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic) with respect to undergraduate questions is:
>
> [do *not* ask questions about]
>
>
> * Undergraduate-specific issues that could not apply to graduate or post-graduate academicians
>
>
>
I propose to replace this by:
>
> [do *not* ask questions about]
>
>
> * Undergraduate admissions
> * Undergraduate life and culture (sports, nightlife, dorms, leaving the nest, etc.)
>
>
>
Close reasons, other help texts, etc. shall be changed accordingly.
This includes the outcome of [this proposal of mine](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3783/7734).
### Rationale
* The current definition is difficult to grasp and a source of dispute.
* The current definition often leads to questions being voted to close for no other apparent reason than containing the word *undergraduate.*
* Going by the outcome of [this Meta question](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3300/7734), there is no difference between the two definitions.
* The separation between undergraduate and graduate students is not universal and thus not generally understood.
For example, there do not even exist accurate translations of the words *undergraduate* and *graduate student* to the German language.
While the proposed wording still contains the word *undergraduate,* it only requires a very basic understanding of the underlying system.
For most question, even that isn’t needed to see that they do not fall into this category.
### This question
Use votes on the question to indicate your indicate your agreement or disagreement with the proposal. Use answers to suggest amendments or elaborate your disagreement.<issue_comment>username_1: Additional clarity is always good. However, we should make sure that we revisit this from time to time—someone may always try to come back and say: "But it's not on the list!"
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't believe those two "definitions" are the same. I'm not sure how seriously people tried to give complete answers to [What kind of undergraduate questions are not really generalizable to graduate education? (An "Academia varies more than you think" perspective)](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3300/19607)
but it seems to me there are various other issues specific to undergraduate education (at least in the US) that would be very different for graduate education. For instance
* general education requirements
* changing majors (while it can be done at the graduate level, the process is quite different)
* minors
That said, I am all for clarifying what's in the help center. So my suggestion would be to amend what's currently in the help center to something like
>
> [do not ask questions about]
>
>
> * Undergraduate-specific issues that could not apply to graduate or post-graduate academics such as undergraduate admissions, undergraduate life and culture, etc.
>
>
>
(I don't know what kinds of undergrad specific questions tend to get asked on this site, but if someone has a sense of this, that should inform the sort of examples we give.)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I think in my mind the distinction wants to be between questions about *being a student* versus questions about *being a trainee researcher/academic(/uni teacher?)*. So I would prefer to make questions about undergrad research (or even classes on presentation skills), or describing your work well in a scholarship application, on-topic, but questions about filling in forms for graduate finance off-topic.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_4: The scope "Undergraduate-specific issues that could not apply to graduate or post-graduate academicians" can be interpreted as *allowing* questions that *can* relate both to graduate and undergraduate issues, but that might be asked by a person who is facing, or has faced, the issue from an undergraduate perspective. Questions for and answers to these kinds of issues should be written from a perspective that could apply to both groups.
E.g. Instead of asking:
>
> I am having trouble in my Freshman math course. How can I ask for help?
>
>
>
Ask:
>
> How can I communicate with an instructor and ask for specific help?
>
>
>
Instead of asking:
>
> I have been accused of plagiarizing on my Senior thesis. I didn't plagiarize. What can I do?
>
>
>
Ask:
>
> How can I handle allegations made against me of plagiarism that I believe are unfounded?
>
>
>
Instead of asking:
>
> Undergraduates at East Northern Outer Podunk University are required to maintain a 2.0 GPA. How can I ensure I keep a 2.0 GPA?
>
>
>
Ask:
>
> How can I understand a minimum GPA requirement and comply with it?
>
>
>
The following topics could clearly be in scope for both undergraduates and graduates, and should be allowed, regardless of whether the question asker is an undergraduate student or not:
* Study habits - how to study, take notes, understand a syllabus, etc.
* How to communicate with instructors.
* Basic research techniques - how to collect data, locate articles, etc.
* How to cite sources.
* How to handle allegations of cheating - founded and unfounded.
* How not to be a cheater.
* Understanding grading systems - GPA, quality points, percentage scores, etc., how they are determined, how to convert between them, how to compute averages, etc.
Upvotes: -1 |
2017/08/25 | 706 | 2,824 | <issue_start>username_0: I was going to flag [Is it considered normal to publish job offers inviting candidates to apply based on their gender and / or race in academia?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/95011/) for moderators' attention, or attempt an edit myself, but then I wasn't sure if I would be acting correctly.
I will try not to get bogged down in the specific topic of that question, which seems to be contentious (and now it's hit the non-academia SE sites and Twitter, natch). Following observations by <NAME> in his answer and various commenters on chat threads, I think it is objectively true that the question has the following structure:
Title: Why is it normal/acceptable for A to happen?
Preamable to question: Some description of circumstances A.
Question(s): Why is B acceptable?
Here it seems to be assumed that A will either lead to B, or has been set up in order to lead to B, or that A and B are the same.
>
> My own question: instead of arguing against the apparent motivation for the question, should users or mods instead change the question to one that is more neutral? Or is this too intrusive against the wishes of the original author?
>
>
>
Sorry if this is too nebulous: I am trying to find a point of principle or practice that it might be useful to sort out, rather than get overly focused on the rights and wrongs of a particular question.<issue_comment>username_1: I would not recommend changing the question. In general, I think we as a community limit edits to grammar/readability, tags, adding content from comments into the question/answer, and rewording the titular question to provide better information on the front page. Trying to change the question i think is too invasive. That said, working with the OP to improve the question through comments and chat (and possibly a mutually agreed edit) is encouraged.
As for what to do with these difficult questions, I suggest flagging, and when you have the reputation voting to close. Often these questions are unclear and/or opinion based and not a good fit.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I think, in most cases, that questions of the form "A is True, Therefore B, Why?" where there is either a false presumption or that the question itself is a sort of rhetorical device rather than a question have a valid answer of "It Isn't".
This doesn't even necessarily need to be controversial questions. Consider, for example, my answer to [Paper rejected. Should I appeal against biased reviews?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/19726/paper-rejected-should-i-appeal-against-biased-reviews/19728#19728)
I will say that it's unlikely the answer will be *accepted* if the OP isn't posting in good faith, but community voting enables disagreeing with the OP's premises in an answer.
Upvotes: 2 |
2017/08/25 | 490 | 1,814 | <issue_start>username_0: A couple of flags have been raised [on this answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/95065/929) that suggests that the OP's example title is not appropriate. I have edited the title which I think conveys the same information, but in a more appropriate way. The OP has rolled my revision back.
Which way do we want the answer?<issue_comment>username_1: I think the original title overestimates the universality of the author's sense of humour, and is in a certain technical sense gratuitous. If the same point can be made with a title that does not risk either causing offence or derailing, then why go for a title that does have such risks, unless one is desperate to burnish one's Lenny Bruce credentials?
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Please read the question [Who has the final authority in an edit war? OP or a moderator?](https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/291153/217406) on Meta Stack Exchange
and one of the [answer](https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/292796/217406) says
>
> What is a moderator? Someone who is trusted to know the site rules and enforce them. Either elected by the site users themselves, or by Stack Exchange staff (or SE staff member on their own), a moderator has the final say in everything, and got tools to enforce their decisions
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: As with @YemonChoi, I found the title to be entirely unnecessary, and a distraction from the content of the answer itself. While I'm all for humorous example titles, it's trivial to make one *not* involving an inflammatory topic.
When it comes down to it, I don't think the fake title added anything, *did* feel like it was baiting a bit, and I was entirely comfortable with its removal. The further edits by the OP don't do much to make me think I'm wrong.
Upvotes: 3 |
2017/09/29 | 1,216 | 4,780 | <issue_start>username_0: After reading some popular comments on this site it seems that many users consider students (students as a group, not individuals) to be irrational \*\*\*holes:
* >
> [*students cannot reasonably expect* - I see you're applying logic to an illogical group, a common rookie mistake.](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/96638/how-do-i-politely-decline-student-requests-to-meet-during-my-research-time#comment248631_96639)
>
>
>
18 votes so far
* >
> [@PsySp, you seem to be too much concerned with this student. Students are free to hate and bad mouth their lecturers. This is the modus operandi of a typical student: complaining and criticizing lecturers. I wouldn't think too much of this.](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/96470/how-to-deal-with-arrogant-e-mail-of-a-student/96475#comment247954_96475)
>
>
>
21 votes
As a former student I feel this is user hostile behaviour, by a more powerful group towards a less powerful group, more suitable at a gripe session in the pub than in a friendly public forum. As a thought experiment, try applying these comments to basically any minority or disadvantaged group and see how quickly that gets flagged and removed.
I'm not sure where this is going. Are these comments not considered rude? Is there a huge amount of popular lecturer-bashing which has passed me by? Obviously some part of the community will consider this too thin-skinned, but it seems this kind of behaviour
1. doesn't add anything positive or useful to the discussion and
2. could discourage some users from participating.<issue_comment>username_1: I am having trouble answering this. At the heart of the issue is *As a thought experiment, try applying these comments to basically any minority or disadvantaged group and see how quickly that gets flagged and removed* students are not a minority or a disadvantaged group, they are the entire population of individuals being taught. The comments are not suggesting any sort of preferential treatment be given to one group of students at another groups expense.
For example, saying students (or any other group) make bad customers because they are illogical is inappropriate since it implies preferential treatment should be given to non-students. Saying jobs in sales are hard because customers are illogical, however, is fine. What the comments are essentially saying is that teaching is hard because students are illogical.
I disagree with your point that the comments don't *add anything positive or useful to the discussion* but I agree with your point that they *could discourage some users from participating*. It is important for new teachers to realize that some students are illogical/emotional and that others will complain and criticize. Therefore, I believe the comments add value. That said, the comments could have addressed the fact that not all students are illogical or prone to complaint and criticism, that students are not necessarily more emotional than any other group, and that each student should be treated as an individual. That is a lot to pack into a comment on the off chance that a student would be offended that students are stereotyped (fairly or unfairly) as emotional.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: A few thoughts on this:
>
> Are these comments not considered rude?
>
>
>
The second example you use is a bit rude, but the first is clearly a joke, and a pretty minor one at that.
>
> Is there a huge amount of popular lecturer-bashing which has passed me
> by?
>
>
>
If you mean on the site, there isn't much. But in life?
Consider the very existence of ratemyprofessor.com. Additionally, there's a lot of concerns about the quality and impact of student evaluations and complaints - there's some evidence of some pretty serious gender bias, these things *are* potentially used in hiring decisions, and there's a whole genre of essay recently that's essentially boils down to "Student complaints are out of control". I have my own issues with the conclusions of those essays, but they're definitely a thing.
>
> As a thought experiment, try applying these comments to basically any
> minority or disadvantaged group and see how quickly that gets flagged
> and removed.
>
>
>
Students are neither a minority nor inherently disadvantaged, which makes this at best irrelevant.
>
> doesn't add anything positive or useful to the discussion
>
>
>
This is where I think you're wrong. Some notes that student complaints are often fickle, make sweepingly ignorant assumptions about what a professor's job actually is, are often biased or needlessly cruel, and often outright insane are useful things for faculty to encounter. "Oh good, it's not just me" is a very powerful thing.
Upvotes: 2 |
2017/10/07 | 823 | 3,274 | <issue_start>username_0: The community has recently put the question [Post-doc priorities: “Laundry list” vs. “Research trumps all”](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/96998/post-doc-priorities-laundry-list-vs-research-trumps-all) on hold. The given reason was that the question depends strongly on individual factors. Other commenters have argued that "Too Broad" and "Opinion Based" could also apply.
If I am being honest, I don't see it. The question lists a few conflicting advises that are generally given, and asks for a strategy how one generally selects between them. Notably, the question does not follow the pattern of *"here is a bunch of facts about me, now tell me what to do"*, which is the standard format of questions we usually close as based on individual factors.
To me, this is a typical Academia.SE question, for better or for worse. Yes, it is somewhat opinion-based. Yes, it is a little broad. But I think it is important, well within our usual range, and actually fairly answerable (I tried to give it a shot, but I would love if others could answer as well).
If we start being that strict about opinion-based and broad, I am afraid we will end up with very little answerable questions. Is
the postdoc priorities question really qualitatively different than [this recent question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/97008/choosing-ones-best-papers-for-job-applications), or [that recent question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/97003/how-would-a-graduate-admissions-committee-view-possibly-false-accusations-agai), or the [following recent question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/96987/should-i-avoid-local-journals)?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, I do think it is different, because I can think of multiple examples of specific jobs for which "Research Trumps All" is clearly correct if you are applying for that job as well as multiple examples of specific jobs for which "Laundry list" is clearly correct if you are applying for that job. Over the job market as a whole, I do not see a clear preference for one over the other.
(Keep in mind my perspective is North American, and it seems to me that there is more diversity here in types of universities and their preferences than there is in Europe.)
For the other questions, I do not know of multiple examples of situations where different answers are clearly correct.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: In addition to @AlexanderWoo's answer, I think some of the broadness of this question steps from *the postdoc* in addition to the job itself.
For example, there are people who I know who are extremely good at playing "The Game", for whom the "Laundry List" approach would potentially be very productive, and where "I spend a lot of time on Twitter" is actually a major benefit to one's career instead of a time sink.
Similarly, there are people who are *immensely* productive when writing papers - if they can ditch the other stuff on the "Laundry List" for a bit, they can absolutely churn out solid, impactful research results. In this case, "I shall crush them under the weight of my CV" might be a good strategy.
I have seen these people co-exist in the same position, and have similarly good career trajectories.
Upvotes: 2 |
2017/10/24 | 473 | 2,078 | <issue_start>username_0: I recently posted a [question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/97792/how-precise-should-data-methodology-be) on methodologies and data reproducibility. After finding my answers, I wondered if I was in the right to delete my question given its duplicate nature.
**Should people who realize that their questions are duplicates delete their questions?**<issue_comment>username_1: Questions should only be deleted if they have no lasting value. Your question very likely has lasting value, however:
* If you found a duplicate question and answer on this site, your question can direct other people having a related problem to the answer. After all you did not find the duplicate target easily yourself, and others may have the same problem. You can mark your own question as a duplicate without wasting anybody’s time via *Flag → should be closed → duplicate of.* If the target was difficult to find, also consider whether its 9indability can be improved, e.g., by adding tags, keyword, or a better title.
* If you found your answer in some other resource, a similar thought applies: You did not find this resource easily in the first place and your question may help others having the same problem. In this case, [self-answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/self-answer) your question. Keep in mind to credit the resources that helped you, refrain from extensive copying and pasting (rather summarise with your own words), and focus on your problem.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I'm not sure what Stack Exchange's view on this would be, but I see a ton of duplicate questions and it usually helps me, not hinders me, because I can combine parts of the different suggested solutions if I need to. There are usually many solutions to a problem and a set of solutions for the first posted question may not work me while the solutions for the duplicate do. This is actually the norm for most of what I go on here for. I would have been SOL many times if duplicate questions weren't allowed to stay.
Upvotes: 2 |
2017/10/24 | 708 | 2,912 | <issue_start>username_0: Every now and then people ask whether it is appropriate to leave a (phd, postdoc, tenure-track...) position they have accepted for a better one that became available later, or in any case how to behave when multiple positions have incompatible deadlines. The last example is [Swap Postdoc position](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/97808/swap-postdoc-position) . Other older examples are [Is it OK to turn down a postdoc offer (contract not signed yet) after getting a better postdoc offer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/74864/is-it-ok-to-turn-down-a-postdoc-offer-contract-not-signed-yet-after-getting-a?rq=1), [Postdoc positions: turning down alternative offers safely and timely](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/90104/postdoc-positions-turning-down-alternative-offers-safely-and-timely), [Tenure-track offer with other applications in progress](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/87912/tenure-track-offer-with-other-applications-in-progress/) .
This would suggest to write a "canonical question" on the subject. On the other hand, I am not so sure that a general answer exists --- maybe all these questions have peculiarities that require them to be answered on an individual basis. What do you think about it?
(I am not asking this because I wish to write myself the canonical question and answer -- on the contrary, I don't think I am experienced enough to answer this.)<issue_comment>username_1: Pondering my own answers to these types of question, I actually think there *is* a canonical version that exists.
Perhaps the canonical question would be something like:
**Switching Positions After Accepting an Offer**
I have currently accepted a position, however in between when I accepted the position and now I have gotten another offer that is more appealing for personal or professional reasons. Is it ethical to accept this new offer and leave the other position, and if so, how do I do so while minimizing any damage to my career?
---
Trying to keep it vague enough that it's widely applicable, while covering most cases.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I am of the opinion that reneging on an accepted PhD position, a grant, a postdoc position, and a tenure track is sufficiently different that merging them all into a single answer is not very useful. Yes, the answer to all of those questions is **no, you should not**, but the practical implications are, I think, different enough that the canonical answer will add little as it would need to address all of these different aspects to be of real value.
Another aspect is that we *have* actually answered virtually all permutations of this question already, so we should be able to close pretty much all of these questions in the future as a duplicate of one of the existing questions - so it's not that we save work by having a canonical question.
Upvotes: 3 |
2017/10/31 | 364 | 1,488 | <issue_start>username_0: According to this [meta post](https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/302609/300001), the SE staff has implemented for a couple of communities a post notice for sensitive, possibly controversial topics.
The notice recites:
>
> Controversial Post — You may use comments ONLY to suggest improvements. You may use answers ONLY to provide a solution to the specific question asked above. Moderators will remove debates, arguments or opinions **without notice**.
>
>
>
We sometimes receive questions about gender issues, harassment etc. that generate many debates: Would such a notice be useful for our community as well?<issue_comment>username_1: I would expect that such labels should be applied rarely, if at all. But it wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing to have the option available to us.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Yes, please add this. And no, I don't think we should add this sparingly. I would propose to aggressively add this to questions that have a potential to be controversial. If used too much it does not matter (the warning does not say anything that's not true for all questions anyway), and if it salvages just a few questions that would otherwise get derailed it's a win.
(OTOH it will *only* help if the diamond mods actually *do* end up aggressively removing argumentative answers and comments without notice, as the warning would indicate - in my opinion this has not really been the case in the past)
Upvotes: 3 |
2017/11/01 | 421 | 1,642 | <issue_start>username_0: I'm a high school student from India, I got a question regarding SAT Subject Tests but I'm not sure if I can post it on the main site. Is there some other site where I can get help? My post is below:
---
**NOTE:** *I do not have any intentions to offend anyone. I'm in no way trying to insult the US education system so if at any point my post suggest that I'm, I apologize.*
I have a SAT Maths II and Physics Subject Test this Saturday(4 Nov), I just bought Barron's Books to preparation and to my surprise, the test felt way to easy. It's like too good to be true so my question is; is it really that easy or I'm being trolled by the book?
**Talking about Physics**
I checked a full length paper on cracksat.com too. The questions are mostly conceptual which is nice cause calculator is not allowed but even then they are really easy. Time is surely a problem, I mean 75 ques in 60 mins, is mad.
But are SAT Subject Tests made this easy?
[Take a Look at this for example](http://www.cracksat.net/sat2/physics/test616.html)
---<issue_comment>username_1: As is, your question would be quite probably considered off topic, because we don't assess the quality of tests, books etc.
A general question about the difficulty of standardized tests could be potentially interesting, but it would be too broad or too much opinion based.
For what it's worth, I find the linked questions from the test rather depressing.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In addition to Massimo's answer, questions pertaining to high school students that are not research-oriented are automatically considered off-topic.
Upvotes: 3 |
2017/11/04 | 329 | 1,245 | <issue_start>username_0: [Is there a (text)book on how academia works?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/98282/14341)
I agree that it looks like a shopping request as its current form, but it is stemmed from the question "how to have a systematic understanding on how science and academia work (without having to browse Academia.SE too much)?", and I don't think that is of any off-topic reason. Isn't looking for a research field about academia and/or science will give me a systematic understanding on them? It's also hard to ask questions on science and academia separately since they are convoluted and I want to have a broadest view first.<issue_comment>username_1: Perhaps we need to carve out an exception for books on the **practice** of academia, since that is (usually) an on-topic discussion here.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Asking for a textbook on how science works is too broad. There is *lots* that has been published on that subject, and it's not clear how to narrow down among them.
Asking for a textbook on how academia or science works is even broader. Asking how academia works is quite different from asking how science works, so you shouldn't ask for both in a single question.
Upvotes: 2 |
2017/11/06 | 1,300 | 4,951 | <issue_start>username_0: <https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/98458/958> ? I don't see any outstanding reason for deletion. It's been downvoted, but that doesn't mean it has to disappear from the website.<issue_comment>username_1: This answer is [not nice](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice) to:
* the asker, who is implied to be insecure and lack social skills:
>
> I think you are blaming your STEM professor status instead of your insecurity and lack of social skills.
>
>
>
Furthermore, there are some pretty trite geek clichés here, that are just silly on their own, but make me question whether the post is serious:
>
> How about you hang out in book stores and try to chat up the first girl that smiles at you?
>
>
>
Also, if I were the asker, I would be put off at least a little by being suggested to acquire a partner through trickery. Finally, unless I missed something, the asker did not indicate their gender or sexual preferences – which is fine as they are completely irrelevant to this question.
* women in general, who are implied to fall for very stupid advances, false compliments and waffling:
>
> [let them know] that they have beautiful eyes, you think they are really intelligent, bla bla bla)
>
>
>
>
> Just ask them where the sugar is
>
>
>
Moreover, tricking a woman into a relationship is considered acceptable behaviour:
>
> one will fall for it after a few tries
>
>
>
Not to mention that the only part of this that addresses the question is the general gist of “try to get a relationship”. Specific dating advice is beyond this question and I strongly doubt that the asker was looking for this (it’s like elaborating the “look into your examination guidelines” part of an answer into a reading 101).
Now, of course all that is inappropriate or beyond the scope of the question could just be edited out of this answer, but that would only leave something along the lines of: “Try to get a relationship.” While that would still make for an answer on its own, it has already been said (in a better way) in other answers.
The only thing that I find odd about its deletion is that the answer was just deleted and not hammered with a *rude/abusive* flag instead.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I think the answer should not have been deleted by a moderator. It is OK for me if it is downvoted into oblivion, but I do not see a reason to take explicit action to delete it.
Summarizing my comments to [this answer](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3864/958), let me counter the arguments in favor of closing it.
1. The "you lack social skills" part seems acceptable to me. In a question specifically about difficulties in socialization, suggesting lack of social skills should not be a taboo topic. The answer does not say "ha ha you are a loser"; it just goes to the point. In fact, apart from the "bro" style, I see little difference between saying *I think you are blaming your STEM professor status instead of your insecurity and lack of social skills* and *My suspicion is that this is not so much about "professors lead lonely lives" as it is about "I am lonely," or "I fear leading a lonely life." But this need not be so. You can learn to be more outgoing* (currently in another answer). Should we close that one, too?
2. The attitude about women suggested in the answer seems acceptable to me. Not that I support it, but I see no reason to censor it. If compliments and attempts at conversation are now an unacceptable way to "trick a person into a relationship", our jails might be overflowing soon.
3. The answer *does* answer the question. The (blunt) answer to "how does a professor deal with a lonely lifestyle" is "dude, stop being a loner, go outside and meet girls".
4. It's assuming OP's gender (uhm, no, it's not actually?) and sexual preference. No big deal --- people often do that. The proper way to deal with it is leaving a comment, not using special moderator powers and nuking the answer from orbit.
5. You don't like the style of this answer, I get it. A part of it probably is there just for the shock value. There are lots of other strongly formulated answers and comments on this site, though --- JeffE is famous for his cutting style, for instance, and it seems very well received. I see nothing so offensive in this answer that deserves immediate deletion, instead of going through the usual path of getting downvotes. There are no direct attacks to the OP. There is a shade of misogyny (is there? I see no attempt to generalize "all women are gullible") that we may find despicable, but the proper answer if you disagree is downvoting, not preventing the answerer to express his opinion.
(And, just in case you are thinking it: there is no relation between me and the answerer. His name sounds Italian, I am Italian, but I have no idea who he is. And I am using male pronouns here because that's a masculine name.)
Upvotes: 0 |
2017/11/07 | 670 | 2,539 | <issue_start>username_0: The posting [How to find a gap in knowledge, for my PhD?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/98469/the-gap-of-knowledge-how-can-we-find-it) asks "How to find the gap of knowledge" (denoted by `Q` in the following). [The posting](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/98509/80454) (denoted by `R` in the following) says, essentially, "don't do it, at least not now". `R` is not an answer to `A`, at least logically or linguistically speaking. However, `R` has apparently been so helpful to the author of `Q` (denoted by `A` in the following) such that `A` marked `R` as an accepted solution. I guess, this is because `R` is an answer to a different question, namely, how to start the PhD studies properly, and this different question is, probably, much more important to `A`. As an answer to "how to start the PhD studies properly", I like `R`, and do like it a lot. But as an answer to `Q`, the posting `R` illogical.
The particular case is exacerbated by the fact that `A` has shown no wish to reformulate the question such that it actually fits his or her *real* question (here: how to start working towards a PhD) rather than the issue formally written in `Q`.
There is an inadequacy of the pair "question - answer" here. I am sure that such inadequacies pop up every once in a while. Not sure how the community should address these pairs *exactly*, but being aware of these issues or addressing them would probably raise the quality of the site.<issue_comment>username_1: Only the original poster can accept an answer, and that’s not something the community can change. It may be a flaw, but that’s the way the system is set up.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: There has to be some room for analyzing *why* the questioner asked the question they did, and maybe indicate some less-than-ideal steps along the way that lead to the question. Sometimes our preconceptions/naivety/received wisdom lead us to ask the wrong question. ([See also the XY Problem](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem) - the questioner's real question here is clearly how to pick a research subject.) In that case, being told about the misconceptions behind the question is often more important than getting your question answered: the fact that the original poster marked this as the accepted answer is a strong indication that it was actually *the most useful* to them.
Taking some kind of action against this type of answer would reduce the overall value of the site, IMO.
Upvotes: 2 |
2017/11/13 | 767 | 3,218 | <issue_start>username_0: Very recently moderator ff524, deleted a question that I would agree was in bad taste after very negative commentary from the OP.
<https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/98902/is-it-a-good-idea-to-take-several-summer-classes-have-a-tutor-after-school-sinc/98903#98903>.
But despite the negative connotations, would there be value in allowing bad questions (that are ultimately closed) that had an answer that effectively addresses the question?
Please excuse the potential bias as the person who answered the question. Although the cost was not great (15 minutes at most), I would prefer that the effort was not wasted.
Taking a step back and looking at the bigger picture, wouldn't there be reason to believe future authors of answers to bad questions would prefer that their efforts are not deleted either?<issue_comment>username_1: The primary reason I had for deleting this question so quickly was that the author had just posted another question that was also very off topic, with all the same problems. When someone abuses the site by repeatedly posting very off-topic questions (that are more rant than question), even after getting feedback that these are off topic, we prefer not to reward this behavior. Also, quick moderation actions (downvotes, votes to close, flags and deletion) help trigger a question ban, which prevents the author from posting more unwelcome content.
I do believe that those who answer very bad questions would prefer for them not to be deleted. But I think this community has an even stronger preference for not encouraging people to keep posting content that they've been told is unwelcome, i.e for closing bad questions rather than answering them. We rely on this kind of community moderation to keep the quality of the site high.
As a general rule, we do not like for bad content to hang around, because it lowers the apparent quality of the site both for regular users and casual visitors. If someone posts a question that can be improved, we would put in on hold and try to improve it; but if a question can never be made to be on topic, and is very low quality, we don't like for it to hang around.
Of course, there is a continuum - a question that is *slightly* off topic, but with very good answers, is often closed but not deleted. But [extremely off topic or very low quality](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/deleted-questions) questions are likely to be deleted.
I would be happy to copy and paste your answer to a pastebin or something like that - it's not on topic here, but if there's somewhere else you want to post it, I'd be glad to help so your work isn't wasted.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In this very particular situation (don't generalize, since I may or may not like what the moderators do or don't do in the other cases!), I would agree with the corresponding moderator: let's kill bad questions. Let's give the OP an opportunity to improve, but, if no action is taken, let's delete them. Yes, some answers required work, but lots of the work of an academic researcher goes into the trash bin, so it's business as usual.
(That's all, folks, sorry for the brevity...)
Upvotes: 0 |
2017/11/13 | 1,543 | 5,400 | <issue_start>username_0: In a [short discussion](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3873/allowing-questions-that-warranted-a-deletion-but-has-an-answer-that-addresses-t) between myself and moderator ff524 about a [deleted question](http://There%20are%20other%20sites%20that%20are%20not%20as%20strict%20about%20moderation%20-%20Reddit,%20etc.%20SE%20is%20deliberately%20different%20in%20its%20moderation%20policy,%20because%20we%20try%20to%20be%20a%20home%20for%20people%20who%20like%20answering%20high%20quality,%20on%20topic%20questions.%20But%20some%20of%20our%20users%20enjoy%20contributing%20to%20those%20other%20sites,%20too%20;)). Moderator ff524 mentioned,
>
> There are other sites that are not as **strict about moderation** - Reddit, etc. SE is **deliberately different in its moderation policy**, because we try to be a **home for people who like answering high quality, on topic questions**. But some of our users enjoy contributing to those other sites, too ;)
>
>
>
Emphasis mine.
I agree with Moderator ff524 on all points. But this led me to think about the effects of Anonymity on both questions and answers in [Academia specifically](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1422/what-do-we-want-academia-se-to-be).
In this particular case, the [author of the deleted question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/82877/nexusoi) has some experience and interaction with SE sites, specifically [Mathematics SE](https://math.stackexchange.com/users/488215/nexusoi). But purely on mathematics topics.
With the following variables on anonymity in play (not exactly rigorous, but will suffice in the meantime):
[Anonymity](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/107152/encouraging-users-to-create-an-account-and-keep-it/107163#107163):
* Binary: has an equivalent real-life ID associated, or a pseudonym.
* Effect: if real-life, then words said would carry over to their IRL identity. If pseudonym, then there is a degree of buffer between the two.
[Reputation](https://stackoverflow.com/help/whats-reputation):
* Integer: based upon a voting system reflected up on a user's contribution.
* Effect: more privileges and respect afforded to the user and can be used as a rough yardstick to measure the experience of the user to the SE model.
**What is the effect of Anonymity on both the quality of questions and answers?**
The various logical derivatives:
* Does real-ID mean higher-quality questions?
* Does real-ID mean higher-quality answers?
* Does pseudonyms mean higher-quality questions?
* Does pseudonyms mean higher-quality answers?
* Does real-ID mean lower-quality questions?
* Does real-ID mean lower-quality answers?
* Does pseudonyms mean lower-quality questions?
* Does pseudonyms mean lower-quality answers?
In my experience at the [Workplace](https://workplace.stackexchange.com/users) as well as [Academia](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users), I would presume that Anonymity has a role to play, but not to the extent that I theorize.
There are great question and answer contributions from users from both sites whether with a pseudonym or real-ID.
But in general, poor-quality questions and answers are from pseudonyms; whether due to inexperience or the buffer (between a person's actions and his/her real-life identity) offered by a pseudonym.
I could be entirely wrong after all, would someone with more expertise on the matter care to comment?<issue_comment>username_1: If you take a look at the top page of users, the split is slightly in favor of pseudonyms over real names (4:3 advantage, roughly).
I'd argue that the quality of answers is independent of the use of a pseudonym. The quality of the questions depends on experience with SE sites rather than just being "experts" or not. We've had many excellent "signed" and "anonymous" questions. However, as you suggest, it's unlikely someone will "sign" a bad question with their real name.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Looking at our [first page of users](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users?tab=Reputation&filter=all) 7/36 users provide limited information in their user name or profile (i.e., are anonymous). Three of these users are, or were, moderators. At least one of these users (me) was not always anonymous. On a [random page of users](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users?page=7&tab=reputation&filter=all) 15/37 are anonymous despite having reputations between 2831 and 3365. These differences could be related to the quality of contributions or an indication that higher rep users are more likely to not be anonymous.
We can also look at the average vote counts for questions and answers by anonymous and non-anonymous users. This is sounding like a question for the data explorer, but taking a very small sample of the top three non-anonymous and anonymous users reveals that the top three non-anonymous users have a combined 3628 answers and a combined rep of 352158, for an average rep of 97 per answer (I ignored the number of questions). The top three anonymous users have 2083 answers for a combined rep of 277104, for an average rep of 133 per answer. This suggests that anonymous users may provide better answers.
In summary, as a biased anonymous user, it looks like anonymous users provided better answers :) As an academic who likes to butcher statistics, I bet my findings will not replicate.
Upvotes: 2 |
2017/11/16 | 343 | 1,449 | <issue_start>username_0: Recently my uncle passed away and left me with a rather large inheritance, much of which I do not anticipate ever having a need for. How can I donate money - in USD - to Academia Stack Exchange - its employees, top contributors, and moderators? Note that I desire my donation to be specific to the Academia site and not to the whole of Stack Exchange.
Please advise, and thank you.<issue_comment>username_1: Stack Exchange is a for-profit company, it cannot legally take donations (as far as I know, but I am not a lawyer). There are also no employees specific to the "academia" site. The contributors and moderators in question could presumably receive a gift (not a donation, and especially not a tax-exempt donation) if you asked them individually to divulge their financial information, but they have no group structure that could receive or manage money.
You may be able to buy some site contributors a coffee, but you won't be able to support the functioning of this website with a donation.
(There are also various pitfalls with introducing money into a community that works essentially as a gift economy, so IMO you should look for other worthy causes.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Requests like this should be made directly to the Stack Exchange team. Contact information is listed on [this page](https://stackoverflow.com/company/contact), which I found on the footer of this page. Thanks!
Upvotes: 1 |
2017/11/17 | 720 | 2,827 | <issue_start>username_0: First, a definition, from Wikipedia:
>
> During the Cold War, lack of reliable information about the country
> forced Western analysts to "read between the lines" and to use the
> tiniest tidbits, such as the removal of portraits, the rearranging of
> chairs, positions at the reviewing stand for parades in Red Square,
> the choice of capital or small initial letters in phrases such as
> "First Secretary", the arrangement of articles on the pages of the
> party newspaper Pravda and other indirect signs to try to understand
> what was happening in internal Soviet politics.
>
>
>
We get a *lot* of questions like this - trying to suss out what a professor is thinking based on a one-line email, or what being "With Editor" at a journal means after 7 days.
I've often thought it would be useful to be able to categorize these to help find duplicates, or mark them in the way many sites mark "Homework" questions, but it also feels a little snarky.
So I thought I'd pose the concept as a discussion.<issue_comment>username_1: We do get a lot of questions like this, but I would not be in favor of this as a tag concept.
This sounds like a meta tag - it's about the category of question, more than it is about the key topics in the question. Meta tags [are discouraged](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/tagging) on SE sites, and I think for good reason.
Also: Tags are most useful when it's easy to find them by name and figure out what they're for. We want to make it easy for new users to find the right tags to use on their posts, and for slightly more experienced users to know how to re-tag posts. But nobody comes here thinking, "I'm going to ask a question about reading between the lines"; they think, "I'm going to ask a question about the status message in a journal submission system". This tag seems a little too subtle to be really usable (except for the minority of very experienced users).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Right. But choose a better name. The word has a direct meaning which you want to avoid (<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kremlinology>), apart from Kremlin in the Soviet times and Kremlin today being two different pairs of shoes. Moreover, a politically neutral tag name would be best. (Humor: *Saddamology* for wrong, potentially blind guesses. After all, we should be *diverse* in our choices.) More seriously, I would suggest a term along the line of "hidden-meaning", "unclear-meaning", "low-information", etc.
Moreover, there is a difference between trying to suss out what a professor is thinking based on a one-line email (which is unknown in general), and what does "With Editor" at a journal means after 7 days (which means exactly what it says and could be clarified in certain cases by reading the online help).
Upvotes: -1 |
2017/11/27 | 760 | 2,997 | <issue_start>username_0: [How to prevent students from using modified calculators to cheat on exams?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/99417/how-to-prevent-students-from-using-modified-calculators-to-cheat-on-exams)
We had a (now-deleted) answer to this question that was at +28 with the author requesting that it be un-accepted so he could delete it. On the other hand, the comments explaining how it was bad had been upvoted to the fifties.
This is not the behavior voting should result in. The answer was known bad, and yet yielding upvotes, but the votes in the comments were logically outweighing the votes in the answer showing its badness. But the answer downvotes didn't come.
What have we done wrong?
Two answers; both miss the point. There is no problem with deleting the answer. There is no problem taking awhile in identifying the answer was bad. There's an obvious problem when the comments on why the answer was bad got more upvotes than the answer ever did and the answer is still net highly upvoted.<issue_comment>username_1: The answer was deleted at the answerer's request:
>
> Update: after further thoughts I agree with the downvoters that this is not a great idea. This is probably not a workable answer in practice. I would no longer recommend it, though I cannot delete it, since it is the accepted answer.
>
>
>
As for why the question wasn't "rated" lower—I think the kernel of a good idea was there (not using your own calculator), but the execution wasn't right. So it's not necessarily worth downvoting to oblivion, but it probably shouldn't have been the accepted answer, either.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: At the beginning, the author of the answer thought it was a good idea (of course he did). Many other people probably thought along the same lines.
Once the possible flaws have been pointed out, some people might still have thought that it was a good idea nonetheless; others might simply haven't come back to the answer to rethink about it; and those who wanted to cancel or revert their upvote would have found the vote locked until the next edit.
I don't think we did anything wrong, after all.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: First note that the answer in question has 51 upvotes and 23 downvotes right now. So there is a considerable amount of downvotes already.
The main reason for the discrepancy between downvotes and comment upvotes is probably this:
* Downvoting requires 125 reputation; upvoting requires only 15. So there are just more users who can upvote a comment than who can downvote the question.
* As of this writing, the question is a [hot network question](https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/219922/255554). It’s safe to assume that most of its ten thousand visitors come from other sites of the network and thus have 101 reputation (from the [association bonus](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/whats-reputation)). Therefore they can only upvote and not downvote.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2017/12/07 | 541 | 2,135 | <issue_start>username_0: The guidelines state:
>
> As a general rule, if you're asking about a particular institution...it's likely your question is too limited in scope
>
>
>
Can this rule be made more precise? In particular, can questions be asked about some particularly large institutes? E.g., CNRS, which [employs 11k](http://www.cnrs.fr/en/aboutcnrs/key-figures.htm) researchers. (As a comparison, Harvard has [~5k academics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvard_University).)<issue_comment>username_1: I think a good line to draw would be:
>
> Questions specific to individual institutions are only allowed if those institutions operate on the national or international level.
>
>
>
This would include institutions like CNRS, NSF, NIH, DFG, Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, etc., but exclude individual universities and similar.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: The basic idea is that if the answer to your question would only be of use to people *at the institution in question*, it’s not a good fit.
Questions related to funding and support clearly fall outside of that. Internal HR policies at the NSF or NIH or Max Planck-Gesellschaft, for instance, would not.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: As I understand it, "Positions at CNRS" mean something different than it would in other countries, because, for a combination historical, social, and legal reasons, the French government largely funds research by hiring researchers directly rather than by giving grants through the universities at which they work.
I was discussing possibly making a 1-2 month visit to a French collaborator. (In the end, we couldn't get the timing and the funding to work out.) If I wanted a collaborator to visit me in the US, the funding mechanism would be that I would apply for a grant (eg from the NSF) or a supplement to an existing grant or a reallocation of funds in an existing grant to fund the visit. On the other hand, if a French person wanted me to visit him in France, the most common funding mechanism involves me applying (with his help and support) for a temporary one-month position from the CNRS.
Upvotes: 2 |
2017/12/09 | 1,597 | 6,301 | <issue_start>username_0: [My question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/100104/in-how-much-detail-should-one-describe-their-past-and-projected-future-work-for) about the application process at the CNRS has been "put on hold" for being "unclear". I am truly at a loss regarding what is supposedly unclear about it. I'm asking what is expected about the reports on past and projected work: their level of detail, their length, their structure. I'm struggling to find a way to put this in simpler words.
To be quite honest the experience of asking a question on this website has been less than stellar. First I had to deal with a vindictive user who fought teeth and nails because they did not know what CNRS is and thought it was a single small research center instead of a national institution which employs and funds people in most French labs, even opening [a meta question](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3895/questions-about-particular-institutions) on which I can't even comment. And now my question is "put on hold" for no visible reason with no explanation from the people who did it. Two different moderators looked at it and saw nothing wrong with it, but all it apparently takes is five random users to deem my question "unclear", presumably because they, too, don't even know what the question is about and should perhaps reserve their judgment...<issue_comment>username_1: For [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/100104/in-how-much-detail-should-one-describe-their-past-and-projected-future-work-for) question, the first (closed) version looked like this:
>
> The competitive application process for CNRS jobs has opened this week, and part of the required documents are a report on past work, as well as a project for future work (together with a list of CNRS labs where this work could be done). There is not much information about what these are expected to contain; the instructions only specifies "Report on research completed" and "Proposed research program".
>
>
> More specifically, for a "chargé de recherche" (junior scientist) position, how much detail should be given in these two documents? How long should they be? Is there a typical structure that one should follow for them? It is my understanding that the national committee members may not (and in my case are not, I checked) experts in the specific domain of the applicants, there is e.g. a committee for all of sociology, another for "brain, cognition, behavior" and so on.
>
>
>
I will try to write the unclear parts one by one:
First, there is no introduction.
1. What is CNRS?
2. What does it stand for?
3. Who are you?
4. How is CNRS related with you?
After that, you mention some reports out of nowhere.
5. What are those reports?
6. Which instructions specify those reports?
In the second paragraph, it gets worse. You start with **more** specifically, even though there is not a tiny bit of specification (see 1-4). After you ask multiple questions about those documents mentioned in the first paragraph, you suddenly jump to the committee members.
7. What committee?
8. How are those members related to your question?
9. How are their area of expertise related to your question?
You cannot assume that people know the answers to all nine questions listed above. Usually, four or five of them makes the text unclear. In your case, you had nine.
For [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/100215/what-is-the-cnrs) question, I believe nothing is wrong with people. The question seems to be asked at random.
>
> What is CNRS? It's supposedly a research center somewhere in Europe but it's been asked about a few times already on this site. I hope that asking this question is going to clarify things.
>
>
>
If it was asked a few times, why do you ask again? Just upvote the question and wait for an answer. This alone is a reason for closing the question because it is duplicate. Also what *things* do you want to clarify? Do you assume everyone reads this question also read your first question? Again, this question is not clear at all to me.
Just something popped into your mind and you asked in Academia.SE. As an example, [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/62146/arxiv-puts-submissions-on-hold-for-months-ignores-email) question also got several downvotes.
The answer to your question is a matter of Google search and reading through the results.
As a side note, it would probably be to your best interest to drop "I'm doing everything right. What is wrong with these people?" and move to "how can I improve my questions?"
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: Welcome to AC.SE. I am sorry your first exposure has been so difficult. Please give us a shot, things usually work much better. Things seem to have gotten a little out of hand this weekend.
I think your question about the application process for jobs at CNRS is very clear. Not knowing anything about the CNRS in particular, I have a hard time judging if it is a good question for our community and therefore do not feel qualified to up/down vote on the question or vote to close or open the question.
My concern is related to this [meta question](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3895/questions-about-particular-institutions) in that I am not sure if your question is about a narrow set of intramural jobs at the CNRS or something broader. The US and UK funding agencies that I am familiar with (e.g., the US NIH and UK MRC), have intramural jobs, but don't really offer extramural jobs. I think a question about how to get a job at the NIH would be closed as *too localized* (SE speak for not being interesting to enough people) just as a question about the application process at Big State U would. That said, employment in France is very different from the US and UK and it sounds like the CNRS has a different model where you apply to and are employed by the CNRS, but work at a university.
My lack of understanding of the CNRS, and the potential that it is different from the US and UK (end even likely the German system) led me to suggest someone asking about the CNRS. This [question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/100215/what-is-the-cnrs) was not what I had in mind and is way too broad.
Upvotes: 2 |
2017/12/14 | 1,051 | 4,021 | <issue_start>username_0: In this [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/100431/access-to-scientific-articles-that-cite-mine-after-leaving-academia), <NAME> wrote an answer:
>
> You can write an e-mail to the authors and ask for a copy of their published paper. Almost everyone will be happy to send you one. [...]
>
>
>
which is a very good answer. However, as an academic, I wanted to share my experience on *when* I would use the suggested solution. I added a comment in line with:
>
> I would only write to the authors if Sci-Hub dies.
>
>
>
This is not only my choice. [For too many fellow academics and scientists, Sci-Hub is the first option, even when legal access exists.](https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/04/whos-downloading-pirated-papers-everyone)
Unfortunately, my comment was deleted. It was by no way unconstructive, offensive, or rude.
Would the moderators kindly justify the deletion? Wasn't it opinion-based?<issue_comment>username_1: Let me start with I did not delete your comment and you are probably not going to like this answer ;)
Comments are the bane of the SE system in my opinion. We need them, but we don't like them. Quoting the [help center](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment)
>
> Comments are temporary "Post-It" notes left on a question or answer.
>
>
>
As you say, we try and delete comments that are unconstructive, offensive, or rude. But we also try and deal with cases that violate
>
> When should I comment?
>
>
> You should submit a comment if you want to:
>
>
> Request clarification from the author;
>
>
> Leave constructive criticism that guides the author in improving the post;
>
>
> Add relevant but minor or transient information to a post (e.g. a link to a related question, or an alert to the author that the question has been updated).
>
>
>
Your comment was flagged as *no longer needed*. As it wasn't really doing any of the above and may have actually fallen into the *When shouldn't I comment* category of *Secondary discussion* it seems like it really wasn't needed.
Of course as you are probably aware, there are tons of comments that are not good comments and we have not deleted them all. As I said, you are probably not going to like the answer that your comment was deleted because it wasn't needed despite the fact that lots of other comments that are not needed do not get deleted.
As for what you should do. You should really turn that comment into a new answer that can be properly voted on and evaluated.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I was the moderator that deleted your comment. username_1's answer explains the reason very well. I would just elaborate on the following:
>
> Of course as you are probably aware, there are tons of comments that are not good comments and we have not deleted them all. As I said, you are probably not going to like the answer that your comment was deleted because it wasn't needed despite the fact that lots of other comments that are not needed do not get deleted.
>
>
>
This site is primarily moderated by the community. In the case of comments, that means that diamond moderators review a comment if it is flagged by one or more members of the community. If the comment should be deleted (according to the criteria explained in username_1's answer), and it is brought to our attention via a flag, then we delete it.
The reason why so many deletion-eligible comments are not deleted, is because they haven't been flagged, and so they haven't been reviewed by a moderator. (Contrary to popular belief, it is *not* because moderators read all comments and delete the ones they disagree with, while leaving the ones they agree with.)
Your comment was flagged, I handled the flag and reviewed the comment, and since it met the criteria for deletion, I deleted it. It really had nothing to do with my opinions about Sci-Hub (for the record, I have no strong opinions about it one way or the other).
Upvotes: 2 |
2017/12/15 | 1,546 | 6,355 | <issue_start>username_0: This question [Should I answer this question about diversity?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/100314/should-i-answer-this-question-about-diversity) got both positive ("Use the opportunity") as negative answers ("Leave it blank").
Now comments sections have been replaced with
>
> Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
>
This indicates clearly that the comment section is not for (extended) discussion *irrespective of reasons, no matter if they are good or bad*. This is something we could all live with.
But if take a closer look, there is something strange.
Positive answers:
+22 accepted by xyz123: 13 comments starting with Dec 12th.
+14 by <NAME>: 17 (!) comments starting with Dec 12th.
Negative answers:
+104 by kingledion: Comments section moved to chat, started with Dec 12th
+8 by Nat: Comment section moved to chat, started with Dec 12th.
<NAME> has also a positive answer with +33 which have been moved to chat, but she was also criticized in the comments.
**Every (!)** answer so far who was negative or where the comments showed strong criticism over the diversity engagement had its comment section removed while positive comment sections were unscathed. None of the comment sections has any difference in starting time etc. which would explain this behavior.
**Again**: The given reason for removing a comment section is that is not for (extended) discussion *irrespective of reasons, no matter if they are good or bad*.
So if there are comment sections which are comparable in length, I suggest that we are treating them equally. The presented behavior really looks like that a moderator could abuse his power to foster opinions (s)he likes and suppress opinions (s)he dislikes by treating comment sections differently.<issue_comment>username_1: The community bot raises an automatic flag when a question or answer receives 20 comments. I almost always move the comments to chat at that point. The only time I tend not to is when the question is on hold or has multiple votes to close and I think the comments might help resolve things.
In the absence of the auto flag, I almost never move the comments to chat.
When moving comments to chat, ideally I will read through them and maybe hand select a few to save that seem important for improving the question/answer. More often then not, by the time I see the flag, things have gotten so out of hand I just bulk move everything.
I like to think my decision to move things and which ones to save have nothing to do with my personal opinions of the comment content, but rather if the comment is secondary discussion or not.
Looking at the timeline od the specific question shows that a number of flags for rude comments were raise around Dec 11 23:59. At that point a moderator username_3 moved almost all the existing comments to chat. It does not appear that post had the auto comment flag, but it did have flags raised by users. When dealing with flags on some comments, is basically the case where I might move other conversations to chat in the hope of keeping everything working smoothly.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Many of the comments "showing strong criticism over the diversity engagement" were repeated comments coming from a few individuals which contributed nothing to the discussion. There were also many abusive and inappropriate comments, some of which used vulgar language. In other words, this is not about politics, it's about bad behavior.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I really did not pay attention to whether the answers were positive or negative, when moderating the comments section. At 00:30-00:40 on December 12, I moved all the long comment threads that existed at that time to chat.
Here is what happened that day: I opened up the moderator section of the site. In the diamond moderator interface, it shows flags that have been raised by ordinary users, grouped by post (so if many flags are raised for a single post, or comments on a single post, it shows them all together). There were a large number of flags on that diversity post. (I don't know how many there were at that time, but as of now, 29 flags have been raised on that post and its answers, which is a very, very, very large number for a quiet site like Academia.SE.) I clicked through to the main post, moved all of the long comment threads to chat, and that was that.
You mentioned two "positive" answers where the comment threads were not moved to chat. I moved comment threads to chat on December 12 between about 00:30 and 00:40, according to the timestamps. I didn't move comments on xyz123's answer because it wasn't posted yet then (the timestamp on that answer is December 12 at 8:54). I didn't move comments on Anna SdTC's answer because at the time there were only two - one from the OP, and one by Anna directly addressing the OP's comment:
>
> Thanks. I am the opposite - high GPA but totally bombed my Biology GRE. So I'd like to take any opportunity - like this one - to boost my application. I just felt that this question really wasn't intended for me. But I guess you're right. Congrats on your success – user84325 Dec 12 at 0:01
>
>
> I am not sure if you can or want to repeat your GRE, but of course take any opportunity to boost your application, such as mentioning that you learned early on to be responsible. That is absolutely relevant to the process! – Anna SdTC Dec 12 at 0:05
>
>
>
the other comments on that thread were added later - the third comment, by Dilworth, was posted Dec 12 at 01:06. (I prefer to leave the OP's comments, if productive, and any direct response from the author of the answer to the OP's comment. I also left undeleted the OP's comment on username_2's answer.)
Edited to add: I have since gone back and moved other comment threads on that post to chat. As a general rule, diamond moderators mostly moderate comments that are brought to their attention via comment flags, either flags raised by individuals or the automatic flags mentioned by username_1. If you're concerned that some comments on a post were deleted/moved but others that should have been deleted were not, please flag the comments that should be deleted for moderator attention, using the "flag" button.
Upvotes: 3 |
2017/12/17 | 882 | 3,263 | <issue_start>username_0: I have a question about my Academia Stack Exchange post: [Is "Assistant Professor Position (Tenure Track) for a female Researcher" illegal in Austria?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/100529/is-assistant-professor-position-tenure-track-for-a-female-researcher-illegal/100709#100709)
A moderator kept deleting my answer under the pretence it's spam/offensive. I don't believe it's spam. And if s/he thinks it offends him/her, please explain why?
Here is the text of the answer:
>
> All people are equal, but some people are more equal than others. Therefore, it is only natural that some actions that are inherently negative see themselves become positive. This is justified by "the end justifies the means" Doctrine which clearly states: that all actions are justified for the greater good.
>
>
> In fact, I'm puzzled why would you want to sue such a moral endeavour. Especially, if you see its success in the United states' undergrad admission.Where the proportion of bachelor's degrees earned has went from an opressive 55% male majority in 1974 to a healthy 57% female majority in 2014, thanks to the affirmative action policy that continues to this day.
>
>
> and it baffles me even more, If you see the great benefits that "trying to control demographics in order to level inequalities" has brought upon humanity as seen in advanced countries like Germany or Israel.
>
>
> One might perhaps argue that this is "a form of separate but equal". But this is easily disproven by noting that women can still apply to the other non-gender-specific job postings.
>
>
> to answer your question, such an effective and moral actions cannot be illegal unless you go by the rotten principle that "all men are equal. full stop". A heinous saying that does not try to hide its patriarchal motives by the use of the word "men".
>
>
> You questioning "the separation of job postings based on sex" seems quite sexist to me. I advise you to check your privilege.
>
>
> Although, I might concede that such a posting might be a bit unethical because it might hurt the transgender and non-binary people.
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: Your original answer was flagged by two users as rude/offensive. This brought it to my attention. Upon looking at the answer it seemed unrelated to the question and designed to produce discussion. This is taking advantage of our community and considered rude. Therefore I cast a 3rd flag as rude which caused the community bot to delete your question.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Your answer is full of arguments that take an argument that is typically made by the side which you claim to oppose and present it as an argument for the other side.
Moreover you are throwing clichéic, unjustified accusations at the asker.
This is so blatant that it is almost certainly intentional¹.
I don’t know whether you do this to provoke conflict, to mock others, or because you severely misunderstood the concept of devil’s advocate.
But whatever your motivation, it’s [not nice](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice):
It’s not respectful of others and harmful to this community.
---
¹ in the unlikely event that it isn’t, please stop; you are not helping your cause
Upvotes: 4 |
2017/12/21 | 921 | 3,762 | <issue_start>username_0: Some folks considered the prior installments of the question [Worst cover-letter mistakes of continental-European applicants for tenure-track assistant professorship positions in CS in USA](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/100907/worst-cover-letter-mistakes-of-continental-european-applicants-for-tenure-track) as too broad. I narrowed it, many times, last time after the question has been put on hold. I'm wondering how often should the narrowing happen.
I'm under the impression that the expertise is not present here at ac.se in sufficient numbers *anyway*, so the question was already narrow enough and is now even narrower, potentially not admitting too many answers or votes from really informed folks, but rather mostly junk (=uninformed) answers and junk votes. So far, I have not even seen any useful comments to the *contents* either.<issue_comment>username_1: These concerns were mentioned in the comments (now in the chat room linked from a comment):
>
> This, unfortunately, looks like a "make a big list" question that likely too broad for effective answers.
>
>
>
and
>
> In this community, the consensus is generally against big list questions
>
>
>
That is the reason your question was closed. Making the scope of the list narrower (by specifying the field, or specifying the part of the application you're asking about) doesn't help; the fundamental question is still asking us to compile a list. When a question is posed in such a way that it can't be answered well in one answer, but needs many separate answers to give a complete answer, it is "too broad", even if the situation referenced is very narrow. This community has decided that we don't want those kinds of "list" questions (with some exceptions, that are discussed on meta before the question is posed).
You also make the situation a bit worse by asking for people's opinions about which mistakes are most serious. (See the [help center](http://academia.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask).)
Your question could be improved by framing it to be about your specific situation, instead of asking for a list of anecdotes from other people's situations, and by not soliciting opinions. Instead of
>
> In your opinion, what are the most serious common mistakes that continental European candidates for tenure-track assistant-professor positions in Computer Science in the US commit in their cover letters?
>
>
>
You could ask,
>
> I am a continental European candidate applying for tenure-track assistant-professor positions in Computer Science in the US. What common cover letter mistakes are made by people in this situation, that I need to watch out for?
>
>
>
This could potentially have a single "best" answer, and doesn't ask for subjective opinions on which mistakes bother people the most. The "best" answer would not just be a one line answer enumerating a mistake that has been judged "most serious" by the votes of other users; the "best" answer would be a comprehensive answer that describes the common problems and explains more about them.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The big problem is that your question boils down to asking for a list of things, and that’s not a good fit for this site.
Moreover, the narrowing isn’t making the question any easier to answer. I can’t really say “continental Europeans do X that other international applicants don’t,” and I don’t think there’s anything that is a CS-only kind of mistake, either.
Also, when asked to clarify what you want, you came up with “the worst ones.” This doesn’t help us understand what you want, which brings us back to an unfocused list question.
To a degree, to paraphrase Chekhov: “every declined application is unique.”
Upvotes: 2 |
2017/12/22 | 2,446 | 9,680 | <issue_start>username_0: I posted an answer to this question: [Writing ads to attract female PhD candidates](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/100884/writing-ads-to-attract-female-phd-candidates/), which boiled down to "How do I write job ads to attract female PhD candidates".
My answer was as follows:
>
> **Don't bother trying.** Your ad is unlikely to make a difference either way; in order to do a post-graduate degree in Computer Science, one would presumably need an undergraduate degree in Computer Science. Since men who complete said undergraduate degrees significantly outnumber the women who complete said degrees (and the ratio gets worse the more developed your nation is, as the women are more free to pick the jobs that interest them, rather than the jobs that might be more economically viable), the number of potential female applicants is already too small to make a significant difference.
>
>
>
It got upvoted up to +11 votes, and was then deleted by Wrzlprmft and StrongBad. Since there doesn't seem to be any method of privately messaging them on here that I can see, I have to ask them publicly like this instead.
When I click the Help Centre link, I get the following list of reasons for answers to be deleted:
* commentary on the question or other answers
* asking another, different question
* “thanks!” or “me too!” responses
* exact duplicates of other answers
* barely more than a link to an external site
* not even a partial answer to the actual question
My answer fell into none of those categories. As I said in the comments of that question to another user, "Don't bother trying" is a valid answer to "How do I [do thing]"; it conveys useful information to the person who asked that question (namely, that attempting to [do thing] is a waste of time and effort, and that they would be better off not attempting to [do thing]).
As far as I can see, neither of the moderators who deleted my answer even made any comments explaining what problems they had with it; they just unilaterally deleted it without explanation.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> "Don't bother trying" is a valid answer to "How do I [do thing]"
>
>
>
In general, I agree with you. An answer that questions the premise of the question is a valid answer.
But that’s not what your answer does.
The question does not aim at fundamentally changing the gender ratio in the field of computer science, but just at making ads more encouraging for women.
A valid (but likely wrong) answer that challenges the premises of that question would be:
>
> Don’t bother trying.
> While there might be an impact of the wording on the gender-specific appeal of job ads, [Doe et al.](https://www.example.com) showed that it is strongly field-dependent and least prominent in the field of computer science where women are at most 5 % less encouraged by typical job ads than men.
>
>
>
Yes, your answer also starts with *don’t bother trying,* but the following elaboration makes clear that this refers to something else than the asker’s goal (with this question).
Your answer addresses the question:
>
> Should we bother to increase the gender ratio of computer scientists at the PhD level?
>
>
>
This is considerably different from the question in question. (It would also be too opinion-based for this platform.)
Hence, I considered your answer to fall in the category *not even a partial answer to the actual question.*
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: The way the SE system works is we like to have our discussions about moderation in public so everyone can participate since we are really a community moderated site and so there is a level of transparency.
In general, regular username_4name_4s cannot delete an answer with a net positive score. They are forced to flag the answer. It then gets reviewed by other high rep username_4name_4s, and based on that review gets brought to a diamond moderator's attention. As a diamond moderator I have extra tools and privileges that allow me to delete up voted answers. The review of you answer is here: <https://academia.stackexchange.com/review/low-quality-posts/57451>
Basically, a high rep username_4name_4 raised a flag on your answer (it is not public who raised the flag, but they are a respected, trusted and valued member of the site). Then 7 additional high rep username_4name_4s reviewed your answer and 5 of them recommended it be deleted. Another username_4name_4 flagged your answer as rude. Basically 7 username_4name_4s voiced support of deleting the answer and 2 suggested it was ok.
Based on this review, I looked at your answer. I agreed with the first comment to the answer
>
> Sans the first sentence, this is a poignant comment
>
>
>
And could see how the 7 username_4name_4s might be agreeing with the idea that your answer is *not even a partial answer to the actual question*.
Overall, the decision to delete the answer was a real struggle for me. My personal preference would be to keep the answer. In other words, if I had a non-mod vote the review would have been 7-3 instead of 7-2, even factoring in your presumably positive vote, only gets us to 7-4. I deleted your answer, because the evidence at the time was that is what the community wanted. If the community thinks the answer is worth saving (and I might even write an answer arguing it should be), I will happily undelete it.
I suggest you either provide an answer to this meta question arguing why the answer should be undeleted because in fact it is more than just a comment and provides at least a partial answer to the question. If the community agrees (by up voting, since votes on meta are interpreted differently), we will undelete the answer.
One difficult aspect of judging the community wishes is the net vote count does not always reflect the wishes of the community. Questions that make the HNQ list attract a lot of attention from SE username_4name_4s whoa may not be active members of academia.SE. These username_4name_4s lack the reputation to down vote questions and answers, but can upvote. This bias is a known problem: [Prevent questions on Hot List from being upvoted by casual visitors (only rep is from association bonus)](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/238420/prevent-questions-on-hot-list-from-being-upvoted-by-casual-visitors-only-rep-is). There is also the issue of down votes costing rep, so there tends to be an upwards bias. In general, 4 down votes is a lot for the main site. It is also a lot on meta, so this answer (and my actions) has clearly struck a nerve.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The answer (1) expresses an unpopular point of view, (2) is poorly reasoned, (3) makes factual assertions without citing evidence, and (4) is not closely tied to what was being asked. The combination of factors 1-4 makes it seem trollish to me. If your intention was not to be a troll, and you actually want to convince liberals in academia to seriously consider a point of view that they are predisposed to reject, then you need to stop making mistakes like 2-4, which make it easy for them to dismiss you as a troll. SE is not an open-ended discussion forum, it's a forum in which people ask and answer specific questions.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: If I understand correctly, the question had +11 votes, as such it seems that the "community" valued this answer. In addition, even if that was not the case, as @jpmc26 said, "I'm not really comfortable with the idea that any content is deleted just because the community wants it to be. Such an approach leaves too much room for drowning out less popular points of view".
Regardless of the last statement, 15 people liked the answer, 4 did not, it means (to me) that those 15 people thought the answer did provide some value. So, while I appreciate the point of view of the moderators that the answer did not answer the question, it seems that at least 15 people did find some value in the answer.
I am just a lowly username_4name_4, but, for what it is worth, these are my 2 cents, and I would vote for the answer to be re-instated (if I had the opportunity).
To summarise: why do I believe the answer should be undeleted?
1. It was up-voted by 15 people.
2. The answer does answer, at least partially, the question asked. In other words, people reading that answer (who may have the same question) may still get some feed-back (they might agree with @nick012000 that it is useless to bother trying).
3. The reason I go to SE is to read different answers, and I would not want that particular answer deleted.
4. The answer is not completely off-topic, nor is abusive or insulting
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Don't you know that moderators are executive, legislative, and judiciary all in one? Don't you know that the SE moderation is also winner-take-all? Don't you know that moderators determine what "rule of law" is?
Since you can't be pro-law today anymore without people assuming that you're being pro-opposite-party when the "law" doesn't match with popular opinion, I do lean liberal.
Math (my community) has the same problem. I would be thrilled if math gained more venerable women mathematicians. Math needs as many brilliant minds as possible. However, attempting recruitment at a PhD level seems to be misdirected. There's research that suggests women tend to lose interest in the sciences between middle and high school. This needs to be researched more.
The way I interpret nicks answer is that you can't fish a dry pond; rather the people upstream controlling the dam need to think more downriver. And this is a perfectly acceptable answer to the question.
Upvotes: -1 |
2017/12/23 | 299 | 1,099 | <issue_start>username_0: [I am familiar with the privilege.](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/protect-questions)
But for users without the rep, is the 'flag' function a viable means to recommend to a Moderator that a question should be protected, or is this not the right method?
[What do I do if a teacher fails me after they said I'd pass?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/100930/what-do-i-do-if-a-teacher-fails-me-after-they-said-id-pass/100935#100935)<issue_comment>username_1: Short answer: Yes.
However, questions are generally protected only when they are attracting large numbers of junk answers or comments or other unwanted behavior by low rep users is taking place.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: You can also drop a line in chat: there there are frequently a couple of high-rep users hanging around who can protect questions (though 15k+ users should wait a bit more than mods to protect a question).
However, I'm not sure I'd protect that question right now, the situation doesn't seem so bad to warrant protection.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
2017/12/31 | 210 | 852 | <issue_start>username_0: Where can I ask to help me to look for resourses like books, scientific articles and so on?
For example, if I want resourses on a specific topic (Does oxygen induce coagulation?), what tag I have to use? Maybe literature-search and literatue?
Thank you so much for your time.<issue_comment>username_1: If you want resources on a specific research area, that is considered off-topic on Academia.SE, since the site is devoted to questions about academic *practice*, not the specific content of research. You might be able to ask such a question on a content-specific SE site, but most likely such questions will be poorly received.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Honestly, I think your best bet is **your local university librarian**. Helping people find relevant literature is part of their job description.
Upvotes: 2 |
2018/01/02 | 812 | 3,203 | <issue_start>username_0: I know [this user](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/56935/leon-meier) was argumentative and seemed to be not-so-subtly trolling the site in many ways but his profile says he was suspended for "voting irregularities". What does that mean? Does that mean he created sock puppet accounts and upvoted himself? Or perhaps it means that he serially downvoted particularly uses. Or both? Kind of curious what's going on here and how one can avoid a similar fate. Thanks!<issue_comment>username_1: As a rule, suspensions are a private matter between the user that is suspended, the moderators, and the SE team. We don't give out information to other users, other than the brief canned message shown on the profile page of the suspended user. (And I wouldn't bother reading too much into that canned message; there are only a few and not all suspensions fit neatly into one of them.)
In general, one avoids "voting irregularities" by voting for *posts*, not targeting specific *people*. That means:
* Don't take any action to specifically vote in favor of yourself or any other user. (For example, the following behavior is not allowed: Paula is friends with Katherine. They don't vote much on SE but they make sure to vote up one another's posts when they see them and like them, to help out a friend.)
* Don't take any action to specifically vote against any user. (For example, the following behavior is not allowed: Joe is convinced that Alex downvoted his post. Joe visits Alex's profile page, looks through it until he finds a post he doesn't like, and downvotes it.)
* Don't take any steps to give yourself more than one vote per post, or other votes that you wouldn't normally be entitled to. (For example, the following behavior is not allowed: Pat creates a second account to post an embarrassing question that she doesn't want to have linked to her main account. Pat then visits the question from her main account and votes it up, even though normally you can't vote on your own post.)
Also see: [What is serial voting and how does it affect me?](https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/126829/254250) and [When should sockpuppets be considered a problem?](https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/57685/254250)
The list above is not exhaustive. If you're not sure about a particular behavior, please start a new meta post to ask about it.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: The question should be posed differently:
**Why did the mods kill Leon Meier** or **on the importance of being revengeful**.
When you take a look at <NAME>'s last comments in the days preceding his death, you find that, on the one hand, his comments were criticizing. On the other hand, some folks also bullied the user, saying one of his posts could be a rant. I guess, it was easy to provoke the user into critical comments against anyone's content - and then the mods probably did their utmost best to allow the others to take revenge on him. (Of course, this is my guess: in reality, I don't know.) Leon's comments I see may be up to the point or not, but they are not bad: it'd say they are business as usual. We see way lower levels on the other SE sites and from other users.
Upvotes: -1 |
2018/01/02 | 657 | 2,582 | <issue_start>username_0: Although rare, account suspensions can happen to users on SE sites. In most cases the reason has been discussed in length by the defendant, site moderators, and SE team admins. With details privy to the parties involved.
However for those who are interested in how the appeal process works, I wanted to ask, just how does one appeal an account suspension?<issue_comment>username_1: When a user is suspended, they receive a message (a "mod message") in their Stack Exchange inbox giving the reason for the suspension. They can then write a response to that message. If they believe that the suspension is in error ("Did you mean to suspend the user *ff523*, not *username_1*?") this is a quick way to clear up the misunderstanding. Note that you can't keep sending multiple responses, one after the other; you get one response per mod message, so use it wisely.
All mod messages *and* the responses to them are copied to *all* the diamond moderators on the site. So if there's a rogue mod acting up ("You voted to close my post? See how you like a ten year suspension!"), other mods will see and intervene.
Finally, if the moderator team on Academia.SE is not willing to lift your suspension that you believe is unwarranted, you can use the "contact us" link in the footer of every SE site to ask the SE team to look into the matter.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: It is described [at the end of this meta.se post](https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/293444/243091):
>
> How do I escalate my individual suspension/conflict with a moderator?
>
>
> There are, I think, three options:
>
>
> * Reply to the moderator message directly. This both preserves privacy and notifies other moderators and a community manager. It's also the best way to show you are a reasonable/misunderstood/repentant user. Note you can only reply once, so make it count.
> * Use the "contact us" link. If you used up your reply or feel the need to elevate your concern, the contact form is a direct line to a community manager. We take complaints against moderators seriously. See also, the advice in the previous item.
> * Post a question on meta. (Not recommended.) Obviously, you can't do this during your suspension. (Though some folks come here to Meta Stack Exchange instead.) This is a master-level move that requires discipline. Be aware that most communities appreciate the hard work of their volunteer moderators so they tend to get the benefit of the doubt. You really need to go the extra mile to show yourself reasonable.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 |
2018/01/03 | 1,328 | 5,282 | <issue_start>username_0: The help center provides some [guidance about deleting answers](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/deleted-answers)
>
> Answers that do not fundamentally answer the question may be removed. This includes answers that are:
>
>
> * commentary on the question or other answers
> * asking another, different question
> * “thanks!” or “me too!” responses
> * exact duplicates of other answers
> * barely more than a link to an external site
> * not even a partial answer to the actual question
>
>
>
One issue is that many low quality answers still have net positive scores preventing high-rep users from casting delete vote. This is [particularly true](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/238420/prevent-questions-on-hot-list-from-being-upvoted-by-casual-visitors-only-rep-is) of questions that make the Hot Network Question (HNQ) list. This results in users flagging low quality answers, but often these flags are cast on answers that do not fall clearly into the help center description of *why some answers are deleted*.
Once the answer is flagged, it goes through a community review process. Every once in a while the review process is inconclusive leading to an auto generated flag for moderator attention where a moderator needs to decide if the answer should be deleted. There have been complaints in the past about moderators reacting to these flags by deleting the answer (e.g., [deleting](/questions/tagged/deleting "show questions tagged 'deleting'")). The only discussion I can find on deleting answers in general is this [old question](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/86/when-should-an-answer-be-deleted) with a short answer and not a lot of visibility.
How do we want moderators to handle flags on answers that have net positive scores that seem to be poorly researched (i.e., worthy of down votes) and not obviously more than a *partial answer to the actual question* that have resulted in an inconclusive review?<issue_comment>username_1: As a mod, I only unilaterally delete posts if they are:
* spam or nonsense,
* ask a question,
* are Thanks!-type comments, or
* are blatantly rude or abusive.
Absent that, I would prefer to wait for flags and reviews, as username_2 suggests in her comment.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: As a mod, when I do not feel a post deserves to be deleted unilaterally, my preference is to leave "not an answer" and "low quality post" flags active - that is, not mark the flag as helpful nor dismiss it. The reason is that these flags put posts into the ["Low quality posts" review queue](https://academia.stackexchange.com/review/low-quality-posts), where other users then vote on them. (Marking the flag as helpful or dismissing the flag would *remove* the post from the review queue prematurely.)
Once the review is completed, one of three things will happen:
* the post will have been deleted by the community from the review queue. (Or, it was deleted by the owner, or it was fixed, in response to comments from the review queue.)
* people have weighed in via review, indicating that most find the post worth keeping. In this case I will not delete the post, and I will mark the flag as helpful (if it was a reasonable flag).
* people have weighed in via review with votes to delete, but not enough to actually remove the post (e.g. it gets five votes to delete, but it needs six). In this case I might add an additional "delete" vote so that the post is deleted, if I feel it's warranted. I will then mark the flag as helpful (if it was a reasonable flag).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> When should answers be deleted
>
>
>
I believe that answers should not be deleted beyond the reasons given in the help page. If mods want to delete answer beyond the reasons given in the help page, we should expand the list as a community.
>
> How do we want moderators to handle flags on answers that have net positive scores that seem to be poorly researched (i.e., worthy of down votes) and not obviously more than a partial answer to the actual question that have resulted in an inconclusive review?
>
>
>
Downvote, edit or comment. I am not a mod, but I believe that low quality posts (that does not meet the deletion criteria) with mixed reviews should be downvoted, and not deleted. If a mod or a user can see a way to improve the answer, edit it away or comment for the OP to improve. I think we should always strive to improve the answers instead of deleting.
If the post is bad and is barely a partial answer to the question, downvotes will be sufficed to signal the OP that particular answer is not well-received by the community. While going on HNQ list may skew the amount of upvotes and downvotes, if the answer is truly low quality and the downvotes sufficiently justified, it will garner enough downvotes (I may be an optimist here). If it does not, and SE deems it important to address the HNQ upvote issue, SE should introduce a new feature as per the [link](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/238420/prevent-questions-on-hot-list-from-being-upvoted-by-casual-visitors-only-rep-is) StrongBad listed in the question. Failure to garner enough downvotes for a low quality answer should not be a reason for deletion.
Upvotes: 0 |
2018/01/19 | 483 | 1,831 | <issue_start>username_0: We already have a question that outlines [the US admissions process](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/38237/how-does-the-admissions-process-work-for-ph-d-programs-in-the-us-particularly) for students with a weak background.
However, I’m beginning to wonder if we need a similar question for the UK and German systems as well. It seems we get a decent number of questions [such as this one](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/102472/what-are-my-chances-of-being-accepted-for-masters-degree-in-german-or-dutch-univ) that it makes some sense to have a community wiki-type question available.<issue_comment>username_1: I think we need more the tag "poor-performer" for the type of questions ([What are my chances of being accepted for masters degree in German or Dutch universities?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/102472/what-are-my-chances-of-being-accepted-for-masters-degree-in-german-or-dutch-univ)) you mentioned.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: I think a canonical question on how academic education after bachelor’s works in Germany would be a good idea, as we get many questions where basic knowledge about this is missing.
I don’t think there would be much to write about borderline cases, given that they are either decided by the hiring professor (and thus very individual) or the programme’s criteria, which in turn are either very clear or subject to grade conversions (and thus difficult to predict without knowledge about the specific grading system). That doesn’t mean that we cannot write anything about borderline cases (I just did after all) or that we shouldn’t use the canonical question as a duplicate for many such questions, but making borderline cases the focus (and title) doesn’t seem like a good idea to me.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2018/01/28 | 1,408 | 5,331 | <issue_start>username_0: Sometimes I read questions here on the site which require thought, and empathy, and are helped much by varigated experience. And if I have an answer for those, I'm glad to get some upvotes (and I often do).
But quite a few questions on the site really seem to me like "There's a hole in the bucket, dear Liza"-type questions. And if I provide a "Then fix it, dear Henry" answer, occasionally those get *massively* upvoted, as if I've found a cure for cancer.
Here's a recent example:
Q: [Professor is upset about student comments about her lectures. What should I do?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/102757/7319)
A: [You're not even in the same university, so do nothing.](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/102793/7319)
I think it's ridiculous this gets over 60 upvotes within a couple of days while, say, [this answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/84938/7319) or [this one](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/96147/7319) have barely a single upvote.
Am I wrong to perceive this as anomalous, or undesirable?
**Edit:** Trivial answers [win again](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/103566/7319)... reputation for nothing, badges for [free](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_for_Nothing_%28song%29).<issue_comment>username_1: It seems like this is common. In the SE system, the questions that get the most views (and hence upvotes) are the clickbait ones: those that end up in the hot network questions list, and/or those that tend to attract strong, polarized opinions (for instance, those about sexism, just to cite a recent example).
In other SE sites this effect is even more pronounced. In Mathoverflow, for instance, the most popular questions are superficial questions on recreational math games, or "soft questions" on writing papers, or "big list of all examples of ". A genius answer on a deep, technical topic will typically get you ten votes or fewer. In Physics.se, an enlightened discussion on the fine points of quantum field theory will attract much less attention than a simple explanation on "why does a feather fall slower than a ball".
I find that this is true also with academic papers: my most cited papers are not the ones I am most proud of --- and every time I speak about this fact with a colleague they tell me that it's the same for them.
It's just life, in my view. The most popular movies or songs are not the favorite ones by critics. The politicians that get the most votes are not the most suited persons to run a country. And we could go on listing examples forever.
I don't think there is an easy way to fix this phenomenon. The only ideas that spring to my mind are a more nuanced rating system (bad-meh-good-genius), or a "pagerank-like" voting system (the votes of "experts" on a given topic count more). Both ideas would change SE radically, though.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: You are being a bit superficial when you describe your example answer. It was, IMO, more constructive and helpful than the somewhat derisory "then fix it dear Henry" would suggest.
So I think you earned the points fair and square.
And in any case, sometimes people need to get a straight and simple answer like that and the votes are, I suspect, for you being the one who phrased it best.
Even the OP in that case accepted the answer.
So, somewhat in the same vein as "well fix it dear Henry", drop the guilt trip and accept the points as a mark of respect for your common sense from the OP and your fellow users.
>
> I think it's ridiculous this gets over 60 upvotes within a couple of days
>
>
>
One of the examples you gave of a post you seem to think got few votes but perhaps deserved more (remember that's a decision for other people to make, not you !), was made 2 days after the higher voted accepted answer. I think perhaps you have to accept that stuff falls off the radar for most people.
That doesn't make your post less useful (and someone clearly thought they were), so I think you may need to treat this as karma that balances out - you got more points that you think you should for one answer, and less for another couple - the net effect was maybe just right.
Personally I am constantly surprised by which answers get votes and which don't on SE generally. It's never quite what I expect and often the highest votes I get will be on answers which I regard as trivial or obvious.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I think your upvoted answer deserves its votes, even though it was easier to write than the others you link to.
This kind of effect often happens on the more technical SE sites: short, easy to understand answers to beginner questions get a bunch of votes; difficult, technical answers to highly specific questions take an hour or two to write get crickets and tumbleweed, because it's not worth the effort for most people to read them.
Broadly speaking, the two effects balance each other out. Look at your rep as a whole and think of the rep you got but "didn't deserve" for this question as making up for the rep you "deserved" but didn't get on the other questions.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Q: Is life fair; more specifically, does the work I do which I highly value get the same recognition as a quick one-off that happened to go viral?
A: Nope. cf. <NAME>
Upvotes: 3 |
2018/01/29 | 1,201 | 4,550 | <issue_start>username_0: It's almost February in 2018, which isn't supposed to be the proper time to cycle these, but for this year it'll be once again, so we'll be refreshing the **Community Promotion Ads** for this year now!
### What are Community Promotion Ads?
Community Promotion Ads are community-vetted advertisements that will show up on the main site, in the right sidebar. The purpose of this question is the vetting process. Images of the advertisements are provided, and community voting will enable the advertisements to be shown.
### Why do we have Community Promotion Ads?
This is a method for the community to control what gets promoted to visitors on the site. For example, you might promote the following things:
* the site's twitter account
* academic websites and resources
* interesting campus story blogs
* cool events or conferences
* anything else your community would genuinely be interested in
The goal is for future visitors to find out about *the stuff your community deems important*. This also serves as a way to promote information and resources that are *relevant to your own community's interests*, both for those already in the community and those yet to join.
### Why do we reset the ads every year?
Some services will maintain usefulness over the years, while other things will wane to allow for new faces to show up. Resetting the ads every year helps accommodate this, and allows old ads that have served their purpose to be cycled out for fresher ads for newer things. This helps keep the material in the ads relevant to not just the subject matter of the community, but to the current status of the community. We reset the ads once a year, every December.
The community promotion ads have no restrictions against reposting an ad from a previous cycle. If a particular service or ad is very valuable to the community and will continue to be so, it is a good idea to repost it. It may be helpful to give it a new face in the process, so as to prevent the imagery of the ad from getting stale after a year of exposure.
### How does it work?
The answers you post to this question *must* conform to the following rules, or they will be ignored.
1. All answers should be in the exact form of:
```
[![Tagline to show on mouseover][1]][2]
[1]: http://image-url
[2]: http://clickthrough-url
```
Please **do not add anything else to the body of the post**. If you want to discuss something, do it in the comments.
2. The question must always be tagged with the magic [community-ads](/questions/tagged/community-ads "show questions tagged 'community-ads'") tag. In addition to enabling the functionality of the advertisements, this tag also pre-fills the answer form with the above required form.
### Image requirements
* The image that you create must be 300 x 250 pixels, or double that if high DPI.
* Must be hosted through our standard image uploader (imgur)
* Must be GIF or PNG
* No animated GIFs
* Absolute limit on file size of 150 KB
* If the background of the image is white or partially white, there must be a 1px border (2px if high DPI) surrounding it.
### Score Threshold
There is a **minimum score threshold** an answer must meet (currently **6**) before it will be shown on the main site.
You can check out the ads that have met the threshold with basic click stats [here](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/ads/display/3961).<issue_comment>username_1: [](https://twitter.com/StackAcademia)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: [](http://www.physicsoverflow.org/)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: [](http://chemistry.stackexchange.com)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: [](https://www.marchforscience.com/)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: [](https://writing.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/academic-writing)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: 
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: [](https://academia.stackexchange.com/)
Upvotes: -1 |
2018/01/29 | 550 | 2,206 | <issue_start>username_0: The original version of this question [How will the academic boycot of Israel (BDS) infulence my career if I get a PhD in Israel](https://academia.stackexchange.com/revisions/102886/1) received two close votes (among the other votes) for the following reason:
>
> ""Shopping" questions, which seek recommendations or lists of
> individual universities, academic programs, publishers, journals,
> research topics or similar as an answer or seek an assessment or
> comparison of such, are off-topic here. (See this discussion for more
> information.)".
>
>
>
The question is about political implications of getting a PhD from a specific country.
Does it qualify as a shopping question?<issue_comment>username_1: Often times once the first person chooses a close reason everyone jumps on that reason even if it is not the best. The original version of the question was not worded in the best way and I would have been inclined to vote to close it as either unclear or depending on "individual factors", but I would not have called it a "shopping question". The edited version makes it much easier for me to see and understand what the question is.
In summary, we often do not use the best close reason, which is obviously not as helpful as we can be.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: To expand on [username_1's answer](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3964/10685), the original question was not a "shopping" question. It wasn't asking directly about what university to attend; rather, it was asking about the impact of a particular phenomenon on people studying in a particular country.
The problems with the original question are that
* the actual impact of boycotts is mostly a matter of opinion; people have been talking about boycotting Israeli academia for at least as long as I've been in the business and nothing much has really ever happened;
* the question of whether it's better to take this potential risk or wait a few years and do a PhD elsewhere is very much an individual factors thing. For some people, there might be little down-side to waiting; for others, it could be a disaster; for most, it's probably somewhere in between.
Upvotes: 2 |
2018/01/30 | 820 | 3,300 | <issue_start>username_0: While going through the review queue, I just noticed two questions back-to-back that were flagged as "unclear". [These](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/103009/what-are-the-most-credible-rankings-of-us-computer-science-departments) [questions](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/102869/most-efficient-way-of-finding-out-if-someone-has-already-published-your-idea) seem well-articulated on their face, and have answers that align with my expectations, but in both the questioner is expressing vehement dislike of the answers in the comments.
How much weight should authorial intent of the questioner be given in these cases? Does the questioner wanting a different answer mean that they necessarily asked the wrong question? Or are there other reasons to close these questions?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Do questions become unclear if the asker rejects the answers given?
>
>
>
No, they do not. If a question is posted that is reasonably interpreted to mean X and answers to X are posted, but the author insists the question means Y, then the only unclarity is in the author's mind. We vote on questions, not authors.
If Y is also a reasonable interpretation of the question, we don't need to do anything. The author should edit their question to clarify, as long as they don't invalidate the existing answers. (Within reason; if there's just one short answer, it's probably not a big deal if that gets broken; if there are thoughtful answers that have taken time to write, they shouldn't be invalidated.)
If Y isn't a particularly reasonable interpretation, then the asker should be encouraged to post a new question that clearly articulates Y. The existing question isn't *unclear*; it's just not the question the asker wanted. However, questions dont belong to the asker. If the "wrong" question is still on-topic and useful, we should keep it. The fact that it is not useful to the asker doesn't mean that it's not useful to our community as a whole.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Do questions become unclear if the asker rejects the answers given?
>
>
>
By definition, no; rather, they lose some false clarity. Without the rejection people have apparently mistaken the question to mean something it didn't. The question as-is may or may not be unclear.
>
> How much weight should authorial intent of the questioner be given in these cases?
>
>
>
It means the world, and at the same time nothing at all.
That is, a question author is entitled to an answer regarding the issue s/he is facing (to the extent they are entitled to anything). At the same time, if a question, as asked, has an answer according to some interpretation which people feel is useful, then regardless of what the original question' author wants - that question + answer combination should exist for the benefit of readers overall.
So essentially I'm saying the question should probably be split off in some way or another.
>
> Does the questioner wanting a different answer mean that they necessarily asked the wrong question?
>
>
>
Let's say they failed to make a clear enough distinction between their own question and another pertinent question for which they got an answer. (Albeit not necessarily pertinent to them).
Upvotes: 0 |
2018/02/05 | 468 | 2,049 | <issue_start>username_0: Recently I was browsing through the "unanswered questions" section, and I found many questions which had good answeres - but those were given as comments.
Some of them are very short, but still a valid and sometimes satisfying answer, so maybe the original commenter did not want to post a one-liner as answer.
Unfortunately, the question remains "open" and is more or less a click bait since people read the question, read the comments ant feel like there is no more to say without repeating the comments.
I see two options:
1. ask the commentators to write their comment as answer - I'm unsure whether they would do it.
2. Compile an answer from the comments given. This feels a bit like plagiarism (of course you should cite them)
What's your thoughts about this issue?<issue_comment>username_1: My approach is generally to prod people who leave good comments into making them into answers, with sentences like "@username, if you posted that as an answer I would definitely upvote it!" That seems to work pretty well. If a few days later the answer still hasn't been posted, I'll post an answer of my own, using the comment as the core but also making a point of elaborating, extending, or providing evidence.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I very like username_1's approach, which is also probably the more common here. I don't like when someone copies a comment into an answer, without adding anything, just to avoid leaving a question unanswered.
However, I'd like to add a remark. I very frequently access SE from the Android app, especially during dead times (while waiting in a line, at the – ehm – restrooms, etc.). Unfortunately, the Android app makes far easier to comment than to answer, because when commenting I can read the question's text too, which is instead removed when answering. Thus, I tend to write a lot of comments, but later I might not have the time to expand a certain comment into an answer (or I simply forget about it). Maybe it's the same for some other people too.
Upvotes: 2 |
2018/02/10 | 589 | 2,246 | <issue_start>username_0: A second ago I was one click away from commenting on a question from 2012, because I did not notice it was so old. Incidentally, I stumbled upon it via the side bar.
As far, as I understand, "late answers" (and, by extension, comments) are frowned on. I would not suggest *disabling* commenting on them. I suggest some kind of a visual clue.
1. A deeper shade of background. Of a JS-popup "This question is from 2012, do you *really* want to answer it?" might help.
2. Would it make sense to filter the questions that pop into sidebars by age?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think that late answers are frowned upon. Where did you get this impression? Yes, it frequently happens that late answers contain spam or questions by new users instead of real answers, and these are certainly frowned upon, but a good answer to an old question won't cause any issue (it's a pity, though, that a late answer may not get the attention it deserves).
For instance, I actually answered a couple of old questions on Cross Validated –
without realizing they were old – and one of my answers was then accepted, even if it came some three years later than the question.
So, no, I don't think there should be any mechanism to discourage users from answering old questions.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> As far, as I understand, "late answers" (and, by extension, comments) are frowned on.
>
>
>
No, that’s not correct.
Stack Exchange is not a forum and we do not frown about thread necromancy like most forums (which does not even make sense for most of them).
If the information in the existing answers is outdated, incomplete, or just wrong, you are encouraged to write a new answer.
Not doing so would be like refraining from editing Wikipedia articles that haven’t been touched in a while.
There are even two badges for providing good late answering: [Necromancer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/badges/17/necromancer) and [Revival](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/badges/64/revival).
The reason why we have a review queue for late answers is to get another check on late answer (of new users) to compensate for the decreased visibility due to the question’s age.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2018/02/25 | 1,609 | 6,109 | <issue_start>username_0: In a question asking [How to stop sexual harassment by teacher?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/104497/how-to-stop-sexual-harrassment-by-teacher) there was a lot of down-votes so I asked why. A comment was made that
>
> (1) We do not handle high school problems. (2) The post contains sh\*t qualified for rude/abusive flagging. The question is automatically downvoted by the flags
>
>
>
I am shocked about this for a number of reasons.
1. As another person commented, bad language is easily edited. On top of that, you could just put a quick pointer into the comments to inform **a new member** about their language.
2. High school is within academia as defined in any dictionary (see [OED](https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/academia), or [Merriam-Webster](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/academia) for examples)
3. [The tour page](https://academia.stackexchange.com/tour) doesn't mention this. It says
>
> Academia is a question and answer site for academics of all levels.
>
>
>
4. The question on [what's on-topic](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic) for asking questions here within the help pages doesn't mention anything.
5. The [introduction to the site](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1203/welcome-to-academia-se) mentions nothing about it
6. The [don't ask list](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask) doesn't have anything about high school problems, **and above all**,
7. **The topic within the question affects not just high school but every level of academic study**.
What is the situation with those in high school who have a question regarding their studies? I can understand that homework questions should be avoided, but when you have situations such as sexual harassment or assault going on, why shouldn't they be able to ask the academic community what they would do?
To me, having down-votes in this manner can be damaging to someone in a vulnerable position.
**Edit**
I have just been pointed to a related question ([public school teaching grades 7-12 considered "academic"?](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/610/public-school-teaching-grades-7-12-considered-academic)). Now if certain levels of academic study is not on-topic, shouldn't this be highlighted, especially on the tour page where it says **for academics of all levels**<issue_comment>username_1: I am the one who made the comment. I'll answer your question to the best I can. I'll leave the things that I cannot answer to the mods.
In our [Help center](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic)
>
> However, please do not ask questions about
>
>
> •Undergraduate admissions
>
>
> •Undergraduate life and culture (sports, nightlife, dorms, leaving the nest, etc.)
>
>
>
So, no, we do not handle high school problems, to the best of my knowledge.
Next, *sh\*t* is not allowed on our site. It's up to the user, you can either flag it or edit it out if the post is salvageable.
Whether it is a troll is up to individual judgement. The Mods may have more clues to tell if it is. I already flag this to the mods.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I think that the linked question is off-topic, but not because of age.
There are certainly questions related to high-school education that remain valid also at higher levels, but this is not the case. In fact, the question states clearly that the teacher had been already removed from the school and, thus, the alleged facts are happening outside of the school environment.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I think there are two issues here. The first is our definition of *academia*. From our [on-topic page](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic)
>
> This site is for academics of all levels—from aspiring graduate and professional students to senior researchers—as well as anyone in or interested in research-related or research-adjacent fields.
>
>
>
So our working definition of academia/academics starts at graduate school research. On the teaching front, we consider undergraduate teaching on topic, but don't consider high school teaching to be on topic. While this definition may not match some dictionaries or the general public, I think it is fairly consistent among *experts*.
As this releases to the question at hand, sexual harassment of high school students is very different than sexual harassment of undergraduate students. High school students are generally minors and sexual harassment of a minor is different than sexual harassment of an adult. The systems in place in a high school are very different than at a university. This means are our experts are not able to answer these types of questions since they are off-topic.
The second issue is that the teacher has already been fired. While there may be some nauce of high school education, the school no longer has an affliation with the teacher and the harassment did not start until the student-teacher relationship ended. This makes it seem like it has nothing to do with academics.
Finally, if the user is a minor and is reporting a crime, that sets off all sorts of warnings. I have alerted the SE team their procedures require them to do.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: I think username_3 has already done a good job of explaining why the question isn't within the topic of "academia", as explicitly defined for this site. I'd just like to address your final assertion a little more thoroughly.
>
> The topic within the question affects not just high school but every level of academic study.
>
>
>
The topic within the question affects many areas of human life *outside* academic study too. Sexual harassment can be experienced by pilots, gardeners, emacs users, TeX users, writers, and puzzle enthusiasts. There are SE sites for all these topics, but the question wouldn't be on-topic there either. Harassment questions can be on topic here *if* they're occurring within an academic environment, but topic X isn't automatically appropriate here just because "X also occurs within academia".
Upvotes: 2 |
2018/02/26 | 1,224 | 5,087 | <issue_start>username_0: Academia is scheduled for an election [next week, March 5th](https://academia.stackexchange.com/election/2). In connection with that, we will be holding a Q&A with the candidates. This will be an opportunity for members of the community to pose questions to the candidates on the topic of moderation. Participation is completely voluntary.
>
> **The purpose of this thread was to collect questions for the questionnaire. The questionnaire is now live, and you may find it [here](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4025/2018-moderator-election-qa-questionnaire).**
>
>
>
Unlike [last time](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/932/2014-moderator-election-qa-question-collection), we're hosting the question collection a week in advance, so that not only can folks start prepping questions in advance, but also potential candidates can think about nominating themselves and seeing the questions they'll have an opening to answer.
Here's how it'll work:
* Until the nomination phase, (so, until Monday, March 5th at 20:00:00Z UTC, or 3:00 pm EST on the same day, give or take time to arrive for closure, I think this is my last sweet day to use EST), this question will be open to collect potential questions from the users of the site. Post answers to this question containing any questions you would like to ask the candidates. Please only post *one question per answer*.
* We, the Community Team, will be providing a small selection of generic questions. The first two will be guaranteed to be included, the latter ones are if the community doesn't supply enough questions. This will be done in a single post, unlike the prior instruction.
* If your question contains a link, please use the syntax of `[text](link)`, as that will make it easier for transcribing for the finished questionnaire.
* This is a perfect opportunity to voice questions that are specific to your community and issues that you are running into at currently.
* At the start of the nomination phase, the Community Team will select **up to 8 of the top voted questions submitted by the community** provided in this thread, to use in addition to the aforementioned 2 guaranteed questions.
* Once questions have been selected, a new question will be opened to host the actual questionnaire for the candidates, typically containing 10 questions in total.
* This is not the only option that users have for gathering information on candidates. As a community, you are still free to, for example, hold a live chat session with your candidates to ask further questions, or perhaps clarifications from what is provided in the Q&A.
If you have any questions or feedback about this process, feel free to post as a comment here.<issue_comment>username_1: Here is a set of general questions, gathered as very common questions asked every election. As mentioned in the instructions, the first two questions are guaranteed to show up in the Q&A, while the others are if there aren't enough questions (or, if you like one enough, you may split it off as a separate answer for review within the community's 8).
* 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?
* How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?
---
* In your opinion, what do moderators do?
* A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that?
* In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching 10k or 20k rep?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: What question or answer of yours on meta best exemplifies your philosophy on moderation? Why do you feel this is the best example?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: As a moderator, I find that comments are a tricky thing to deal with. Under what circumstances will you delete comments?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: What is your field?
I think it's important to have moderators that aren't just mathematicians or experimental scientists (for example)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: What activities on the site suggest that you would be a good moderator? How have you used the moderation tools available to you at your current reputation level?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: A user posts something you consider off-topic/not-an-answer/offensive and you close/delete/migrate the post. The user takes the issue to Meta and the question as well as answers supporting and opposing your decision get a lot of upvotes. How do you decide what to do next?
*This is essentially [this question](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/946/7734) from the last election.*
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: The site has a large number of answers, and partial answers, in comments. As a moderator, what is your stance towards these?
Upvotes: 0 |
2018/02/27 | 1,525 | 5,818 | <issue_start>username_0: [This question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/32317/what-leverage-do-universities-have-over-sexual-violence-in-fraternities) is predicated on the now-debunked ["A Rape on Campus"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Rape_on_Campus) *Rolling Stone* article.
As user Ben [points out](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/104545/37441), this information isn't in the post.
>
> Now that the reported rape at the University of Virginia has been thoroughly discredited and exposed as serious journalistic misconduct, I think it is worth adding a new answer to this question that reflects that updated information.
>
>
>
While his "answer" is certainly abrasive, it does merit consideration that the question should be changed to either reflect that the example didn't happen, or edited maybe to be about any other sexual assault that occurred in a frat:
From aeismail's suggestions:
* [Baylor](http://www.kwtx.com/content/news/Waco--16-defendants-added-to-lawsuit-over-2016-BU-frat-party-rape-474908383.html)
* [Yale](http://www.businessinsider.com/yale-dke-frat-brothers-allegations-of-sexual-assault-2018-2)
* [Wisconsin](https://badgerherald.com/news/2018/02/04/saturday-night-sexual-assault-reported-at-unknown-fraternity/)
Personally, I think changing the predicating assault is fine - or the OP <NAME> can weigh in.<issue_comment>username_1: Thanks to [Azor-Ahai](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/37441/azor-ahai) for making this meta-post. As the poster of the original criticism of the question, here is my two-cents on possible amendments/retraction:
* In my view, it would be dishonest to alter or remove the initial claim in the post, or substitute it with another alleged incident of rape. The very fact that a false rape claim was used as the example is informative of the subject under discussion. (In particular, it undercuts the OP's claim of a "pervasive rape culture" and raises the issue of false rape claims.) Given that the question asks what can be done about fraternities, it is relevant that the example raised to justify the discussion is an example where the fraternity was falsely accused.
* Replacing the incident in the post with another incident would be a classic example of cherry-picking and swapping-out of evidence. It would be highly intellectually dishonest. The question is predicated on the assumption that a rape accusation was correct, when it has subsequently been shown to be false. The OP cites this case as an instance of "entrenched rape culture", which is itself a highly controversial notion. By substituting the false rape claim for a true (or possibly true) rape claim, that would mean that the OP is able to put forward evidence, have it rebutted, and then change the evidence to ignore the original evidence.
* **So what *should* be done**. In my view, the question should be edited with an **update** at the end, correcting the record. The initial claim could be edited with ~~strikethrough~~ so that the initial claim is visible, but the reader is alerted to the fact that it is now being retracted.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The question, as is, asks the question: Given that a horrible gang rape happened in a fraternity event, what can and should the university do?
This question is reasonably independent of the actual university in question. Furthermore, even if no such events had happened, the similar hypothetical question would have the same answers, and would still be on topic.
The question is not part of an argument, and is not intended to be evidence for anything, and as such editing it to point to actual examples, with maybe a note at the end about the original question, is in my opinion unproblematic.
The current situation, where the question claims that there a happened a rape at a particular fraternity where such an event did not happen, is very bad: it makes a serious false accusation. At we should edit in a note saying that that the claim about the rape is false.
In fact, I went ahead and edited the question to include a note about the retraction and similar events. A false accusation should not stand uncorrected.
Academia.SE is not an advocacy group
====================================
This section mostly addresses a misconception by the user username_1. Academia.se is not a discussion group or an advocacy group. It is a site for asking concrete questions about academic life, and for providing answers to such questions. This is not a blog or a discussion forum.
The reason why this particular question contained misinformation for such a long time is because nobody who knew about the misinformation happened to read it and bothered doing anything to address the matter. It was a good thing for username_1 to let the users know about the issue.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I am at a little bit of a loss about what the question is about and how the originally cited incident and the other similar incidents relate. At the heart of the question, I think, is *what can universities do to fraternities that do bad/awful things*. But maybe the question is really about when the awful thing is rape. Then there is the part about a very minimal punishment (at least according to the OP). Did the other *similar* incidents also result in similar punishments? Does it matter?
Part of me thinks the question could avoid rape all together and essentially be be reduced to
>
> Supposing for the sake of argument that they were willing to completely disassociate themselves from one frat, or from the frat system as a whole, would it do any good? I assume that the frats own their houses, and the schools can't actually shut them down.
>
>
>
but this would invalidate the answers which focus on the rape aspect.
Upvotes: 2 |
2018/03/01 | 434 | 1,927 | <issue_start>username_0: For the question [Should I report a PhD student’s incompetence to their supervisor?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/104704/46184) I gave [an answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/104720/46184) based on an assumption that the OP and a supervisor were based at the same institution - information which was not originally apparent. Since then, OP has clarified that my assumption was incorrect, and this invalidates my answer.
Should I now remove my (substantially upvoted) answer which does not address OP's exact situation? Or should I leave it to stand on the basis that it may be helpful to others in similar but not identical situations? In any case I will add a note to indicate my incorrect assumption.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't think you should delete your answer. Even though it doesn't address the OP's situation exactly, it's a good answer that can be useful to others experiencing a similar situation within their institution. The disclaimer you added should be enough to warn the reader.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: The purpose of Stack Exchange is not merely to provide immediate answers to people with immediate questions, but also to allow people who have similar questions in future to benefit from the answers that have already been written. If the Question is one that would likely be found by people seeking the answer for the question you answered, your answer would be of benefit to those people whether or not it is of benefit to the person who asked the original. If the Question has changed so that it would no longer be found by such people, it may be worthwhile to post the question which you had answered as a new Question, copy your answer to that, and remove it from the original where it no longer applies. Moderators may have tools to migrate answers without having to delete and re-post, but I don't know how that would be done.
Upvotes: 1 |
2018/03/05 | 7,280 | 28,367 | <issue_start>username_0: In connection with the moderator elections, we are creating a Q&A thread for the candidates. Questions collected [from an earlier thread](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4008/2018-moderator-election-qa-question-collection) have been compiled into this one, which shall now serve as the space for the candidates to provide their answers.
Due to the submission count, we have selected all provided questions as well as two of our back-up questions for a total of 9 questions. We skipped one backup question because it covers similar ground as the submitted questions.
As a candidate, your job is simple - post an answer to this question, listing each of the questions, with your answer to each question given just below. 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](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/revisions/dd90db94-b3b0-4e18-ab91-19548d040770/view-source).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, and also including a link to your answer on your nomination post.
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!
**Oh, and when you've completed your answer, please provide a link to it after this blurb here, before that set of three dashes. Please leave the list of links in the order of submission.**
To save scrolling here are links to the submissions from each candidate (in order of submission):
* [padawan](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4030/118)
* [Fomite](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4031/118)
* [<NAME>](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4034/20058)
* [Wrzlprmft](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4036)
---
>
> 1. What activities on the site suggest that you would be a good moderator? How have you used the moderation tools available to you at your current reputation level?
> 2. 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?
> 3. How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?
> 4. As a moderator, I find that comments are a tricky thing to deal with. Under what circumstances will you delete comments?
> 5. A user posts something you consider off-topic/not-an-answer/offensive and you close/delete/migrate the post. The user takes the issue to Meta and the question as well as answers supporting and opposing your decision get a lot of upvotes. How do you decide what to do next?
> 6. What question or answer of yours on meta best exemplifies your philosophy on moderation? Why do you feel this is the best example?
> 7. What is your field of study in academics?
> 8. In your opinion, what do moderators do?
> 9. A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that?
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: **Padawan's answers**
>
> **Question 1**
>
>
> What activities on the site suggest that you would be a good
> moderator? How have you used the moderation tools available to you at
> your current reputation level?
>
>
>
My comments on the ways to improve a question is usually received well. I have 203 comments, and a big portion of them is for other users' posts. Either for the purpose of improving the question or clarifying the answer. I am trying to edit and reopen as many questions as I can. Also, I am trying to omit unrelated details in long questions to make them more readible. I never hesitate to flag a discouraging comment, regardless to the total votes of the post.
>
> **Question 2**
>
>
> 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?
>
>
>
"Valuable" here is subjective. I cannot judge the value of an answer. I can only decide if it goes against some community rules, or not. Therefore, I would carefully examine every flag and comment, whether they are legit or not. If the user indeed posted an answer that is strictly agains community rules, then there is no option but banning the user.
>
> **Question 3**
>
>
> How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc
> a question that you feel shouldn't have been?
>
>
>
If I feel that question does not deserve to be deleted, I first edit the question, and reopen. If it is deleted once more based on the flags, I then have no option to leave it closed.
>
> **Question 4**
>
>
> As a moderator, I find that comments are a tricky thing to deal with.
> Under what circumstances will you delete comments?
>
>
>
Other than the clearly stated rules, these are the conditions for me to delete a comment is as follows.
a) The comment is just posted for upvotes, containing a pun or a joke that is slightly related to the question.
b) The comment is taking the micro-discussion to a totally different topic.
c) The user is ranting about the post because of some previous venom.
d) The user is discriminating another user because of their ethnicity/status/policital view.
>
> **Question 5**
>
>
> A user posts something you consider off-topic/not-an-answer/offensive
> and you close/delete/migrate the post. The user takes the issue to
> Meta and the question as well as answers supporting and opposing your
> decision get a lot of upvotes. How do you decide what to do next?
>
>
>
As far as I have observed, the votes in Academia.SE are pretty reasonable. However, in some rare cases, people go with their own ideas instead of being objective about the matter. In these cases, I would first state the reason why I decided to delete the particular post, and ask for a clear contradiction in the rules. If one states a clear contradiction, also approved by majority, I would discuss undeleting the post with other moderators. Unless it is an argument like "this is a major nowadays" or "if this happened to you," I would undelete the post.
>
> **Question 6**
>
>
> What question or answer of yours on meta best exemplifies your
> philosophy on moderation? Why do you feel this is the best example?
>
>
>
[This](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3899/what-is-unclear-about-my-question/3900#3900) is the one. Yes, this post of mine has -5 votes. However, I lay out my justifications to close a question clearly, one by one. Also, you can see that I am not judging a question by the OP, and I am eveluating the question by its last state because [I have not voted for closing the question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/100104/in-how-much-detail-should-one-describe-their-past-and-projected-future-work-for) again.
>
> **Question 7**
>
>
> What is your field of study in academics?
>
>
>
Computer science and mathematics. Specifically, computational geometry.
>
> **Question 8**
>
>
> In your opinion, what do moderators do?
>
>
>
Moderators make this site a better, more readible and joust-free environment. They act to resolve the issues which do not add any value to the content of this site. Usually, there is an obvious solution according to most of the users.
>
> **Question 9**
>
>
> A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the
> past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will
> do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that?
>
>
>
That is a big privilege for me. However, the things I write, or comment to hall not carry more weight than any other user. I humbly accept that I have a great responsibility, but I do not consider myself as a "god" like [The Trainman](http://matrix.wikia.com/wiki/The_Trainman) in Matrix Revolutions.
**As a side note** I would suggest adding the options "Technical question about Google Scholar" and "This is a rant rather than a question" for the reasons of closing a question, as those are two of most common closing reasons.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: **username_2's Answers**
>
> **What activities on the site suggest that you would be a good moderator?**
>
>
>
There are three main activities I try to engage in as a regular user of the site that I think translate well to being a good moderator:
* When possible, I try add comments that might encourage a question/answer to be more fleshed out. I think one of the first goals of moderation should be to render a question/answer suitable to the site before approaching the idea of removing it.
* I try to make room for the idea that there are alternate opinions, different field-specific norms, etc. I think balancing "Academia is not homogenous" with the population of the site and the desire for general questions is one of the inherent challenges of Academia.SE
* I make time to go through the review queues when visiting the site. Though I confess the new GUI indicator for this threw me for a loop for awhile.
>
> **How have you used the moderation tools available to you at your current reputation level?**
>
>
>
I've earned a number of "moderation-esq" badges, and use the review tools to try contribute to the overall moderation workload as much as possible. Additionally, I try to use the flagging system fairly actively so the moderation team doesn't necessarily need to be combing through everything, and have what I'd like to think is a decent "Helpful" rate of 86%.
Beyond that, as mentioned in the answer above, I do my best to try and help users - especially new users - craft an answer that's suitable to the site, even if it takes a few iterations.
>
> **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 think the first order of business with a user like that is to try to engage with them to figure out where those flags are coming from. Is there a particularly hot button issue that provokes those reactions, or is it a more widespread problem?
That might help craft a solution - either the user just knowing this about themselves, perhaps engaging in a little self-moderation, etc.
Past that, I think one needs to figure out if this is merely creating more work for the moderators, or actively driving down the environment of the site. It's possible that heated discussions might not result in hurt feelings, users leaving the site, or otherwise productive comment chains being dragged down. On the other hand, it's entirely possible that, even if they are valuable contributors to the site, that their "style" is sufficiently detrimental to Academia.Se that some sort of more formal sanction needs to be considered.
>
> **How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?**
>
>
>
I think there's a difference between "I wouldn't have done that" and "This is a hill I'm willing to die on" in terms of disagreeing with another mod. Generally, I've found the moderation team on Academia.SE to be excellent, so if anything for most disagreements I might try to gauge why they thought it should be closed/deleted/etc. to understand their reasoning, learn from their experience, etc.
For things where there's a genuine disagreement and I think the closing/deleting was a *mistake* rather than merely something I wouldn't have done, I think engaging with the other mod to understand why, and then helping the user of the question change things to address their issues is how I would approach it. But when it comes down to it, I think that a moderator - who is by definition a very committed member of the site - deciding something should be closed is a pretty reliable proxy for there being at least a reasonable argument that it should be.
>
> **As a moderator, I find that comments are a tricky thing to deal with. Under what circumstances will you delete comments?**
>
>
>
I think the most important considerations for comments is that SE answers are supposed to be useful beyond solving the OP's original problem. I think comments that address things that have sense been resolved by edits, etc. are prime candidates to be cleaned up, because their context is now missing.
I also think rude and abusive comments fall under the category of not adding much - I think they're more likely to drag a conversation down than they are to improve the content of a question or answer. I'll admit, looking at what I've flagged vs. what's been accepted in that camp that I might have a wider definition than some of our current moderators.
On the other hand, I don't think moderately long comment chains, as long as their being productive, need to be removed.
>
> A user posts something you consider off-topic/not-an-answer/offensive
> and you close/delete/migrate the post. The user takes the issue to
> Meta and the question as well as answers supporting and opposing your
> decision get a lot of upvotes. How do you decide what to do next?
>
>
>
Try to take the answers opposing my decision to heart, reflect on them, and improve my moderation in the future.
For things that are genuinely split, I tend to err on the side of pruning over not pruning, especially for the latter category. A lot of votes on either side (for Meta definitions of a lot of votes) suggests that while this needs to be reflected on more, there's no inherent call to change my original decision.
On the other hand, if one of the opposing answers genuinely makes me rethink my logic (this has happened to me more than once), I'm perfectly happy to do what I can to reverse the decision, and avoid it coming up again.
>
> What question or answer of yours on meta best exemplifies your
> philosophy on moderation? Why do you feel this is the best example?
>
>
>
This is, for the record, a very good question.
I'm particularly proud of this question: [Time to Expressly Ban "I want to do X, Here's My Life Story..." questions?](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1093/time-to-expressly-ban-i-want-to-do-x-heres-my-life-story-questions) which did start us down the road to a custom close reason.
I think this is my best example because I found myself at least growing somewhat impatient with the volume of "Lets talk about my specific edge case" questions that weren't answerable without being on the admissions committee of University X, and editor at Journal Y, etc.
Declaring those unanswerable and genuinely out of scope was, I think, a good thing. I also don't think it had the downstream consequences of closing some otherwise worthwhile question that people were worried about.
We still get some of these questions, usually answerable with a comment "Have you asked your advisor?", but I think it helped the signal-to-noise ratio of the site.
>
> What is your field of study in academics?
>
>
>
I'm a computational epidemiologist. I make virtual people sick for a living.
Importantly, this also means I have a fair amount of exposure to both computational science and biomedical science. I think having diversity of fields in both users and moderators is useful because there are often answers on this site that are *very* field specific (see: anything involving LaTeX or arXiv).
Having a broad range of voices is, in my mind, a good thing.
>
> In your opinion, what do moderators do?
>
>
>
Moderators gonna moderate.
There are, naturally, the administrative aspects of moderation. The "Super-Close", being able to migrate questions, etc. - but as noted, users above a certain reputation have many of those same tools. I think there's also an aspect of moderation that comes in the form of trying to be a guiding/calming influence on improving questions and answers, modeling behavior, etc. And in that aspect, I think the difference between a moderator and a user is one of obligation - it's non-optional for a mod.
>
> A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the
> past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will
> do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that?
>
>
>
While I post under a pseudonym, that pseudonym is pretty weak, and I try not to say anything I wouldn't be comfortable saying with my name attached to it. The same is true of the moderator diamond.
Somewhat related to this, from IIRC the CrossValidated election questions awhile ago, is the idea that a diamond might make one's behavior change. While I expect that, if elected, the volume of my moderating-type tasks will increase, I already treat things like voting to close a question as if they're the final say.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> 1. What activities on the site suggest that you would be a good moderator? How have you used the moderation tools available to you at your current reputation level?
>
>
>
I've tried to participate to the life of this site by highlighting unclear points in questions, by suggesting duplicates, by proposing to close off-topic questions or reopen possibly on-topic ones, and by protecting questions when necessary. I'm an active participant of our Meta, and I can be found in the Ivory Tower chat for informal discussions.
I vote a lot because I think that voting is an important aspect of the Stack Exchange communities. And even though it is a kind of Lepreuchan money, which disappears in real life, it helps encouraging writing good questions and answers, and it can be attracting to new users.
I admit that I don't use too much the review queues because I frequently access this site from my mobile phone. Thus, most of my moderation activity (close/reopen/delete votes) is done from the front page. I'm aware that if I would be elected, I'll quite probably have to change this aspect of my participation.
>
> 2. 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 wouldn't deal alone: I'm convinced that problematic cases like this one should be discussed among all the moderators. I'd first propose to have a private chat with the user to convince them to avoid this kind of disruptive behaviour. I'd consider suspension as a last resort.
>
> 3. How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?
>
>
>
I think that for borderline cases we should leave the decision to the community. Therefore, I wouldn't reopen or undelete the question unilaterally, but I'd propose to the other moderator to agree on publishing a meta question to see what the community thinks about the closure/deletion/etc.
>
> 4. As a moderator, I find that comments are a tricky thing to deal with. Under what circumstances will you delete comments?
>
>
>
Comments are really a tricky point for at least two reasons. First, there is a clear discrepancy between the intended usage of comments from the Stack Exchange staff and the intended usage from many users. Second, it appears that moderators have limited tools to deal with comments. For instance, at present, comments can be moved to chat only once (there are suggestions to improve these tools, but we don't know if and when they will be implemented).
In principle, I think that comments should be deleted only when they are rude or offensive, or when they become obsolete. A long list of comments can be moved to chat, but I'd avoid deletion. However, for answers, I think that comments that point out significant technical, regulatory or legal flaws should stay attached to the answers and not moved to chat or deleted. Of course, this principles might not be fully applicable because of the limitations of the moderation tools.
>
> 5. A user posts something you consider off-topic/not-an-answer/offensive and you close/delete/migrate the post. The user takes the issue to Meta and the question as well as answers supporting and opposing your decision get a lot of upvotes. How do you decide what to do next?
>
>
>
I'd reopen or undelete the post, and then I'd open on Meta a broader discussion to see up to which point we can really extend the borders of on-topicness around that example, to achieve a wider agreement.
>
> 6. What question or answer of yours on meta best exemplifies your philosophy on moderation? Why do you feel this is the best example?
>
>
>
This one:
<https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2027/20058>
Even though at first glance it might not seem directly related to moderation, I choose this answer because I think it exemplifies well my understanding of people's way of voting, and the way in which complains about up or downvotes should be handled.
>
> 7. What is your field of study in academics?
>
>
>
I'm a metrologists, and metrology is likely the most underrepresented field in any kind of community, especially that of grammar-checkers. Along my life, I've actually worked in several different subfields of metrology: first that of fundamental constants, then that of time and frequency metrology and now that of electrical metrology, mostly resistance and impedance metrology.
>
> 8. In your opinion, what do moderators do?
>
>
>
I think that they do two essential activities. They clean up the mess and they actively gauge the community about critical topics, to better guide the direction of the site.
>
> 9. A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that?
>
>
>
Certainly, a bit ashamed of a few things I had written, but conscious that I'm working to avoid making such mistakes again.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: ### Wrzlrpmft’s answers
>
> 1. What activities on the site suggest that you would be a good moderator? How have you used the moderation tools available to you at your current reputation level?
>
>
>
I performed a lot of community moderation such as reviewing, raising flags, and editing.
During this, I always aspired to do more than what is necessary, but salvaged posts that would likely have been closed otherwise, left comments that helped users understand and address problems, or identified problematic patterns, e.g., vote abuse.
Moreover, I contributed to addressing issues with site on Meta by adjusting our scope, providing guidance for new users, and similar.
Being a moderator on two other sites, I am familiar with the tools and capabilities, and I know what to expect from the job.
>
> 2. 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?
>
>
>
The contributions of a single member cannot be so valuable that they justify tolerating a disruptive behaviour.
Thus, I will start with a moderator message (without suspension) explaining why their behaviour is problematic.
Should this not work, I will resort to more drastic actions such as suspension.
During all of this, I will take into account what the exact problem is: It’s a considerable difference if somebody is rude or just likes to discuss a lot.
>
> 3. How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?
>
>
>
I’ll talk to the moderator to find out where exactly we disagree, if at all.
Should this not resolve the situation, I will consult a third moderator or the community on meta, depending on the situation.
>
> 4. As a moderator, I find that comments are a tricky thing to deal with. Under what circumstances will you delete comments?
>
>
>
I will not hesitate to delete comments that are rude or have become obsolete due to edits, answers, or similar.
I will also generously move comment discussions to chat that have digressed from the actual post, since this does not destroy any content but keeps the main site focussed.
As for the more tricky cases like answers posted as comments and single chatty comments, I will decide on a per-case basis, but usually act only upon flags as they indicate that some other user sees a problem (barring the occasional flag abuse).
Should I feel that general deviations from this policy are necessary, e.g., due to an epidemic of answers in comments, I will bring the issue to Meta.
I also may use my authority for general reminders on hot network questions (e.g., “please do not post answers in comments, they will be deleted without warning”) and act accordingly.
>
> 5. A user posts something you consider off-topic/not-an-answer/offensive and you close/delete/migrate the post. The user takes the issue to Meta and the question as well as answers supporting and opposing your decision get a lot of upvotes. How do you decide what to do next?
>
>
>
If the Meta discussion yielded a clear consensus for undoing my action and convinced me of it, I will act accordingly.
Otherwise, I will leave the decision to another moderator, as I cannot avoid being biased.
Should this not be possible (e.g., if time is of the essence) or when being the other moderator in such a situation, I would consider the arguments and votes on Meta, whether the decision can actually be undone without causing additional problems, and potential third ways.
>
> 6. What question or answer of yours on meta best exemplifies your philosophy on moderation? Why do you feel this is the best example?
>
>
>
[Obviously insincere posts – how should users/reviewers react?](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3318).
When I posted this, Academia was being haunted by malicious posts by tenacious trolls as described in the question.
Since this was a new problem for Academia, many users were unaware of the general issue and did not know how to delete such posts efficiently without a moderator.
Therefore these posts caused some bad blood (and thus success for the troll) before moderators would even see them.
I am quite confident that my post helped to break this vicious cycle.
I chose this post for several reasons:
* I took a quick and effective initiative when needed.
* It employs and encourages community moderation.
* It reflects parts of my general approach to problem users: Avoid public dispute, in particular if this what they appear to be seeking, and use existing mechanisms to get rid of problematic content.
>
> 7. What is your field of study in academics?
>
>
>
I am a physicist by education, but due to the interdisciplinarity of my research, I have ventured into mathematics, medicine, neuroscience, biology, and computer science.
I am aware that [academia varies more than I think it does](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1212/7734).
Thus I will be very careful before making moderation decisions based on what I believe to know about academia’s workings – but then I do not expect this to happen very often.
>
> 8. In your opinion, what do moderators do?
>
>
>
Moderators mainly handle issues that cannot be handled by community moderation due to privacy, extremeness, or time pressure.
They also act as a liaison between the community and Stack Exchange.
Finally, they can steer community discussions, which happens mostly through the authority of the mandate and the [featured](/questions/tagged/featured "show questions tagged 'featured'") tag.
>
> 9. A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that?
>
>
>
I am fine with that. Should I be elected, I do not intend to change how I speak except that I sometimes will speak explicitly as a moderator. The only possible exception for this is that I have a knack for asking questions where my intentions are misinterpreted and will try even more to avoid this.
Upvotes: 4 |
2018/03/12 | 1,204 | 4,806 | <issue_start>username_0: Example: The [question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/105236/how-to-review-bogus-science-without-hurting-feelings) and my [answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/105236/how-to-review-bogus-science-without-hurting-feelings/105240#105240). I was writing a lengthy post about "Why downvotes? Please explain so I can improve!" but I noticed it had a very nagging character. Instead, let's do it more professional!
So image I have posted an answer that isn't well received by the community, getting below score of -5 and some comments pointing things out I may have missed. I reacted to the comments explaining, but the community seemed to agree with the other commentators (e.g. 12 upvotes on one) but almost always disagree with my answers (no upvotes), or they simply didn't read them, I don't know.
So since I'm a beginner academic (if anything) and can be easily influenced by nature, I'm starting to believe I either made some grave mistake in the answer I cannot recognize because of my lack of ability to do so, or I have some extremely unorthodox point of view that is frowned upon (or both), but I don't know which and asking the community on meta feels like nagging and inappropriate. **Either way, the community convinced me to believe that my answer is bad. Should I now delete it, even when I can't understand why it is bad?** On a technical note, having answers with heavy downvotes is likely to decrease my answer score and I may face repercussions from the site?
I should mention, on Math SE I'm usually either wrong about what was asked, my solution attempt was wrong or I didn't explain well. In that case given a comment I can either improve my answer well or, if I realize I actually don't know an answer, I just delete my answer, because I can see that it doesn't help anyone. But here at academics, I'm at loss.
[Related Meta-Post.](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/163730/when-should-i-delete-an-answer)<issue_comment>username_1: I think that your answer is not bad but a bit naive, as coming from someone who hasn't really seen how much time and energy a crackpot is able to drain if one tries to be understanding. During the newsgroup era there were crackpots who went on for years with the same arguments. But I also think that your answer doesn't deserve so many downvotes, and there's no need to delete it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I think the main reason your answer is rather massively downvoted is that in addition to the naïveté you're a bit too positive about people academics call 'cranks' and also that your first phrase sounds like an accusation and immediately triggers an emotional response (retracting the accusation doesn't retract the emotions I'm afraid).
So it's mostly the severe cultural mismatch (with academic culture) and lack of neutral tone in the answer that gives the downvotes, I presume. I can edit the post to be more neutral and more 'culturally fitting' if you'd ask. (I propose this here instead of editing myself, as this would be (at least likely perceived by reviewers as) conflicting with 'original intent')
Although actually, that likely won't remove the downvotes. You could consider deleting your answer and starting over with a new one, rewriting it from scratch with what you learned here and take care to be neutral on this slightly sensitive issue where your view can be easily seen to be controversial. If you do that, I don't think you'll reach as much downvotes again.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Since your reputation balance is not very high yet, if I were in your shoes, I would delete it. That's what I personally would do. However, if you want to leave it up, that would be fine too. If your reputation goes too low you lose certain basic functionalities and that would not be fun.
I disapprove of massive downvoting (except perhaps in Meta). So, for me, another reason to delete would be to stop massive downvoting in its tracks. To me, massive downvoting is like chicken pecking. Once the chickens have smelled a drop of blood, they all have to descend on the poor chicken with the drop of blood, and have at him themselves. I'm not happy when I see Academia SE participants behaving in such an uncivilized way.
Now, in general terms, if you've written an answer that you think is going to be helpful for someone, then you might want to leave it up despite the damage it's doing to your numerical rep (and your street cred reputation).
*Some small suggestions to facilitate more successful communication here: use a spell checker. Work on your English, outside Academia SE. Until your English is more reliably understandable and less annoying to read, try to stick to simple sentences. (Think Hemingway.)*
Upvotes: -1 |
2018/03/15 | 803 | 3,345 | <issue_start>username_0: This question may not be well fitted here. But I am wondering why someone is perhaps intentionally down-voting my old low-scored questions asked here?
I wouldn't surprise if the down-votes appears at the time I asked the question. But the down-voter is targeting my old low-scored questions. I would appreciate if the same down-voter gives some up-votes to my high-scored questions. But I can't see it.
Although I don't care the votes or scores at all, but still wondering the possible reasons for it.<issue_comment>username_1: I think that your answer is not bad but a bit naive, as coming from someone who hasn't really seen how much time and energy a crackpot is able to drain if one tries to be understanding. During the newsgroup era there were crackpots who went on for years with the same arguments. But I also think that your answer doesn't deserve so many downvotes, and there's no need to delete it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I think the main reason your answer is rather massively downvoted is that in addition to the naïveté you're a bit too positive about people academics call 'cranks' and also that your first phrase sounds like an accusation and immediately triggers an emotional response (retracting the accusation doesn't retract the emotions I'm afraid).
So it's mostly the severe cultural mismatch (with academic culture) and lack of neutral tone in the answer that gives the downvotes, I presume. I can edit the post to be more neutral and more 'culturally fitting' if you'd ask. (I propose this here instead of editing myself, as this would be (at least likely perceived by reviewers as) conflicting with 'original intent')
Although actually, that likely won't remove the downvotes. You could consider deleting your answer and starting over with a new one, rewriting it from scratch with what you learned here and take care to be neutral on this slightly sensitive issue where your view can be easily seen to be controversial. If you do that, I don't think you'll reach as much downvotes again.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Since your reputation balance is not very high yet, if I were in your shoes, I would delete it. That's what I personally would do. However, if you want to leave it up, that would be fine too. If your reputation goes too low you lose certain basic functionalities and that would not be fun.
I disapprove of massive downvoting (except perhaps in Meta). So, for me, another reason to delete would be to stop massive downvoting in its tracks. To me, massive downvoting is like chicken pecking. Once the chickens have smelled a drop of blood, they all have to descend on the poor chicken with the drop of blood, and have at him themselves. I'm not happy when I see Academia SE participants behaving in such an uncivilized way.
Now, in general terms, if you've written an answer that you think is going to be helpful for someone, then you might want to leave it up despite the damage it's doing to your numerical rep (and your street cred reputation).
*Some small suggestions to facilitate more successful communication here: use a spell checker. Work on your English, outside Academia SE. Until your English is more reliably understandable and less annoying to read, try to stick to simple sentences. (Think Hemingway.)*
Upvotes: -1 |
2018/03/16 | 1,713 | 6,351 | <issue_start>username_0: I've been struggling recently with the use of "ethics" on this site - I think it's overused to the point of the tag itself being much less useful than it could be (it's currently our 12th most popular tag) as well as answers and comments being bogged down by disambiguating "Is X ethical..." are potentially meaning:
1. "Is X ethical..." in the proper sense
2. "Is X a good idea..."
3. "Is X nice..."
4. "Can I be upset by X..."
5. "Is my advisor/classmate/teacher/etc. a less than perfect individual..."
etc. Is there a good way to handle this? I think actual discussions of ethics are interesting, and a violation of academic ethics is often a very serious accusation, so I dislike that it's being heavily diluted in terms of its meaning.
Do we consider heavily editing questions/deleting tags for things that aren't actually about ethics? If so, do we need to fine-tune the current definition?
>
> On the moral code or ethical policy of academia, including values such as avoidance of cheating or plagiarism;
>
>
>
Or do we just let it slide?
Some examples, per Wrzlprmft's request:
* [Is it considered rude to address a PhD holder as sir or miss?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/104867/is-it-considered-rude-to-address-a-phd-holder-as-sir-or-miss) - I think this is a stretch to call this an "ethics" question. "Is this insulting?" isn't actually a matter of ethics.
* [Contacting EiC on social media](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/105557/contacting-eic-on-social-media) - Again, this is far more "Is this a bad idea?" than is this *ethical*.<issue_comment>username_1: ### Short Version
* Re-tag those questions that are clearly not about ethics.
* Ask the asker whether it is really ethics they wish to ask about.
* Ethics needs not be “heavy” ethics.
### Long Version
Going by the examples provided, I see three kind of problematic questions:
* Questions that are just mistagged and do not mention ethics in the question body at all, like: [Is it considered rude to address a PhD holder as sir or miss?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/104867/7734)
We should just retag these and move on. It is the nature of this site that many questions are poorly tagged (also see [this](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1679/7734)).
I have subscribed to [research](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/research "show questions tagged 'research'") for some time just to remove it from questions that have nothing to do with research as per the tag’s definition at all – which is about half of the questions tagged with it.
You could do the same with [ethics](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ethics "show questions tagged 'ethics'").
(Sidenote on this question: With etiquette, the line is quite clear to draw in my opinion: Etiquette is a codex, whose rules are mostly orthogonal to ethics. Either somebody asks what the etiquette is or what the ethics are. There may be questions about whether it is ethical to follow etiquette, but apart from that a question is either about one thing or the other. We should however not forget that some cultures hold etiquette to such a high value that it may be difficult for their members to distinguish between etiquette and ethics.)
* Questions that explicitly asks for the ethics of a situation, even though it seems likely that this is not what the asker actually cares about or at least this is not what we would care about in this situation. (This is a variation of the [XY problem](https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/66377/255554).) For example: [Is it okay to critique my already published paper?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/104740/7734) Here we should ask the asker as soon as possible whether they really want to ask about the ethics of the situation, and if yes, why they even consider that something may be unethical or ethically compulsory.
Now, if the asker confirms their interest in the ethics, I don’t consider this a big problem: The question and answers may not be as interesting, but the asker (or somebody else) can always ask a different question about other aspects.
There may be a slight problem with questions where the asker gives us no clue as to why they have ethical concerns and we can answer nothing but: “I see no ethical issues.” or similar.
I think we can close such questions as *unclear* on a per-case basis.
* Questions which are not about “heavy ethics”, such as: [Contacting EiC on social media](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/105557/7734).
In this example, the asker specifies an ethical concern (taking unfair advantage by exploiting their personal connection to the EIC).
In this case, *ethics* in the common meaning of the term certainly applies.
One might debate whether *ethics* in the sense of the tag description applies, i.e., whether we would consider this part of the common academic ethical policy.
However, the latter is unwritten and at least I wouldn’t know where to draw the line between “heavy” and “light” ethics and whether there is anything to be gained from it.
I certainly wouldn’t consider questions on “light” ethics off-topic.
In this respect, I would at most edit the tag description a bit (and particularly make the tag wiki a proper tag wiki instead of a Wikipedia copy).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I suspect some number of “ethics” questions are really “etiquette” questions.
But the big thing to remember here is that tags aren’t static. Users with sufficient reputation can edit tags if they think something is amiss.
So if something isn’t addressing ethics, feel free to adjust the tags appropriately.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Many questions asking about the ethics of some course of action are really asking whether the action is *appropriate* in a certain social, cultural, or professional academic context.
As [username_2](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4054/31917) says, `ethics` tags that are used in this overly loose fashion can and should be removed. But I would also advocate for liberally editing out the terms "ethics" or "ethical" and replacing them by "appropriate", "tasteful", "polite", etc. as applicable, especially in question titles. This is to avoid confusion about a question's actual substance, and to avoid dilution of the term "ethical".
Upvotes: 3 |
2018/03/17 | 687 | 2,722 | <issue_start>username_0: It would be interesting to learn what is the viewpoint of Academia.SE community on the following situation.
[There is an Area 51 proposal for Paranormal Phenomenons.](https://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/114464/paranormal)
Please follow the links from this question to read further details, but to keep all discussion in one place, I suggest to express your opinions as answers to this question here. I was recently involved in a discussion about cranks in science, so I'm very intrigued what you think.
(Blatantly copied in parts from [this question](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1896/openscience-and-academia-qa-sites) to make sure to stay on-topic.)<issue_comment>username_1: My personal opinion: I'm... baffled that something like this exists. I mean, given human nature it was sure to happen eventually, but still... Wouldn't such a site only serve to strengthen superstitious believes of people? Isn't this necessarily a bad thing? I mean, I'm not saying such people should not allowed to express their opinions on the Internet, but for that purpose using Stack Exchange, a site that, forgive my enthusiasm, strengthens scientific and expertise knowledge around the world, seems just... wrong... to me.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: First of all, I'm *not* sure this question is really appropriate, but that's just my opinion. I do think there's no reason to be vehemently against such a proposal without seeing how it'll turn out.
In my opinion, 'paranormality' is actually a sort of 'parareligion'. Since we have serious sites that manage to seriously and objectively discuss Christianity, Buddhism, Islam or theological matters, I don't see what prevents serious and objective discussion of 'paranormality'.
Anyway, this site is still in the definition phase. Many sites don't even get beyond that phase. Only a minor fraction of all proposals reach the beta stage. So I wouldn't worry. Just sit and wait. You might consider mentioning in chat when (if!) it reaches public beta.
Also, I do think there is a *tiny* overlap between academia and 'paranormality': 'Cranks'. Questions about cranks and how to deal with them (for some academic) are very much on topic here. Paranormality appears to be a 'field' with more cranks than non-cranks, so I think 'dealing with crank questions' might appear on that site (although most likely from the cranks perspective). Still, experts from Academia.SE could share their expertise their. The serious, scientific investigation of 'paranormality' (Yes, it exists!) might overlap a bit, but I think that leans a bit too much towards 'questions inside a field' than questions about academia itself.
Upvotes: 2 |
2018/03/20 | 444 | 1,427 | <issue_start>username_0: Academia's [second moderator election](https://academia.stackexchange.com/election/2) has come to a close, the votes have been tallied, and the moderator is:
[](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/7734)
They'll be joining [the existing crew](https://academia.stackexchange.com/users?tab=moderators) shortly — please thank them for volunteering, and share your assistance and advice with them as they learn the ropes!
For details on how the voting played out, you can download the election results [here](https://academia.stackexchange.com/election/2), or [view a summary report online](https://www.opavote.com/results/4963713824063488/0).<issue_comment>username_1: *Non c'è due senza tre* (poor man's translation: from two follows three): An Italian saying that welcomes your well-deserved third moderator appointment Wrzlprmft! Congratulations and keep up the good work!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Congrats Wrzlprmft. It’s well deserved and I think Academia is in excellent hands.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Congratulations! I wish you a good moderatorship.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Congrats Wrzlprmft.
Welcome to Academia cleanup zone. Academians are waiting for....
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/5X4um.jpg)
Upvotes: 2 |
2018/03/21 | 971 | 4,031 | <issue_start>username_0: I have asked a question. In [this question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/106754/how-to-know-a-community-of-researchers-in-order-to-be-more-successful-in-researc?answertab=active#tab-top), I provide details about what I mean and even a link to the content I am talking about. Some people put the question OnHold because they say It is not clear what you want. But when I asked what is unclear nobody answered or commented. It is very strange that some people handle such a detailed question in this way and when I ask what is vague no answer or comment. The question is how to know what is vague? I want to know what is vague. Ironically they are unclear for the reason in putting this question on hold. I hope somebody will listen.<issue_comment>username_1: There are 5 questions in your question. Each of which could probably stand on its own and receive an in depth answer. It is hard to see the single thread that runs between the questions and without that it is unclear how to write a single comprehensive answer that answers your unstated question.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: I noticed this question as well. To me it seemed a bit, well, broad -- question #3 is basically "how do I network", and the other questions broaden the scope still further. Your first two paragraphs explain why you ask the question, but don't make your question any more specific.
In my view, *all* researchers struggle with the question of how best to network -- that's part of the game, and SE is for Q&A, not comprehensive tutorials. If you want to reopen the question, I would focus on what makes your situation different than that of every other researcher. Examples -- maybe you work in an esoteric subfield? Or in an country without a strong research infrastructure? Or don't have an advisor? Or can't afford to attend conferences? Or have never published anything? Or...?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The multiple questions are bound together by McEnerney's use of the term *community*. Scaahu wrote, *Unless we watch the video, how could we know what he meant by "community"?* Some of the close votes and lack of reopen votes may have come at least partly from a similar lack of clarity. So let's get on the same page about that first.
>
> [Oxford](https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/community) 1 A group of people living in the same place or having a particular characteristic in common. *‘Montreal's Italian community’ ‘the gay community in London’ ‘the scientific community’*
>
>
>
*Community*, used in this way, is a term that's come into vogue in recent years in at least some parts of the US. (Note, in "I attended a small, supportive liberal arts college that had a great sense of community," it has a slightly different meaning.) Maybe some of our participants haven't come across this usage yet, but what McEnerney appears to have talking about is the set of people who have an interest in the particular area (or sub-area) of study.
I would like to respond to username_1's argument, "It is hard to see the single thread that runs between the questions and without that it is unclear how to write a single comprehensive answer that answers your unstated question." (I don't understand "unstated question," since he was pointing to the *multiple, supposedly unconnected questions* as being the problem.)
Sometimes one person will have an easier time understanding a particular question than someone else. That's why the system requires five closure votes rather than just one. But, following username_1's logic, the existence of an answer that holds together well and responds to what was asked, shows that the unclearness was subjective -- some people got it and some didn't.
About the video link. Posting a link to a video in a question is helpful. This is done regularly on many SE sites. *Not* posting a link to the material the question is about -- that would be bad.
I hope others will join me in voting to reopen.
Upvotes: -1 [selected_answer] |
2018/03/21 | 1,257 | 5,166 | <issue_start>username_0: We have at least one old unclosed question asking to evaluate some commercial online services: [Is Academia.edu useful?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/44632/7734)
This was cited in favour of questions going into the same direction: [Is Peer.us useful?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/106706/7734) The latter question in turn has attracted a controversial answer originating from the operators of that platform. Both questions have received close votes in the past.
I think it’s time for a general rule how to deal with such questions and thus I ask:
* Shall we allow all such questions, only some of them, or close them altogether? If only some, where do we draw the line?
* If we allow all or some of such questions, how shall we deal with opinionated answers and comments, i.e., answers not focussing on objective observations but mainly on bashing or praising the platform? In my experience, it is almost inevitable that such posts will happen, no matter how objective answers the question seeks.
(Note that I explicitly exclude services without commercial goals, such as the Arxiv.)<issue_comment>username_1: Historically, this community has had a strong policy of staying away from assessments of (most) specific organizations, commercial or otherwise. I believe that this is a good policy for several reasons:
* Assessments are often highly relative and based on perspective
* There is a temptation for advocacy, whether for personal ("Go Tech! Beat State!") or financial ("Buy our widgets!") reasons.
* Complementarily, people are likely to become upset if others place harsh judgement on an organization that is important to them.
* Many organizations (especially new entrants to a field) will change quickly in their nature, impact, and significance, and answers will tend to become rapidly obsolete.
* Allowing any assessments of organizations opens the door to a potentially unbounded flood of requests to assess other organizations.
I think that this should apply no matter how large the organization, *when the question is about assessing the organization*.
Instead, I notice that most well-regarded questions about organizations seem to fall into two classes:
1. Questions about established places like LinkedIn, ResearchGate, Facebook, Google Scholar, IEEE, etc., which already assume that organization is notable and legitimate but which are asking advice about how to manage some aspect of one's interactions with it with respect to some aspect of academia. Thus, we take the organization for granted and ask for experts in it to share their experiences.
2. Questions about whether to trust a possibly sketchy organization. These are often something that can be generalized to a class of organizations, like how to assess whether a conference or journal is predatory.
In neither of these cases do we need to assess an individual organization, and thus we avoid the tar-pit of associated problems.
Thus, if a question cannot be edited into one of these two classes, I think that it should be closed. I think the Academia.edu question *might* be able to be turned into a question in the first class, but I don't think the Peer.us question can be.
**TL;DR: Evaluating an organization is not OK. Evaluating a class of organizations is OK.**
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Note that we have allowed questions about a specific possibly predatory journal, e.g. [How is publishing in JoVe (a "video journal") perceived?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/34065/32436).
What I see in this particular question that seems to me to make it well posed is
>
> How do they compare with similar services; and how they want to monetize their product
>
>
>
Furthermore, I think the deleted controversial answer can easily be edited and restored, as it answers the business plan aspect.
Where to draw the line? This will be easier to figure out if and when we start getting more of this type of question. (Right now we have a total of two, if I understood right.)
How to deal with opinionated answers and comments, i.e., answers not focusing on objective observations but mainly on bashing or praising the platform? In the same way we deal with other opinionated answers that are presented without documentation or specific support for the position being presented.
The business side of academia is starting to change, as business models in the modern world are changing. Let's not put our heads in the sand and refuse to question and understand these changes.
---
**Edit**: Responding to the question in the comment (To what answer are you referring?) -- in the question post, I read
>
> This was cited in favour of questions going into the same direction: [Is Peer.us useful?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/106706/7734) The latter question in turn has attracted a controversial answer originating from the operators of that platform.
>
>
>
When I go to the link, there is a notice at the bottom of the page about a deleted answer.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/qJtm8.png)
Upvotes: -1 |
2018/03/24 | 841 | 3,369 | <issue_start>username_0: I've been thinking of writing this for a while. It doesn't happen frequently but, yes, it happens: a user answers a question and also votes to close it.
Though not forbidden by the system, I think that such kind of behaviour is bad in two ways:
1. It confuses the questioner, especially when they are new to the site: how come that this expert user thinks that my question is off-topic, too-broad, whatever and answers it anyway?
2. It might give the message that, yes, the question is off-topic, too-broad, whatever, but the user who voted to close answers it anyway to get a few more reputation points.
Should we thus discourage such kind of behaviour? If yes, could we actively discourage it by commenting with a boilerplate comment? E.g.,
>
> Please, avoid answering a question you voted to close. See [this meta discussion](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4077/20058).
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: I'd say the best behaviour is to vote to close and wait. This doesn't confuse the question asker. And when the question is reopened, you can slightly adapt the answer and submit.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_2: I would argue there can be circumstances where answering and voting to close together makes some sort of sense. There are many questions asked that are not really suitable for this site, but it is clear that the OP is hurting. Answering could be a way of pointing them in the right direction, which achieves its purpose in a short timescale (long enough for the OP to read it), while longer term the question will be deleted.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: I can support "Please don't answer if the question is obviously poorly posed" as a guideline, as long as it isn't enforced blindly as a hard and fast rule.
You say that it doesn't happen very often. I tried to find some examples with careful googling ("closed as unclear what you're asking by" OR "closed as off-topic by" OR "closed as too broad by" academia stackexchange). I couldn't find any closed questions where the same person voted to close and answered the question. (Although I have occasionally written an answer to a question that was clearly poorly posed, e.g. <https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/107357/32436>.)
Could you post some links to some examples that concerned you?
I'm a bit more bothered when I see a high-rep participant contributing an answer which gets wildly upvoted, and dozens of people getting involved in very involved discussions, while the answer gets closed. This suggests that we have more work to do as a community to get on the same page about when to close questions.
Also, I think it would be helpful if we put together a set of **canonical questions** or **common questions**. Benefits:
* Easier for askers to find the information they need.
* We'd see fewer questions that are variations on certain basic themes.
* It would be easier to close repetitive questions.
We already have some questions and answers that would be candidates for such a tag (although they might need a bit of adjusting).
Some possible topics:
* How does funding work in country X
* How do I go about changing fields
* What should I do if the professor seemed agreeable to something but is not responding to email now
* How do I strengthen my application to grad school given such-and-so weak areas
Upvotes: -1 |
2018/03/27 | 1,607 | 6,716 | <issue_start>username_0: I frequently see questions from this stack in the Hot Network Questions list (the network-wide list of questions in the right sidebar) that I find interesting. I sometimes answer them and have acquired a small amount of rep from a couple of upvotes per answer.
However, I'm not a scientist, student, professor, teacher, researcher or university staffer. It has been about 7 years since I last was in a school in the capacity of a student. Because of this, I'm not sure whether it's wholly appropriate for me to answer these questions.
On one hand, I have no experience with academia, so I don't know any of the established procedures and rules from Academia. What I suggest might be completely inappropriate for someone who is active in Academia.
On the other hand, I have no experience with Academia, so I might be able to provide a unique perspective from someone with a minimum of preconceptions. In some notable cases in the past, such perspectives has led to stuff like unsolvable conjectures being solved, impossible machines being invented and generally major advances in a number of scientific fields.
From reading [another meta answer](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1545/11593), I have seen at least one person explicitly mention
>
> * A user that, based on her/his bio and SE habitus, seems trustworthy to answer the question
>
>
>
as something they typically upvote and
>
> * Answers that seem to fall into the "uninformed opinion" category ("I don't have experience with this, but clearly ...")
>
>
>
as something they typically downvote, with this answer getting over a dozen upvotes. Does this mean that this community does not want answers from people who are not part of the scientific community?<issue_comment>username_1: Excellent question! Thank you for taking the time to ask it.
Academia is a subculture. Like almost every other subculture, it has its own social mores and norms. Many of the questions here are asking about those "you have to be there to know it" aspects of academia. To that extent, (in my opinion,) if the question seems to requires knowledge of the field, its probably best to leave those for other academics. What may seem to be good advice from the outside may actually be harmful to those familiar with the culture.
That said, a good chunk of questions more broadly defined as, "is this a good idea?" We've had some very good answers from outsiders to some of those questions[citation needed], and I would welcome anyone to contribute there.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Well, I'm just a Masters' student, so most of my academia knowledge is very basic.
However, note that all answers are judged by their content (and form), not their *creator*. Hence, as long as an answer that is useful, but not necessarily from an academic perspective, it can be accepted.
One example of such an answer could be this one:
[phd-in-mathematics-science-communication-jobs](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/104079/phd-in-mathematics-science-communication-jobs/104092#104092)
No academic knowledge required, yet still an useful and well-received answer.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: As a user can obviously garner several hundred rep or more without a direct or deep or active involvement in academia, there are obviously questions you can answer successfully and appropriately.
However, being aware of the lack of direct experience means you must carefully consider whether, by virtue of not being involved, there are things you don't know that critically undermine your answer accuracy and relevance.
Given the number of academicians that fail to do this (a small but still identifiable superminority), and given an apparent awareness of the issue, you're probably fine as you are.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Just in peeking through your answers on the site so far, although you've gotten a lot of upvotes on some (likely through the HNQ bloat, as others have pointed out), lots of your answers don't answer the actual question, and are more like extended comments on other answers.
Some of this might be because you lack the "insider information" necessary to answer the original question, or it might be just a style in your answering that is outside the normal guidelines for what make good StackExchange answers. Given the topic of this meta post, I'll assume the former:
I think that laypeople who are not part of Academia should not use partial answers to address only parts of questions when they are not prepared to answer the whole question. There may be some questions here that can be answered by anyone, but in most cases those questions either belong on a different stack, or the user answering them may not have sufficient understanding of Academic culture to recognize when an question actually has an academia-unique answer.
As just an example, completely independent from your personal answering history, the role of an academic advisor as both a "boss" and a mentor is completely different from that of a boss in the outside world. Advice for how to deal with a bad boss at work is often completely inappropriate for an academic context, even if the interpersonal problem is the same.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Some question actually can only be answered from an outsider's perspective. Applying for industry jobs is a prominent example. Many PhD students will have questions related to this topic but a typical academic career path does not include leaving academia.
If you post stupid stuff, you will be downvoted. Similar to other SO site, bad answers will move down, good answers move up. Your answers with upvotes were considered helpful - write more of these!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I have a pet peeve about nonacademics answering questions on this site. But not with all of them; only with those evincing a certain kind of behavior. Namely, what irks me tremendously is those who answer questions about academia *but refuse to comment on or acknowledge their lack of academic expertise*.
(In fact this is not limited to non-academics. I am just as bothered by e.g. academics who have never left Continent A but answer questions about academia on Continent B without acknowledging -- or even knowing, perhaps? -- that these answers may well be negatively useful.)
If you want to answer a question as an academic outsider, please include in your answer that you are an academic outsider. As others have pointed out, this does not automatically disqualify or discount your answer: for some questions it will actually improve it. But readers deserve to know this information, whatever they do with it.
Upvotes: 4 |
2018/03/31 | 246 | 903 | <issue_start>username_0: Not sure how unique it is to Academia.SE but it didn't show up in MathOverflow. To get rid of it, I had to click on it which involved giving it access to the microphone. How do I know this website has relinquished this access after I dismissed the duck? I think the duck should go or at least be presented in a more informed way, with opt-in, not opt-out.<issue_comment>username_1: I've seen it on multiple sites, so that suggests this needs to be brought up on [the main meta site](https://meta.stackexchange.com).
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: **The duck *never* accesses your microphone**, even if you say that you have one.
Think about it: If it could access your microphone without a browser-site confirmation, so could every other website, which would be a privacy nightmare.
[Further reading on Meta](https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/308581/255554).
Upvotes: 2 |
2018/04/26 | 2,466 | 9,504 | <issue_start>username_0: The title of my question exaggerates a bit to stress its point, but it concerns a class of questions where the OP seeks advice on basic human communication with a professor. I have seen many many question on academia.SE where the OP has some basic inquiry to make and is seeking advice about how to talk to or email the contact person, usually a professor. Often the enquiry is a basic one involving normal administrative matters, with no special issue that makes it especially difficult or arduous, and it is unclear why any special advice would be required. There are many examples of this, but here are a few of them:
* [How to effectively e-mail a professor I met briefly about collaborative work?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/108710/how-to-effectively-e-mail-a-professor-i-met-briefly-about-collaborative-work)
* [How to tell a Prof you are no longer applying to a PhD program at his university?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/99183/how-to-tell-a-prof-you-are-no-longer-applying-to-a-phd-program-at-his-university?rq=1)
* [how can I ask a professor about funding for master!](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/90136/how-can-i-ask-a-professor-about-funding-for-master)
* [Politely ask a professor about my application status [duplicate]](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/86303/politely-ask-a-professor-about-my-application-status?rq=1)
* [How to thank a potential supervisor's email? [duplicate]](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/100829/how-to-thank-a-potential-supervisors-email?noredirect=1&lq=1)
* [Is it rude to tell my professor about my other admissions? [closed]](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/90483/is-it-rude-to-tell-my-professor-about-my-other-admissions?rq=1)
* [Phone contact after no response from scientific collaborator?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/62814/phone-contact-after-no-response-from-scientific-collaborator)
I have not seen questions this basic on other SE forums. I find them rather annoying, since they lack any real substantive content on academic matters, and instead ask trivial questions about how to undertake basic human communication. Pretty much every question of this kind is answered by [this general question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/90725/how-should-i-phrase-an-important-question-that-i-need-to-ask-a-professor?noredirect=1&lq=1), but most of them strike me as so trivial that the simple answer to all these questions is: *you tell/ask them that thing you want to tell/ask them*. Some of these questions are already marked as duplicates of that general question, and this is desirable. In my humble opinion, it would be a good idea to either close or mark-as-duplicate all questions of this kind.
I suspect that many of these questions come out of a sense of nervousness that students, etc., have when they want to communicate with academics. The implicit premise in these questions seems to be that professors are some kind of sanctified emperors and you need to seek detailed advice on etiquette before speaking in their presence or sending them an email. Answers often give some help with forms of words to use, etc., and this is a good attempt to help, but it has the side-effect of reinforcing the view that some special advice is needed to speak to an academic.
**My question:** Are questions of this form off-topic? They strike me as having minimal to no academic content, and the OP is essentially just asking about basic human communication. If not considered off-topic, are they merely trivial duplicates of [How should I phrase an important question that I need to ask a professor?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/90725/how-should-i-phrase-an-important-question-that-i-need-to-ask-a-professor?noredirect=1&lq=1)
**Follow-up:** Two answers have raised the possibility that questions of this sort might come from questioners with different cultural experiences who need assistance with basic communication skills. In such cases, we can also refer questions to [InterpersonalSkills.SE](https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/).<issue_comment>username_1: Questions about academic etiquette are not necessarily trivial. There are certain issues related to cultural sensitivity that may arise in particular circumstances. (For example, how to address an email is a non-trivial matter in some countries!)
That said, many of the questions could be included under the header of "How to ask ask an important question." (I do note that at the moment the answer does not address the possibility of a discussion that shouldn't be had by email.)
If the question is of essentially the same nature, then it should be closed as a duplicate, the same way we now use the "journal workflow" question to close many similar inquiries as duplicates.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: To corroborate [username_1's answer](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4110/20058), let me give you a semi-serious example of the possible intricacies of academic communication.
Up to 30-40 years ago in my country, Italy, you would have formally addressed a university professor by starting with
>
> Ch.mo prof. X,
>
>
>
The abbreviation *Ch.mo* stands for *Chiarissimo*, which can be translated as *Most Eminent*.
Moreover, if within the text you would have to refer to the professor with a pronoun, you would have quite probably capitalized the pronoun initial.
Nowadays, luckily, these traditions are being abandoned (at least in STEM fields) but sometimes you still get students who use them: maybe they don't use that pompous salutation, but they frequently use capitalized pronouns. When I get such emails, I usually reply: "I'm not worthy of capital letters!". A few students reply that they sent emails to a few old-school professors without capitalizing the pronouns, and without starting with "Ch.mo", and the professors got mad at them.
However, nowadays, many Italian students attend courses which are taught in English, and I've been teaching for about ten years in one such course. And I frequently receive emails in English where every single "You" is capitalized:
>
> Dear Prof. Ortolano,
>
> Could **Y**ou please [...]
>
>
>
At this point I tell them that they should definitely avoid writing emails in English with capitalized pronouns, especially if they're going to write to people around the world because that, yes, would look weird.
So, sometimes, yes, also a simple email can cause headaches for students (and that's why I've answered a few questions of that type along the years).
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: **No: those questions are not off-topic**
Academia has its own rules and to deny that is to deny that there is a world outside academia. As a student, I had to bow in front of Magnificents, Eminents, and other medieval titles mentioned in another answer; once a professor myself, I begged my students to avoid titles with me - leaving them only more perplexed. They don't need to thank profusely when I answer their questions, as it is (part of the reason) why I get my paycheck; contrarily, they regard me as very generous as I am setting time apart from saving the planet/evolving mankind. At times I was offered gifts, a practice that I thought was confined to doctors - a similar priest-like profession in our modern world -always smiling but firmly returning the presents. Academics in many of the world best institutions occasionally adorn themselves as high ranking priests of some archaic religion. The rest of the time, they wear blazers with elbow patches and sandals.
Professors talk and behave very differently from the high school teachers you just said goodby to, or the office manager you are running away from. Students often enroll in universities in distant countries, with very different cultures. Professors everywhere are often dismissive toward undergraduate students. They often have life/death power over their subjugates - no parents-teachers meetings to mediate, no Human Resources offices to help you solve workplace disputes. For as much as we love academia, we need to recognize it's a very quirky world.
**Yes, most of those questions are duplicates**
That is something that is very common to StackExchange websites, and we shouldn't be dismissive either. Your comment is very timely as it goes along very well with [this recently published apology by StackOverflow to its programming newcomers](https://stackoverflow.blog/2018/04/26/stack-overflow-isnt-very-welcoming-its-time-for-that-to-change/?cb=1). The average response from experts to beginners in StackOverflow is: this question is trivial/this question is duplicated, followed by a rain of downvotes and condescending comments. I find Academia to be thousands of times gentler than StackOverflow. Still, the same sectarian attitude is there.
The average Academia recent user is a young student who for the first time is facing what is typically a workplace issue - aggravated by the super-human aura of the professor. This site is here to help people; we should try to help. If a question is really a duplicate, we should kindly point to the question it refers to. If we don't, it means it isn't a duplicate. Let's remember that all those unwritten rules we are so familiar with in Academia, were learned by us making the same trivial mistakes, having the same goofy hesitations we smile at on many of the questions we see on this site.
Upvotes: 4 |
2018/04/27 | 562 | 2,177 | <issue_start>username_0: I haven't found a subreddit with dense source of data on Indian academia (career, education, research education questions) in reddit or in other sites. Sites related to academy (like <https://academia.stackexchange.com/>, i.e. this one) seem to be more general, and non-local. This new subreddit for indian academia, might allow having source for local data on the indian academy.
Here is the link to it: <https://www.reddit.com/r/Indian_Academia/><issue_comment>username_1: You don't "announce" *anything* on the main board. Stack Exchange is **explicitly** a Q&A forum, so such links are considered to be spam, and are therefore always off-topic.
You may mention it in the chat room, but that's about it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I consider it acceptable to make such announcements on Meta Academia or in chat, as they generally pertain to parts of this community. You can also try to get sufficient upvotes on a [community promotion ad](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3961/7734) such that it is shown on the main site.
That being said, you are kind of announcing something that is likely viewed as a competing platform or community or a platform for questions that we do not allow for good reason. Either way, do not expect that such a proposal is met with much enthusiasm.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: [From a previous meta question here, it also appears that you could include a link to that in the "About Me" section of your profile](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1623/is-it-ethical-to-promote-another-stack-exchange-website-in-about-me-section-of-t). That is seen when someone mouses over your identification information, so if you answer questions about academia in India, people who find your answers useful will be more likely to see it.
This next part is perhaps more controversial, but if you encounter a question that is closed as off-topic here (such as polling questions or shopping questions or very situation-specific questions seeking advice) and you think that the subreddit might provide useful answers, you might comment with a suggestion to try that resource.
Upvotes: 2 |
2018/04/29 | 1,994 | 8,579 | <issue_start>username_0: In light of the recent [Stack Overflow post](https://stackoverflow.blog/2018/04/26/stack-overflow-isnt-very-welcoming-its-time-for-that-to-change/?cb=1) on being more welcoming to newcomers, I believe it is worthwhile for us to explore what we can do to help new visitors ease into the site.
While I do not believe we should relax standards for what is considered an acceptable question, nor should we answer repeat questions "just to be nice."
However, it does seem appropriate that we do a better job explaining why we have issues with questions that are posted in a way that helps users try to improve their question if possible, or be a clear explanation of what's wrong.
Are there any other suggestions for how we can implement this initiative here on Academia.SE?<issue_comment>username_1: Something that was pointed out in a recent answer on another question here on meta:
Often a newcomer will ask a question which turns out to be a duplicate. This question will then be marked as such, and often nothing further will happen.
While this is all as it should be, it may leave the newcomer feeling like they did something wrong for not finding the duplicate themselves.
For this reason I propose that when we mark such questions as duplicate, we also make some remark indicating that this is not a fault with the question, and that the existence of this new version will help future visitors to find the answer they need. Hopefully, this will make the newcomer feel more welcome and they will be more inclined to stick around and ask other questions or even answer some.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Adding to Tobias' plea for better explanation of duplicate flags, I suggest we give an explanation more often (whenever we can?) for any close-votes.
Sure, we already have "canned" explanations that come with a close-vote, but since they are necessarily phrased in general terms, the OP may have difficulties to understand what specifically makes their question (for example) opinion-based.
In fact, we *should* always be able to explain how the general close-reason relates to the specific question. Such a reason-giving requirement would not only "be nice" to new users, it would also help safeguard borderline off-topic questions and make us less "trigger-happy".
I sometimes find myself wanting to close questions for being "too broad" just because *I* can't think of an informative answer, or for being "unclear" just because *I* don't quite understand what the issue is. But that doesn't mean that someone with better expertise cannot give a useful answer to a somewhat broad or (to me) opaque question. If others here have similar impulses, it might be a good idea to ask for specificity or clarification, wait if edits are made or useful answers are given, and only then, after a while, decide whether voting to close is actually helpful.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Is it possible to change the minimum reputation to unlock the chat privilege? Or changing it from "privilege" to a "basic right".
If new users had the opportunity to be redirected to the chat they would feel more welcome, having the opportunity to discuss opinion-based questions or being helped by others when facing some confusion/misunderstanding.
Recent example: [Should I do BSc in mathematical physics or theoretical physics?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/108865/should-i-do-bsc-in-mathematical-physics-or-theoretical-physics#comment284904_108865)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: As a relatively new person here, I think the response about duplicates up above is a good one. Just to add to that, I feel like there are times where a question has maybe one answer, and it's not at all comprehensive or directly relevant to the new question being asked, but close enough where some would automatically close it.
I know this is basically asking for more lax standards in closing a duplicate, but I really do feel like there are sometimes pretty unsatisfactorily answered questions from a few years ago and it would be nice to seek a fresh and more relevant (and hopefully comprehensive) response.
Last point (and unrelated to the first)... I was directed to SE by a few colleagues, and they warned that it's mostly for STEM/comp people, and if you're humanities, social science, etc. you won't get much out of it. I guess I don't have an explicit suggestion here, but that feeling has certainly rung true for me so far.
Edited to add: I don't intend this at all to be snarky, but one relatively simple fix would be to figure out how to incentivize more people to answer more questions. I was searching through the first few pages of recent questions just a moment ago, and most questions had 0, 1, or 2 answers. If someone asks a question for the first time and gets 1 answer, they may not think it worth it to return and engage further.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: **Lighten up on enforcing rules for the sake of enforcing rules.** This is a problem all over StackExchange, and academia.SE is no exception.
Comment deletion is a good example. Newcomers may not remember that comments aren't for answers, and may think comments are for short responses. But their (possibly highly upvoted) comment may get deleted for no other reason than too many other comments accumulated below it, so a mod moved ALL the comments to chat. Which is the same as deleting them, for people who have no interest in using chat. A lot of thought goes into some comments, and nothing discourages new users more than semi-arbitrarily deleting the content they contributed. (In fact, I am not a new user, but I still struggle with this. Sometimes, the thing the OP most needs to hear is not a direct answer to their question, so it wouldn't fit as an answer. I have had such comments removed *without even getting a notification*, and it makes me want to contribute to the site less.) At the very least, there should be an upvote threshold above which comments aren't removed so willy-nilly. (Or maybe they can be automatically converted to answers in some situations?)
We should also not be such sticklers for whether something is on-topic. Blatantly off-topic questions should of course be removed, but there seems to be a culture of "when in doubt, say no" just because people like to be sticklers for rules. It's not hard to see how this discourages newcomers. If we're not sure, why not leave the question up and see if any good answers result.
We need something like "Rule 0" which would roughly state "ignore the rules when following them would make the site less useful." This would not only make the site more welcoming, it would make it better.
(The obvious response would be: if the rules are hindering us, we should make better rules and follow those. But life is not so simple. We know good content when we see it, but we can't always write down a finite set of rules that will reliably sort good content from bad.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: I think users should have some better way of selecting tags or some tags should automatically be assigned to a question rather than the user having to explicitly search for a tag that may not necessarily exist.
Also, off-topic questions by new users should be automatically migrated to the suitable SE site rather than closing the question or deleting it which may leave a bad impression on the new user.
Downvotes for answers and questions should be attached with a 'reason' for the downvote so that the user knows what went wrong , this might also help avoid random downvoting.
And i personally think , questions from low reputation users who are fairly new should be put on hold for 10 minutes at a checkpoint once the user submits the question so that the moderators and bots have a chance to filter out very far off or inappropriate questions rather than having to clean up later , also to make up for the 10 minutes , new users can be allowed to post every 30 mins and all the questions that the moderators didn't get a chance to check will get posted automatically after the said 10 minutes.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_7: Please don't overcomplicate yourself. We just need to answer their questions, and they will feel welcome. What about this? We force our lovely moderators to answer each and every newcomer question, no matter what they ask. The new users will see exactly 5 answers from our moderators, they will feel very happy.
I think it will work as our moderators spend most of their awake time on this site anyway.
Upvotes: -1 |
2018/05/01 | 1,069 | 3,581 | <issue_start>username_0: There was recently a [deleted answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/108950/19607) to a [question of mine](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/95176/19607) based on a blog post I read, to which I also attached a bounty. The answer in question is just a verbatim copy-paste from the blog post with a follow-up comment:
>
> @Kimball-Since I have given a correct answer to your question,Please award me a bounty worth +100 reputation within 5 days from today – user92118
>
>
>
In addition I cannot click on the username so I presume either the post was created without an actual account and/or the account was promptly deleted.
Anyway, I don't recall seeing such blatant trolling on this site, but I was wondering: is this an isolated incident or does it happen with some regularity?
PS: I am new to bounties, but it appears I can actually award the bounty to this deleted answer (the +100 is highlighted when I roll over it). Can I? My second reaction to this post was that it was actually quite funny, and if there's no other answer I feel worthy of a bounty why not award it to this just to pile pointlessness on pointlessness (a la the "I figured 1 big pile of garbage was better than 2 smaller piles of garbage" philosophy).<issue_comment>username_1: This is the first time I’ve seen such behavior as a moderator. However, we try to stay on top of getting rid of trolls as soon as they crop up. So please flag any such behavior and we’ll take care of it.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: According to [this question on the main Meta](https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/169225/300001) you cannot actually award bounties to deleted answers, even though the +100 button looks active.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> does it happen with some regularity?
>
>
>
Yes, I saw it before. Copy and paste the answer from somewhere, leave a comment asking for bounty and then delete the account. Actually, this is how I caught it. The moment I saw it, I knew it's coming again. So, I took the first few lines of the answer and Google it and then found where it came from. I then flagged it.
I am going to provide another example of an incident of this kind. Hopefully, the Mods can tell us whether they are the same user or not.
[A deleted answer](https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/85475/546) for the question [What to do when a good article is published in a predatory online journal that disappears?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/84244/546)
The deleted answer was copied and pasted from <https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0917504017300217> as pointed out by @InquisitiveLurker [at that time](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/84244/what-to-do-when-a-good-article-is-published-in-a-predatory-online-journal-that-d/85475#comment215085_85475).
And as you can see the comment (now deleted) left by the poster
>
> @Joe74-Now that I have given an answer to your question,please award me a bounty worth +100 reputation within 5 days from today
>
>
>
To me, if this is not the same user, then the user who trolled this time must be a copy cat (pun intended).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Please adhere to the following with these posts:
* Flag as rude/abusive (it’s abusive of our community). Six such flags suffice to kill the post. Using custom flags or NAA/VLQ flags just slows things down.
* If nobody has done so before you, leave a comment linking to whatever was copied. (This way, it only has to be searched once.)
* Do not do anything else.
Upvotes: 3 |
2018/05/03 | 3,857 | 13,169 | <issue_start>username_0: There was a [recent SE blog post](https://stackoverflow.blog/2018/04/26/stack-overflow-isnt-very-welcoming-its-time-for-that-to-change/) about promoting diversity and niceness at SE, and an associated [SE Meta question](https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/309645/287826).
Food for thought for us at Academia SE!
Could someone provide some recent stats regarding gender distribution of Academia SE participants? Academia has been male dominated for a long time (in some fields more than others; and although women are becoming more and more present as time goes on), and it's my impression that that imbalance may carry over to our participation levels at Academia SE. What do the stats say? I realize there are lots of participants who have not indicated their gender. But it would be interesting to see what is known about gender distribution here.
The blog post contains a brief survey questionnaire. I hope Academia SE participants will take part.<issue_comment>username_1: It’s not possible to report gender data, because it’s not something that Stack Exchange asks for or collects.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: ***tl;dr*-** This post's a data dump for:
* demographic data and other diversity facts;
* links to SE content about diversity.
This post is a community wiki, so please feel free to contribute edits!
---
Demographic info, informal polls
================================
Several SE sites have performed informal polls, though it should be understood that informal polls like these tend to suffer from strong sampling biases.
1. [SE.Academia poll](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/467/) and [corresponding discussion](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/468/).
2. [SE.TeX poll](https://tex.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1564/) and [corresponding discussion](https://tex.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1581/discussion-about-tex-community-polls).
3. [SE.ReverseEngineering](https://reverseengineering.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/213/), no corresponding discussion.
4. [SE.Mathematica](https://mathematica.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1310/), no corresponding discussion.
Demographic info, for StackOverflow
===================================
Most SE sites don't collect demographic info, but the big exception is the annual developer survey for StackOverflow:
* [2015 developer survey](https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2015);
* [2016 developer survey](https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2016);
* [2017 developer survey](https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2017);
* [2018 developer survey](https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2018/);
* [2019 developer survey](https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2019/).
*Figures below are from the [2018 developer survey](https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2018/).*
### [Geographic location](https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2018/#geography)
### [Gender](https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2018/#demographics):
* **Male:** 92.9%;
* **Female:** 6.9%;
* **Non-binary, genderqueer, or gender non-conforming:** 0.9%.
### [Race/ethnicity](https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2018/#developer-profile-race-and-ethnicity):
* **White or of European descent:** 74.2%
* **South Asian:** 11.5%
* **Hispanic or Latino/Latina:** 6.7%
* **East Asian:** 5.1%
* **Middle Eastern:** 4.1%
* **Black or of African descent:** 2.8%
* **Native American, Pacific Islander, or Indigenous Australian:** 0.8%
### [Sexual orientation](https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2018/#developer-profile-sexual-orientation):
* **Straight or heterosexual:** 93.2%
* **Bisexual or Queer:** 4.3%
* **Gay or Lesbian:** 2.4%
* **Asexual:** 1.9%
---
Demographic info, by field in American academia
===============================================
Bachelor's degrees in the US, though probably reasonably reflective of graduate degree distributions as well as the student body academics at universities see everyday:
[](http://www.randalolson.com/2014/06/14/percentage-of-bachelors-degrees-conferred-to-women-by-major-1970-2012/)
Key observations:
* Computer Science and Engineering are both heavily male-dominated.
* Health Professions, Public Administration, Education, and Psychology are heavily female-dominated.
---
StackExchange posts on diversity issues
=======================================
### Q&A about general diversity issues:
1. From SE.Academia:
* ["What is the purpose of women-only meetings, panels, conferences, etc. in academia?"](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/77123/)
* ["Why are women even less represented in engineering than in other STEM?"](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/97267/)
* ["What is being done to make the academic environment more women friendly?"](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2113/)
2. From SE.ComputerScienceEducators:
* ["Why did the percentage of CS bachelor's degrees going to women peak in 1984?"](https://cseducators.stackexchange.com/questions/2875/)
* ["Why did interest in CS majors plummet in the United States after the mid-80s?"](https://cseducators.stackexchange.com/questions/2942/)
3. From SE.Skeptics:
* ["Do biological males who were castrated at birth and raised as females often behave like stereotypical men?"](https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/39232/)
### Q&A about StackExchange-specific diversity issues:
1. Related to the recent blog post, ["Stack Overflow Isn’t Very Welcoming. It’s Time for That to Change."](https://stackoverflow.blog/2018/04/26/stack-overflow-isnt-very-welcoming-its-time-for-that-to-change/) (2018-04-26):
* This question.
* ["What examples are there for Not Being Very Welcoming?"](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/366867/), StackOverflow.Meta
* ["Is Stack Overflow really racist/sexist?"](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/366937/), StackOverflow.Meta
* ["Does Stack Exchange really want to conflate newbies with women/people of color?"](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/366665/), StackOverflow.Meta
* ["Is the Implicit Association Test effective at determining an individual's biases?"](https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/41176/), SE.Skeptics
2. General discussion unrelated to the recent blog:
* ["Gendered pronoun usage"](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3484/), SE.Academia.Meta
* ["How do we feel about gender specific terms?"](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3280/), SE.Academia.Meta
3. Specific cases of reported issues:
* ["Apologies and parting notes"](https://interpersonal.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2838/apologies-and-parting-notes), SE.InterpersonalSkills.Meta
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I think a particularly valuable part of this question is the encouragement for everyone on Academia SE to take part in [the SE survey](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdCQNtu4KHesQz-2AzRSl8z6d4_cLgPj4B7cjNpPePc-04seA/formResponse), which allows a space for some short comments, as well as an opportunity to volunteer for follow-up research. The more that active users engage with that, the better a picture we'll get of what's working and what opportunities there are for change.
The more that this is qualitative research, rather than just counting people up in categories, the more useful I think this effort will be. That sort of user experience work can surface complex issues and potential solutions. On the other hand, it's hard to tell what benchmark Academia SE demographics should be compared to.
* For instance, it's a worldwide site, so the meaning of certain race/ethnicity categories is hard to interpret.
+ People of South Asian and East Asian descent are 16.5% of the SE developers (according to username_2's great answer), but 35% of all people in the world live in China and India.
+ Should it be benchmarked against the world's English-speaking population? Maybe not, since most academics around the world are incentivized to work in English.
+ More deeply, asking about race/ethnicity is not based on some idea that all people who are white or of European descent are interchangeable or share a deep set of characteristics. Rather, the category provides useful information in the context of a given country; a particular race/ethnicity means they are likely to have been treated in a certain way or that we are more likely to be able to predict other correlated traits.
+ So far in the academic literature, I haven't seen treatment of how to ask meaningful world-wide questions about race/ethnicity, other than tailoring the questions to different countries/cultures to capture the distinctions that matter in that society. (I am very aware that many people find the idea of "race" itself offensive, particularly Europeans.)
* SE users are self-selecting in a lot of ways.
+ I speculate that Academia SE users are more likely to be early career rather than late career academics, which might make the pool more demographically diverse. (Not sure the extent to which undergraduates and grad students are involved.)
+ Because SO and SE are built on programming questions, people who do programming and computational work are more likely to discover and sign up on Academia SE. I believe that even within academic disciplines in the U.S., more quantitative and computational work tends to be done by men. (Definitely my own experience; I believe I've seen documentation of this, and would edit in a reference if anyone has one off-hand.)
+ Are there elements of SE culture that are further causing self-selection? In bad ways?
A lot of measurements seem like their meaning should be self-evident, but that's rarely the case. It's also very easy for people to list statistics and for others to infer blame from those statements. Further, when people know stats but aren't used to social science or stats about people, it's easy to come up with calculations that are technically correct but misleading or misinterpreted. It may be most productive if we can agree on some basic descriptive facts and withhold normative judgment from those numbers alone.
---
When I saw this question, I became really worried it would explode into the conflict we've seen on other parts of the site in response to this issue. My initial thoughts were that the most productive way forward might be to not press the issue but to keep doing useful things, like Atlanta's rebranding itself as ["The city too busy to hate."](https://www.coca-colacompany.com/stories/the-night-atlanta-truly-became-the-city-too-busy-to-hate-)
I don't think avoiding the real problems people experience is the right thing to do, but in this case I think that those problems are better explored by people discussing their experiences, rather than reading into demographic numbers.
---
Edit: I took a look at the questions in [the poll Massimo Ortolano commented about](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/467/20058), and those seem like they may be helpful for Academia SE to understand its users.
Edit: Why am I hesitant about this conversation? Because it's being addressed in different ways across SE/SO. [This answer on SE Meta covers a lot of it](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/309513/stack-overflow-isnt-very-welcoming-especially-marginalized-groups/309538#309538). Then there are various ones (responses to the blog post and others on the topic) that demonstrate how volatile these discussions can be:
[SE Meta 1](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/309513/stack-overflow-isnt-very-welcoming-especially-marginalized-groups), [SE Meta 2](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/309612/does-stack-exchange-have-an-ethical-responsibility-to-address-global-discriminat), [SE Meta 3](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/309514/inclusion-project-emphasize-stack-exchanges-culture-of-inclusion), [Interpersonal Skills (IPS) Meta 1](https://interpersonal.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2838/apologies-and-parting-notes), [IPS Meta 2](https://interpersonal.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2811/is-this-a-site-that-wants-to-exclude-people), [IPS Meta 3](https://interpersonal.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2776/does-the-be-nice-policy-cover-potential-rants-about-general-groups-of-people), [SO Meta 1](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/366645/please-ask-if-there-is-a-problem-before-telling-us-there-is-a-problem), [SO Meta 2](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/366665/does-stack-exchange-really-want-to-conflate-newbies-with-women-people-of-color), [SO Meta 3](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/309908/declining-numbers-of-women-in-programming-what-can-so-do-to-help), [SO Meta 4](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/281295/does-the-so-community-view-itself-as-gender-neutral), [SO Meta 5](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/366937/is-stack-overflow-really-racist-sexist), [SO Meta 6](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/366867/what-examples-are-there-for-not-being-very-welcoming), [SO Meta 7](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/366858/when-is-stack-overflow-going-to-stop-demonizing-the-quality-concerned-users-who)
Upvotes: 2 |
2018/05/13 | 1,450 | 6,221 | <issue_start>username_0: I noticed that [this](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/109343/slept-through-final-professor-is-giving-me-a-zero-and-failing-me-is-there-any) question was marked as a "controversial post." The text says:
>
> Controversial Post — You may use comments ONLY to suggest improvements. You may use answers ONLY to provide a solution to the specific question asked above. Moderators will remove debates, arguments or opinions without notice.
>
>
>
I find this concept morally dubious.
To illustrate, here's a statement made in an answer that is EXTREMELY opinion-laden:
>
> So, rather than trying to plead for another chance, rather than trying to "see what can be done," the solution is to recognize that you have made a serious error that cannot be rectified.
>
>
>
I strongly disagree with this highly controversial statement, and I note that it hasn't been "removed without notice," most likely because it fits with the politics or meta-philosophies of certain moderators.
Further to this, I imagine, there were equally controversial statements that *were* removed simply because they didn't fit with such meta-philosophies. If that's not the case for this particular question, then at least it's probably the case for other questions so-marked as controversial.
My point is this: the controversial post mechanism, which by its nature does not require the *consistent* removal of controversial or opinion-laden statements, but only gives moderators the *option* of removal, consequently confers inordinate power to moderators and allows them to impose their political views and personal opinions upon others to a much greater extent than can be considered necessary or morally sound.
Interfering with people's freedom of speech is already problematic from an ethical point of view, but when this interference is at the discretion of authorities and policing is inconsistent, it becomes orders of magnitude more problematic. For these reasons and others, I oppose the use of "controversial question" mechanism and I think that academia.stackexchange should search for more ethically sound ways of reducing interpersonal conflict.<issue_comment>username_1: >
> Further to this, I imagine, there were equally controversial statements that were removed simply because they didn't fit with such meta-philosophies. If that's not the case for this particular question, then at least it's probably the case for other questions so-marked as controversial.
>
>
>
Your views here are incorrect. There are two deleted answers. One was deleted by the owner of the answer and one was deleted by the community bot in response to spam flags. The spam answer was clearly spam. The only things deleted by moderators were a few chatty comments (e.g., +1 great answer). A couple of comment conversations were also moved to chat and comments on those questions/answers have been repeatedly pruned since then. As we can only move comments to chat once, those additional comments were deleted.
The post notice is relatively new and while I have not gone back to every question that it has been applied to, I can assure you that moderators have not been indiscriminately deleting content.
>
> My point is this: the controversial post mechanism, which by its nature does not require the consistent removal of controversial or opinion-laden statements, but only gives moderators the option of removal, consequently confers inordinate power to moderators and allows them to impose their political views and personal opinions upon others to a much greater extent than can be considered necessary or morally sound.
>
>
>
The post notice does not confer any power to moderators. We have the power to indiscriminately and unilaterally remove whatever content we want in the absence of the notice. We were elected mods because the community believes that we can use the additional moderator powers to improve the site and that when we make mistakes that we will take responsibility for those mistakes and make sure they get corrected. What the post notice does is remind users that if things get heated, a moderator might clean things up. Which of course we can, and do, do even if we haven't warned users.
**Why was the post notice added** You might be asking yourself if we don't delete stuff, why even add the post notice. I added the post notice because there were a large number of answers and comments on the question. This generated a flag which alerted me to the question. I protected the question, as we usually do with questions that have lots of answers and comments and are on the HNQ list. I also moved one comment chain to chat. I felt that the question would likely generate a large number of additional comments and even with the post notice and comment saying *additional comments will be moved to chat*, it has. Since we can only move comments once, I felt an additional warning that comments would be deleted was in order. At some point a moderator will need to read through the new comments and decide if they should be deleted. The post notice is designed, in my opinion, to cut down on these situations.
*Note that I have edited the post in reaction to finding out another mod deleted comments after the comment thread was moved to chat. As you may have heard the comment moderation interface is not the best. I applogize for missing these comments the first time around*.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Moderators do not delete or censor posts because they contain opinions we disagree with. If they run afoul of community guidelines—such as using obscenities, posting spam links or nonsense—that’s different. (The former is cleaned up as “lightly” as possible, the latter gets deleted.)
Even in the case of controversial posts, though, there is the possibility of discussing it in chat. Remember that part of the goal of SE is to provide curation for future users. Having long, tangential discussions that do not help understand, clarify, or improve the question do not help towards that aim. We do not typically resort to that designation—as I’ve gone on record, it should be used extremely sparingly—but from time to time it becomes necessary.
Upvotes: 3 |
2018/05/15 | 3,696 | 14,783 | <issue_start>username_0: The question [What was offensive about the "ladies lingerie department" joke, and how can I avoid offending people in a similar way?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/109789/7734) has caused a lot of controversy in comments and answers, in particular with respect to whether it shall be open or closed. Since any discussion on this in the comments or chat will inevitably get very tedious due to other matters being discussed in parallel, we (read: some moderators) have decided to lock the question and take this issue here.
Be aware that there are already seventy deleted comments on this question and its answers, some of which were [not nice](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice).
### This Question
In an answer please propose how we should proceed with this question:
* Should it stay closed?
* Should it be reopened as it is?
* Should it be changed in a specific manner and then reopened?
Please answer only with respect to this site.
Migration would only happen if the target site wants it (which is unlikely) and thus not something we can decide.
### Food for Thought
It would be great if you could address these questions in an answer:
* Does this question fit our scope?
* Is the question reasonably narrow?
* Is it reasonably clear what is being asked?
* Can it be avoided that this question turns into a popularity contest?
---
**Update**: A [new question](https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/109937/32436) has been posted, following from the discussion below <NAME>'s answer.
The new question has some discussion [here](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4165/follow-on-to-the-lingerie-elevator-question).<issue_comment>username_1: I think the question should stay/be closed for a number of reasons. First, I do not agree with the arguments that
>
> I think it is wrong to assume that no part of this is specific to academic culture (if that's the case, that's part of the answer)
>
>
>
I cannot possibly see how a comment about women's lingerie can be construed as having anything to do with academia. While the comment was made at an academic conference, it would have been just as offensive at any other event (e,g., a trade show). In fact, none of the current answers provide any academic specific context.
Second, the question fails 3 of the 5 [don't ask](https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask) tests
>
> every answer is equally valid: “What’s your favorite \_\_\_\_\_\_?”
>
>
>
Why I find X offensive is no more or less valid than why someone else finds it offensive (or not)
>
> there is no actual problem to be solved: “I’m curious if other people feel like I do.”
>
>
>
This is essentially what is being asked
>
> your question is just a rant in disguise: “\_\_\_\_\_\_ sucks, am I right?”
>
>
>
I cannot help but think one of the motivations for asking the question is that the OP feels the sanctions (and negative press) were unfair.
Third, the question is rather broad and I believe requires an answer that covers the history of sexual harassment/discrimination and the ["Elevator Floor Announcement" trope](http://allthetropes.wikia.com/wiki/Elevator_Floor_Announcement). While it is possible that someone will provide a sufficiently broad answer, I think it is unlikely given the number of answers the question has already received.
Finally, I think the question is reasonably clear in asking "in what way is X offensive". The problem is that the answer really depends on the person you ask. I can assure you there are a number of topics that my grandfather would not find offensive, that I find astonishingly out of place. I think the answers are going to continue to be based on personal experience/views which are controversial and lead to extensive discussion in the comments.
I do not think editing the question can address the fact that I do not see how a comment about women's lingerie can be construed as having anything to do with academia. I also do not see how anything short of a major rewrite would transform the question from a bad subjective to a good subjective. The broadness of the question is not a huge issue in my opinion and if everything else could be addressed through edits, I think could be ignored in reopening the question. It might be possible to address the personal experience/views issue by rephrasing the question as "Why might groups of individuals construe the comment as offensive?", but I am not sure that is the case and it does not address the boat programming and bad subjective nature of the question.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: ### The question should be open to receive answers, but with lots of structure.
First, I'll respond to the specific points raised by username_1.
1. "I cannot possibly see how a comment about women's lingerie can be construed as having anything to do with academia."
It wasn't the underwear that had to do with academia, it was the *setting* where the underwear remark occurred, that created the connection with academia, and the nature of the question "How can I avoid a faux pas of this type?".
2. "The question fails 3 of the 5 don't ask tests."
(a) "Every answer is equally valid, as in, “What’s your favorite \_\_\_\_\_\_?”. Why I find X offensive is no more or less valid than why someone else finds it offensive (or not)."
I believe it's possible to provide a comprehensive answer which explains each of the levels on which the elevator remark was offensive. There are innumerable answers on this site that involve a *list* of points. Just because a question has a multi-part answer doesn't mean it isn't well posed.
2. (b) "There is no actual problem to be solved, as in, 'I’m curious if other people feel like I do.' This is essentially what is being asked."
Actually, OP starting out by saying, Such-and-so respected body found that the remark was offensive. He goes on to say, help me understand *how* it was offensive, and suggest how I can avoid being inadvertently offensive. So, OP isn't curious if others share the respected body's determination that the remark was offensive. In fact, he asked that people not get into a debate about that, and simply take the respected body's position as a given.
2. (c) "Your question is just a rant in disguise, as in, '\_\_\_\_\_\_ sucks, am I right?'. I cannot help but think one of the motivations for asking the question is that the OP feels the sanctions (and negative press) were unfair."
I didn't take the question that way. It seemed to me that OP was asking how to avoid giving offense *because he wanted to know.* The question wasn't a rant in disguise because rants in disguise don't go past the complaining stage, or if they do, the constructive part is of less importance than the complaining part. (For hybrid posts, that combine rant + constructive part, there's an easy rescue -- edit out the rant part; and this leaves a well-posed question that can be left open.)
3. "Third, the question is rather broad and I believe requires an answer that covers the history of sexual harassment/discrimination and the 'Elevator Floor Announcement' trope. While it is possible that someone will provide a sufficiently broad answer, I think it is unlikely given the number of answers the question has already received."
I looked at your link for the trope; it appears to be tangential. Regarding the history of sexual harassment and gender discrimination, while that's a fascinating topic, the question can be answered without writing a historical treatise.
There are other questions on this site that someone might feel tempted to answer with an overblown answer. That doesn't mean the questions are badly posed.
5. "I think the answers are going to continue to be based on personal experience/views which are controversial and lead to extensive discussion in the comments."
In my opinion, a subjective answer based purely on personal experience wouldn't be a well-constructed answer.
(If you're still concerned about this, the moderators *could* create a ground rule for this question, that answers that consist of nothing but the OP's subjective experience will be removed.)
---
One of the major challenges Academia SE faces has to do precisely with gender. Each question related to gender issues is a learning opportunity for individuals who participate here, and for the community as a whole.
I do appreciate the headaches this question creates for the moderators; but I have a lot of confidence in our moderators. I think they're up to the job of keeping things organized and civilized -- with the help of community members responsibly raising flags when needed.
One or more good answers to the question OP raised would add to the value of the site.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It makes no sense to open it.
* If you make it generic, and remove the actual quotation there is no
question in the question. It would basically be asking "What are some
offensive things you could say to women at a conference?"
* If we leave it open with the quotation intact, that means we're OK
with people posting rude comments they hear at a conference and
asking "Was this woman overreacting to this comment?" ... which
really isn't the point of this site.
There *are* some questions about taking offense that would make sense here. For example, someone insisting on "Miss" over "Doctor" or "Professor," but we're not here to judge passing rude remarks an academic is subjected to.
I find it hard to believe the OP thought there was some specific academia-related reason the comment was in poor taste, and agree with username_1's opinion they disagreed with the negative press.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: Having just reviewed my supervisor's training on workplace harassment, I have strong opinions on this question. **Short version: it can have a simple and definitive answer, and should be edited and re-opened**
1. This is not really an Academia question, but a general question about professionalism in the workplace. As such, one might argue that it should be migrated to Workplace.SE.
2. At the same time, a lot of the questions and answers on this site boil down to "yes, academia is also a workplace, and professional behavior is required." I think this is important, because many people seem to hold beliefs that academia is otherwise.
3. As such, I believe the question can be answered quite simply and in much the same way that it would on Workplace.SE.
In my opinion, the core problem with the question is that it invites "explain this joke to me" answers. It should be edited to focus more clearly on the "How do I avoid workplace harassment?" question instead, and answers should be dealt with similarly.
---
More concretely, I believe the answerable concern in the core of the question is:
>
> I am worried because I don't understand precisely what was offensive, so I fear that I might do something similar.
>
>
>
I would consider the question to basically be suffering an X-Y problem because the asker has jumped to an attempted solution of "understand why this joke is offensive" rather than sticking with the problem of "I fear that I might do something similar."
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_5: I think that this is a good faith question which we should attempt to give a good faith answer to, and I like several of the answers which were given before it was closed. It could also go on workplace or IPS, but I do think academic norms are different enough that it would do well here.
There are a number of academics who don't see how what, from their point of view, seems like a light joke, can feel exclusive and unwecloming to others. Off the top of my head, I remember [Should academic papers necessarily carry a sober tone?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/9396) , [Would students feel uncomfortable if I include in my lecture a quote which is somewhat sexually suggestive?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/100620) and [Is it appropriate for my professor to include gender offensive material that is unrelated to the class subject matter in the course notes?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/57074) .
I think the answers to those questions are helpful to academics who are proceeding in good faith but don't see the problem.
One of the things I love about most of the stackexchange network is that it is a place where you can ask very basic questions and get clearly written answers. Not every place should have to be like that (indeed, my primary SE site, mathoverflow, is very explicitly not!) but I think it is good that most of the SE network is.
As regards the question of whether this would be the same in any workplace: I don't think so. As an academic, I continually receive the message from my employers and my community that they are very concerned about gender representation and have put a lot of thought into issues of microaggressions. I hear the same thing from people I know who work in tech, but I don't hear it from doctors, lawyers, musicians or chefs. I think gender issues are more tense in this community, so I think an answer explaining the norms in this community would be helpful. Indeed, I suspect that math is different from political science, and it might be best if we got an answer from someone in the political science world.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: Honestly I don't understand why
[How can I avoid inadvertently offending my female peers and getting into trouble for it?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/109937/how-can-i-avoid-inadvertently-offending-my-female-peers-and-getting-into-trouble)
is open and
[What was offensive about the "ladies lingerie department" joke, and how can I avoid offending people in a similar way?](https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/109789/what-was-offensive-about-the-ladies-lingerie-department-joke-and-how-can-i-av)
Is closed.
They are both still basically asking the exact same question in a different way.
I think the original question was formatted in a much better way with more context.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_7: My 10 cents, it would be good to see it on the site, and open, if people are able to control their emotions and address it in a methodical and rational way. Particularly if commenting is monitored.
These types of topics can become highly charged quickly and this can circumvent constructive discussion and possible resolution of these issues.
Is it relevant, yes. It is interesting and elucidating what type of behaviour is acceptable in this type of situation and breaking it down into the basic parts of why something is not appropriate. Academic situations abide by strict codes of conduct, so exploring what breaches these is important.
Upvotes: 2 |
2018/05/16 | 259 | 1,037 | <issue_start>username_0: For some reasons I need to know about the level of research conducted in a certain university (**not because I want to study there**: I got my Ph.D. years ago). Specifically, I'm interested in a certain department. I did some due diligence, such as looking at the Google Scholar profile of one of the professors, and looking at the website, but I didn't get a conclusive answer. Can I ask this question on Academia.SE?<issue_comment>username_1: Not sure what "level of research" implies, but I imagine that would not be a good question for this site, as that's fairly subjective. I can't imagine what we'd post beyond what you already were able to find for yourself.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The question you propose would be a [shopping question](https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3657/7734) as it asks us to evaluate an individual university.
What you can ask about is *how* to evaluate the research level of an anonymous university (unless we already have a question on that).
Upvotes: 2 |
Subsets and Splits