What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 134 Stack Exchange communities.

Recently I see a lot more questions being deleted immediately after being closed. I can understand this for negatively scored questions, but I see this with positively scored questions that I think are decent for the site as well.

For example, this question was deleted immediately after it was closed. I thought it was a decent question, although it had some extra questions added on that pushed it into "not-constructive" for SE.

I wanted to edit it to remove the offending phrases and get it reopened, however since it was deleted by a moderator immediately after being closed, I cannot vote to reopen and it is extremely unlikely that anyone else will ever see the question.

In addition, the OP will never see that their question was closed, or why. All he/she knows is that they were getting some answers and upvotes, but then their question suddenly disappeared.

So why are decent questions being deleted immediately after being closed? Is this some new policy I haven't heard of since I've only noticed it recently?

share|improve this question
    
"[I] see many new WPF users who have this kind of question" If that's true, then wouldn't it be closed as a duplicate? Can you find one of the other, older questions on this topic to answer? Or are is every single question on this topic (back to the beginning of time) deleted? –  Servy Jul 19 '12 at 16:42
    
@Servy There might be duplicates out there, but typically I see this kind of question in comments or as part of the text in a different question. Its actually one I asked myself when I first started learning MVVM (although I didn't post a question on SO). –  Rachel Jul 19 '12 at 16:44
11  
Slightly beside the point: But the whole immediate deletion thing needs to be reconsidered. Too often I see 20ks and moderators delete a question immediately after closing. The OP has no chance to learn why X question was unsuitable. Perhaps there should be a "timed deletion" vote that allows you to automatically cast a delete vote X days later without needing to come back. –  Mysticial Jul 19 '12 at 16:47
    
@Mysticial An alternate implementation could be just that deleted posts are visible to <10k users if they are less than X [units] old. –  Servy Jul 19 '12 at 16:49
1  
@Servy That was probably the intended purpose. But I get the feeling that people cast immediate delete votes because they know they will not come back later. –  Mysticial Jul 19 '12 at 16:50
    
@Mysticial I think you're right, and I like your solution of being able to cast timed delete votes :) However I don't think the delete vote should get processed (if a moderator delete) if an edit gets made to the question, or if it has reopen votes. If someone edits the question to make it valid, and there are some re-open votes on it, we don't want a single moderator vote to be suddenly deleting the question. –  Rachel Jul 19 '12 at 16:54
2  
@Mysticial - There was a recent discussion about this in How long should I wait before deleting a closed question?. I think the answers there cover this topic well. –  Brad Larson Jul 19 '12 at 16:59
1  
@BradLarson Note that the meta question is in regards to users, not moderators. We're tasked with different responsibilities. –  casperOne Jul 19 '12 at 17:01
    
@BradLarson So I guess the problem we need to solve is in my second comment: People cast immediate delete votes because they know they won't come back. So either a list of 2-day closed questions or a time-delete feature needs to be implemented. –  Mysticial Jul 19 '12 at 17:04
    
BTW, "decent" is a subjective term, it's not an absolute gauge of the quality of the question. –  casperOne Jul 19 '12 at 17:09
2  
Also, upvotes != quality, just popularity. –  casperOne Jul 19 '12 at 17:10
2  
I'm reopening this post-edits, but I'm pretty sure this is now a duplicate. Looking... –  Anna Lear Jul 19 '12 at 18:03
    
Good luck on timed reminders on stuff here ... we've been asking for that sort of functionality for a while –  jcolebrand Jul 19 '12 at 19:44
2  
Can you show examples where you don't have skin in the game? In this example question and the one you reference in Nicol's answer you have answers on both. Would you show examples where you believe this to be the case where you have not participated? –  casperOne Jul 19 '12 at 20:26
    
@casperOne I will see if I can find some other examples for you, but its hard to search deleted questions. I only have references to these two since they're linked in my profile –  Rachel Jul 19 '12 at 21:23

1 Answer 1

Technology, like a time limit, is not going to solve this problem. This is a people-problem, and it can only be solved by people.

Personally, I think casperOne is getting a little trigger-happy as a mod. Not only did he immediately delete the original question for no adequately explained reason (closing it is fine, insta-deleting it is not), he also closed this question as "Too Localized", even though talking about moderator and community actions on questions is exactly what Meta sites are for. This is rather unacceptable and skirts dangerously close to a mod trying to cover their own tracks when they did something wrong.

At the very least, a moderator should almost never close a meta question that is discussing their own actions. If the question is close-worthy, another moderator can do it.

share|improve this answer
1  
Maybe it should be made that a moderator can't delete a question with their mod powers that they also closed with their mod powers. –  Al E. Jul 19 '12 at 19:15
    
You may be right that this is only the actions of one moderator. I know I recently lost a bunch of rep from another question that was closed and deleted immediately, so I looked it up just now and it was casperOne again. I can't remember who closed/deleted the other questions I noticed recently though. Its hard to find them if they're not linked in my profile somewhere. –  Rachel Jul 19 '12 at 19:43
    
Upvote for "this is a people problem", not sure that the criticism against casp is absolutely on-target, I think there's just a lot more volume of crap than people realize ... In response to "a mod should never close a meta question discussing their behavior", I agree in 90% of cases, I suppose. –  jcolebrand Jul 19 '12 at 19:45
    
You might recall that the original revision of this question before it was closed was a highly localized question, even though it was under the guise of a broader question. That said, the situation around that revision question was resolved and it was closed as TL because it was question-specific. Once the question was edited to truly be more general and reopened, I deleted my answer (as it was question-specific and the question was broad). –  casperOne Jul 19 '12 at 20:19
1  
As for the "people" (me), well, there's a lot of crap on the site. Call it whatever you want, but honestly, you don't really know the definition of trigger-happy given you have no real stats about how many things I or other mods process on a daily basis, as well as what our respective error rates are. Needless to say from the error metrics that are tracked, I can say that my error rate is somewhere around 2% (and that's given tens of thousands (30K+ all-time, 300+ today) of flags processed). If that's your definition of trigger happy, then I'd dare say you're being overzealous, at best. –  casperOne Jul 19 '12 at 20:22
    
Also, it should be noted, the system works. The original revision of this question was about the closure and deletion of a specific question, and that question was undeleted (by me) and reopened (by the community). Even here, after the question was edited (after my informing @Rachel as to why the question was too localized in the comments of my answer) it was reopened. Again, the system works. So what's your point? It's not a people problem either. It would be a people problem if the system didn't work, so I'm not too sure what your answer is adding here. –  casperOne Jul 19 '12 at 20:30
    
@casperOne: I'm rather unclear about your definition of "work." The OP of the linked question did not repair the question; Rachel did. I have no idea how she got the link to that question, but in most cases, when a question is deleted, it's gone. If nobody has a link, it's not getting fixed. Ever. So I disagree that this is "working". Or more to the point, I don't trust a system that appears to work when the evidence of it working is based around luck. –  Nicol Bolas Jul 19 '12 at 20:42
3  
@casperOne: "you don't really know the definition of trigger-happy given you have no real stats about how many things I or other mods process on a daily basis" No, but this is not the first time I've seen you called out for quickly deleting something. That may be anecdotal evidence, but it's not like SE makes it easy to track down which mods are more "trigger-happy" than others. So unless SE devises a simple means to track which moderators close&delete questions more frequently than others, we make due with the information we have. –  Nicol Bolas Jul 19 '12 at 20:46
    
@NicolBolas "So unless SE devises a simple means to track which moderators close&delete questions more frequently than others, we make due with the information we have." - Make a feature request for it. Until then, frankly, you should not make overreaching statements about things you have little evidence to base them on. "Making due" is not enough. My numbers come from the horse's mouth (I asked SE). –  casperOne Jul 19 '12 at 20:47
    
As for the definition of work, @Rachel had an answer on the question and is a 10K user, so it shows up on her profile (did you even look at the question, she edited it and has the top-voted answer on it)? –  casperOne Jul 19 '12 at 20:49
1  
@casperOne: "did you even look at the question" I looked at the question; I didn't look at the answers, as they're more or less irrelevant. But that makes my point for me. If Rachel was not a 10K user, there would have been nothing that could have been done. Whereas if you had just closed the question, she would have been able to correct it and get it reopened without this MSO thread and without being a 10K user. So again, the system only works by a matter of luck. I don't trust a system that works based on good fortune. –  Nicol Bolas Jul 19 '12 at 20:50
2  
@casperOne: " My numbers come from the horse's mouth" The other problem with this is that there's no way to tell what you real error ratio is. You say it's 2%, meaning (as I understand it) that 2% of questions you delete are undeleted eventually. Well, what of the other 98% that might have been fixable that weren't undeleted because no 10K user happened to be involved? No statistics can tell us about that. –  Nicol Bolas Jul 19 '12 at 20:53
    
It's obvious you have an issue with my moderation style. I would recommend being more direct about it and separate it out from this post and put it in another meta post. As it stands now, you really don't answer @Rachel question for the general case, you are simply ranting about me. –  casperOne Jul 19 '12 at 21:01

You must log in to answer this question.

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