4 ms·

As long as there isn't a push to fix it and prevent it and stop it, and coach around it, the issue doesn't get solved. That sounds like defeatist attitude. St

As long as there isn't a push to fix it and prevent it and stop it, and coach around it, the issue doesn't get solved. That sounds like defeatist attitude. Stack Exchange could add a rule forbidding asking why or adding answers that have caveats the question asker already said in op were unacceptable and deal with part of the issue They could also add a system to review, rate, and appeal moderator actions, and penalize people who's moderator actions aren't proper. They could also add a regular segment to their blog or meta that is just about showcasing improper moderator actions in the light of this is why they thought that was the proper action, this is what they missed, this is how we can avoid that kind of mistake in the future. But all of this really has to be built in from the ground up, as no existing mod community with go along with that being added after the fact.

LeoNatan25 7y ago
> Stack Exchange could add a rule forbidding asking why or adding answers that have caveats the question asker already said in op were unacceptable and deal with part of the issue Any such answer I see, I flag as not an answer to the question, and those answers are often converted to comments or deleted. It seems you are not really familiar with all the tools in your disposal on SO. > They could also add a system to review, rate, and appeal moderator actions, and penalize people who's moderator actions aren't proper. These tools already exists, sans the penalizing. The whole idea is not to penalize anyone. Just as users are not penalized for asking bad questions, likewise users are not penalized for potentially bad votes.
thrower123 7y ago
It's a realistic attitude. When you have been around for more than a couple of these cycles, you just see the same things happen, over and over and over. It's very difficult to sustain a technical solution in the face of human nature that moves at such a comparatively glacial pace.
pjc50 7y ago
> Stack Exchange could add a rule forbidding asking why .. that would make the outcome significantly more frustrating, as the only way to discover the real requirements is then to post an answer which the questioner regards as wrong.
- vonmoltke 7y ago
  SE is a collection of question answering sites, not requirements-gathering sites. The network has a borderline-psychotic devotion to the Q&A format. In that light, just answer the question that was presented. Identifying the "real requirements" is out of scope unless the question itself makes no sense.
  - mark-r 7y ago
    It's not at all uncommon for the question to not make sense until you get some supporting information.

LeoNatan25 7y ago

> Stack Exchange could add a rule forbidding asking why or adding answers that have caveats the question asker already said in op were unacceptable and deal with part of the issue Any such answer I see, I flag as not an answer to the question, and those answers are often converted to comments or deleted. It seems you are not really familiar with all the tools in your disposal on SO. > They could also add a system to review, rate, and appeal moderator actions, and penalize people who's moderator actions aren't proper. These tools already exists, sans the penalizing. The whole idea is not to penalize anyone. Just as users are not penalized for asking bad questions, likewise users are not penalized for potentially bad votes.

thrower123 7y ago

It's a realistic attitude. When you have been around for more than a couple of these cycles, you just see the same things happen, over and over and over. It's very difficult to sustain a technical solution in the face of human nature that moves at such a comparatively glacial pace.

pjc50 7y ago

> Stack Exchange could add a rule forbidding asking why .. that would make the outcome significantly more frustrating, as the only way to discover the real requirements is then to post an answer which the questioner regards as wrong.

vonmoltke 7y ago
SE is a collection of question answering sites, not requirements-gathering sites. The network has a borderline-psychotic devotion to the Q&A format. In that light, just answer the question that was presented. Identifying the "real requirements" is out of scope unless the question itself makes no sense.
- mark-r 7y ago
  It's not at all uncommon for the question to not make sense until you get some supporting information.