35

I have been a moderator on this site for quite a while and am pretty active on the site myself. So I think I have quite a lot of experience with how the community reacts to certain questions. Let me tell you what would have happened if I had left that question open. Phase 1: The big Trump roast The mostly Anti-Trump audience of the community would have ...


27

I agree with SamIAm that your question is too meta, and because of that seems to promote a specific cause, which is off-topic (I would disagree with Philipp, that a potentially on-topic question can/should be closed because it could cause additional off-topic commentary). I would remove all that irrelevant meta commentary (which would basically leave you ...


20

I don't think you can every prove good faith – no matter what rules or advice we give, there will be concern trolls who are happy to abuse them. I think the best thing you can do is interact with the people reacting to your question and work hard to address their concerns. Generally, it's a matter of switching to a neutral-point-of-view, removing leading ...


11

General principles rather than having any chance to improve my question, it is closed. Closing is a chance to improve your question before it is answered. Once a question is answered, your ability to change it goes down as edits can invalidate existing answers. So the proper procedure is to close the question first, to prevent answers. When edits ...


11

The most immediate problem with your post is that it violates some basic rules of Composition and Style. These aren't Stack Exchange rules per se, they're good practices for writing in general. Get to the point. You spend too many words explaining this theory of yours before you get to the actual question. We don't need to know your theory in order to ...


11

A desire for revenge is not tolerated on this site, @guest271314. Instead of focusing oneself on hurting other users who voted to close posts, one should see if these posts can be improved. Other than this, Use the Force, Luke: A simple Stack Exchange API query returns a list of Closed Questions originated by a certain User. Further playing with the ...


11

I'm going to go ahead and post some of my thoughts on the question in question, specifically, where it might have problems. The majority of your question is a meta-commentary about other questions. This meta-commentary is mostly dead weight, and should be drastically reduced if not outright removed from your question. Your question cited a Professor and ...


11

Part of the problem has been people Sealioning (a type of bad-faith) the issue on multiple sites. In Charcoal (anti-spam project) we track mentions of the Holocaust. An excellent example happened here two weeks ago with this post asking a seriously incendiary question. As such, I've tended to err on the side of caution with regards to questions about anti-...


10

Welcome to Politics Stack Exchange. Please note that the purpose of this website is to teach and learn about politics and political processes. We are not here to convince others of our political views or spread awareness for political issues. For that reason we generally try to write questions and answers on this website which stay neutral and do not take ...


9

I haven't read the question, but FWIW -9 downvotes (and counting), and zero upvotes, is a sign that the question isn't controversial at all. Only troll types of questions get that type of verdict. And just the very first line of the question is such a huge troll that it warrants a downvote and close vote then and there. Controversial questions get positive ...


9

Frankly I don't think there's much to be gained by closing a question just because it questions a practice that people consider to be racist. As long as they're not maliciously disparaging anyone or any groups, the question should probably stand. And in case you're wondering how you detect whether someone is being malicious or not, you can use context ...


8

There are two ways to cast close votes on a question (for users with sufficient privileges, of course): via the review queue by clicking on "close" below the question itself The close-votes cast via these two methods are added. But only those cast via the review queue appear in the review history. Those cast on the question itself do not.


8

What was your goal in asking the question? (really think about this one) What do you think an acceptable answer to this question should include? Do you already have you mind made up about the question you're asking? IMO, that question stank of being rhetorical as soon as I saw it. Edit; In future, look out for accidentally putting skub (or anti-skub) in ...


7

There are two kinds of aspects to building a canal. The engineering aspects. Is it possible to build a canal from A to B? What would it cost? How long would it take? What physical obstacles are there and how could they be circumvented? The political aspects. Is there political will do it? Is there relevant political opposition? What are the geopolitical ...


7

I'd just let the 'roller coaster' do its thing because that seems to be entirely by design. There are certain time limits to the close votes so the roller coaster won't go on infinitely (at least not in the short term). All in all, it's not ideal that questions get closed and reopened repeatedly, but it's not the end of the world either. Fewer close votes As ...


7

As I mentioned in a comment under the question, I think it's still too broad even when narrowed down to a single country: @Matcha_boy98 it's still pretty broad. How a country makes policy is quite complex, too much for an answer here. Consider for example this Wikipedia article on the Government of Japan. I suggest reading such articles first and then ...


7

There was a comment by the initial close-voter; I can't remember it exactly, but it was to the effect of: The UK and US are similar enough politically that the answer will be the same. Unfortunately, they edited that comment into the auto-generated "Does this answer your question?" comment, which gets deleted once the question is closed, so you must not ...


7

The wording is confusing, but reopen votes and the reopen review queue are actually 2 separate things. A question gets reopened when it gets sufficient reopen votes. To enable improved or improperly closed questions to get reopened, certain actions get the question put into the reopen queue to get additional attention. In the queue, people can review the ...


6

The answers so far show some current models of moderation, but none of the moderators address the question of whether or not racism is a objective fact. That is, depending on the definition or standard, one might be racist: by creed, membership, (in an avowedly racist group, like the KKK) or ideas. In deeds and actions, or sometimes inactions. Both. But ...


6

The question had issues to begin with. Note that putting a question on hold is not a rejection of that question. It means that the question still has issues which need to be resolved before constructive answers should be posted. In this particular case, the question was about a hypothetical scenario which was quite far away from reality. Also, it has ...


6

To quote you a comment [I echo/endorse] from under your (new) question, before it was deleted: Yes there are definitions, but which one to use? The opinion comes in to play when arguing whether any single act counts as "proof of fascism." To some putting kids in cages is absolutely an act of Fascism, to others it is simply following the law. – ...


6

It's important to note that there's both good and bad subjective If we can avoid conversations that are — and this is the really tricky part — too subjective, we can maintain the ideals of great Q&A in the face of completely subjective topics. We can avoid falling into the predictable destructive patterns of random discussion, debate, and opinion that ...


6

For the questions in your post: Why is President Trump making such a big deal about fake news, and specifically targeting reputable organizations like The New York Times and CNN? While the wording here is leading, the question is answerable and good answers were given, with sources, from different perspectives (and, honestly, the truth is probably a ...


5

The answer already posted by @Philipp confirms that macroeconomics is within scope here, but doesn't really explain how to resolve the situation when a question is legitimately on topic at two or more SEs. As such I'd argue it doesn't answer your question completely. I did post a similar question to Meta.SE not long ago (Is "closer match to another SE&...


5

We have already established in 2014 that macroeconomics is in scope on this website. I therefor reopened the question (two other users already casted reopen votes at that point).


5

First one is easily explained by the fact that the original down-voting and closing pertained to original, bad, version of that question, whose title wasn't the objective-ish answerable "plausible outcomes" but instead a wholly subjective speculative "What is going to happen after the Catalan referendum?" Please note that once a user fixed the question up ...


5

Yes, a question which is closed can be reopened. Just as with closing, this requires 5 votes by regular (>500 reputation) users or one vote by a moderator (user with a ♦ behind their username). When a question you consider on-topic gets put on hold, I recommend to: find out what's wrong with it by reading the comments on it (it is good etiquette, although ...


5

So, even though fascism has well-established dictionary definitions and encyclopedic references, some people decided that there was no way to provide answers based on facts and references. Not quite. Fascism is a hard thing to define because it means different things to different people. As such, it winds up being more of a Rorschach test. If you dislike ...


5

I suspect a large part of what you're speaking about is because at Stack Exchange, moderation is people. Rules are in the eye of the beholder (or user that votes to close / reopen / delete / etc). Questions that are interesting and borderline are more likely to remain open then the ones who are borderline and maybe don't interest the majority here.


5

I never saw this 'reopen' question appear in my review queue That's because you already voted to reopen it. This started the review task, which is to be performed by others, as all review tasks in the system do. Three 'Leave Closed' reviews complete a Reopen Votes review queue task (just like three 'Leave Open' reviews complete a Close Votes review queue ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible