44

You need to be more careful with balance. There are a wide variety of 'formal' political organizations, from all sides of the political spectrum: the NRA, the NAACP, the League of Women Voters, the US Chamber of Commerce, American Crossroads, Democracy Matters, the College Republicans, etc. There are also a large number of organized groups that have a ...


37

Yes, answers should be backed up. However, I think that absolutely requiring references for all answers, as Skeptics does, is not suitable for our site. On the one hand, always requiring references is too much. There is a key difference between us and Skeptics. On Skeptics, every question probably has one and only one answer that can be backed up up with ...


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 ...


30

Thank you for your service as a moderator. I've been impressed by your impartial decision making and discretion in using the minimum disruption necessary to keep things civil, informative, and on-topic.


30

You and another user had an extended discussion of about 30 comments. This goes far beyond what is or should be on-topic or allowed. A lot of those were nitpicks, borderline insults, misunderstandings and meta discussion. I can't recall much of it now except someone saying "where did I say 'might'", someone calling something egregious and a ...


28

Bigoted viewpoints can be discussed by attributing them to the people who make these statements and not to the posters themselves and by putting their statements into an appropriate context. Example: Question: The political doctrine of Antifelinism believes that all kittens should be eradicated. How do prominent antifelinists propose to do this? A bad ...


27

I was baffled by the comments and I'm glad I'm not alone The question asks for Trump's plan, which doesn't exist, even in the most generous hypothetical sense. So this "answer," based on Trump's actual demonstrated business management model, seems as valid as any that can be offered as an explanation for something that does not exist. And I think that ...


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 ...


26

The purpose of the tag info is to provide a guidance to when the tag should be added to a question. Providing a wikipedia-like definition is only necessary when the tag is a particularly uncommon or niche word many users might not be familiar with. I believe that everyone should know what the word "abortion" means, so we do not need to have the controversy ...


26

I kicked the question from HNQ (after 10k views) because I don't think it's a good question to represent our community and attract the users we want on this site. The question itself is one of those "XYZ sucks, am I right?" questions. It attracted a lot of bad answers. 5 with negative score, three of them got deleted. It also attracted a lot of bad ...


26

I agree the display name was in very poor taste and obviously intended to troll and/or offend people on the site. I reverted it to the user's previous one.


24

When it comes to suspected trolls, my policy is to follow Hanlon's Razor. "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence." So instead of assuming that the user has got to be a troll to post such an inappropriate question, try to assume that the user is just misguided about what kind of questions are and are not appropriate. ...


23

What I deleted was a comment chain of 60(!) comments posted over a timeframe of just 2(!) hours. It was a back and forth which didn't really go anywhere. First it was a "you are wrong - no you are wrong" discussion and then it escalated into personal attacks (literal quotes: "Are you being deliberately obtuse", "Without it, people like you would [...]", "I ...


22

I am not a member of this community, but I did comment on the question, so I thought I'd expand on my comment here. (In a broader sense, I am active on the Stack Exchange network in general and so what I say is based on that.) To me, asking a question to make a point doesn't seem right. The Help Center for all sites says: You should only ask practical, ...


22

"Be nice" policy is a cornerstone of the entire Stack Exchange community. Once you see a post that clearly violates the policy, flag it for Moderator's attention. If a certain behavior becomes a pattern, and the user does not stop, accompany your flag with a comment pointing to a post where you remember the past user's aggressive posts have occurred. Even ...


21

Apologies. I declined your flag by mistake. I must have clicked the wrong button. I removed the comment now. Unfortunately, I cannot change the status of your flag.


21

It doesn't work, because it doesn't fit the model: Ask questions, get answers, no distractions A politician isn't interested in answering the question. A politician wants to get votes. Good answers are voted up and rise to the top. But if questions and answers are partisan, then "popular answers rise to the top". That is different. Moreover ...


20

Good Faith involves the following Be Serious - As Sam I Am noted, there was a recent unserious answer that was upvoted and defended. People liked the snarkyness and the political jabs. A serious question can contain jabs, but it needs to have a real point. Good Faith means that you're not solely playing (or pandering) to an audience. Defensible viewpoints - ...


20

Providing an English translation of a party name makes the post more accessible to anyone not deeply familiar with the country you are talking about. As you noticed, most foreign media uses translated party names. So someone who is just casually following Russian politics from mainstream media reporting will be more familiar with the name United Russia than ...


20

This was an automatic question block made by the Stack Exchange algorithm. The details of the algorithm aren't public (we moderators don't know them either). But it usually seems to get triggered when most of the questions of a user got a negative voting scores. This includes questions which got deleted, apparently regardless of whether the question was ...


20

Georgia, the US state, doesn't really need a tag (the one question using it that way was about a local election). Most states don't need a tag (CA being a notable exception, since they often use their singularly large economy for broader policy changes). Just use united-states to cover questions about it. The existing tag should be renamed to republic-of-...


20

As I commented on the question: I think that ridiculing politicians, their views and/or their actions is detrimental to this site because it breeds hostile sentiments between people with different opinions. So we should not do that. It is also detrimental to an objective discourse about politics in general. Whether or not Theresa May is an "international ...


20

The edit has description: Use non breaking spaces in monarchs' names This non-breaking space is a very minor typesetting cosmetic improvement but people like me will notice when it’s missing at the wrong place. The idea is that the numeral belonging to a monarch’s name (as in King Henry VIII) should not be in a different line than the name itself; i.e. ...


20

The answer was flagged: This answer is being deliberately provocative by using a neo-pronoun ("xyrself") where none is called for. I don't know about deliberately provocative, but I agree that the use of the neo-pronoun in the answer is unnecessary and would probably prove to be a distraction. The edit may look minor, but I think it's a helpful one and ...


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 ...


19

Definitely. I think they are even more of a fit here than on history


19

Staying politically neutral is a principle of the community of politics.stackexchange.com, because we believe that it leads to a more productive culture which produces more fact-driven content. But this doctrine is specific to Politics.SE. But Politics.SE is still a part of the larger Stack Exchange Network owned by Stack Exchange Inc.. The appeal to ...


19

Even though you can always change your accepted answer at any time, most people read an "accepted answer" as a signal that you're satisfied with that answer and aren't really looking for anything else. Therefore, people are generally less likely to take the time to write an answer to a question that already has an accepted answer. By accepting an answer ...


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