What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 131 Stack Exchange communities.

How about deleting the questions which are not welcome to be entertained?

Few things:

  1. Some questions are closed as not constructive even when it has many upvotes - which means, people like them.

  2. Some questions are closed as not constructive and also has down votes - which means, people do not like them.

In either case, "Closing a question" (not protected - closed) - indirectly means - You're not allowed to answer because this question is not welcome here.

Considering that we want to keep users happy, we may rule out deleting it completely for point 1 but, "I do not see" any apparent reason to keep questions, like those mentioned in point 2.

My point is, how about implementing a feature of 'deleting' the posts with 10 downvotes instead of keeping them?

It's like recruiting an employee to show company strength (be there on Google), irrespective of his productivity (of it being closed).

Thoughts?

share|improve this question
4  
What is wrong with the current system? What is the actual problem you're solving here? –  Bart Mar 23 '13 at 8:39
    
well, I came across my own question on Google , which was marked as non-constructive, limiting me to few answers to choose from. There are even questions which I came across in past, which were closed as not constructive, no answers... but, it was still there... –  KarmicDice Mar 23 '13 at 8:41
    
Automatic deletion for old questions without any other content and a negative score already exists. For closed questions with answers though, the answers might still be of value. I don't really see a need to target those with deletion. Or at least not to a point where I think we need far more users participating in their deletion. –  Bart Mar 23 '13 at 8:44
3  
I wonder if this post is related here: stackoverflow.com/questions/12400159 –  Andrew Barber Mar 23 '13 at 8:45
    
+1 for your analysis and marking a down-vote on it. AGAIN! I am sure, you did it!... :P But, Yes................ I googled for Java EE suggestion and there it was! Closed as non constructive. I marked for deletion. I still there !!! Thought about asking u to implement an automated system... –  KarmicDice Mar 23 '13 at 8:47
1  
You are sure I did it? Ok; it's your assumption to make. But at least it does seem your actual motivation is revealed, here. Nothing at all wrong with that motivation, but... (insert assumption here) –  Andrew Barber Mar 23 '13 at 8:56
    
Whats up with but... (insert assumption here) remark??? No use getting Personal here Mr. Andrew Barber, your dry reply wasn't appreciated, a simple No was good? It was not my actual motivation (which was your assumption) but, also a suggestion... I have been doing reviews (performing towards civic duty) and giving back to Stack community, we are even. My motivation was to see if this can be made better, irrespective of my question. Next time, no dry comment please. –  KarmicDice Mar 23 '13 at 9:35
    
After you posted it here, I have been getting constant downvotes. Is this a way to bully, @AndrewBarber ? How about a justification on repeated downvotes? –  KarmicDice Mar 23 '13 at 9:38
4  
@KarmicDice Votes are anonymous by design. Comments on downvotes have been proposed here many times before and have been rejected each and every time. There is no bullying going on here. The link caused your question to get extra attention. And users voted on that question as they saw fit. That's all. –  Bart Mar 23 '13 at 10:17
    
Ofc this is bullying @Bart . People slog to 'earn' the reputation! Give answers based on research, help one another and try to deliver best... SHARE WITHOUT HESITATION!!! Such reputation is earned in a hard way! And just because one question was asked in a 'wrong' way, positive reputation is being affected! This is discouraging, VERY discouraging. Look at the answers I have posted on Stackoverflow, tried to give best to community and earned repos... and this is treatment you give, saying 'thats all' and STILL it is NOT deleted! –  KarmicDice Mar 23 '13 at 14:22
    
Again, my point of this Thread was not that question. –  KarmicDice Mar 23 '13 at 14:30

2 Answers 2

Deletion is a very high privilege, (10K), Instant deletion is an even higher privilege (20K).

It only takes 3 privileged people to delete.

If your example question is that bad, it will be deleted by 3 20K users soon enough. What you're proposing is practically giving 125 reputation users partial deletion privilege.

While they already have some (6 spam/offensive flags), I don't feel that it's necessary in this case.

In short

No, don't implement this please.

share|improve this answer
    
How about raising the margin from 5 downvotes + marked non-constructive TO 10 downvites + marked non-constructive? –  KarmicDice Mar 23 '13 at 8:37
    
This will make moderator's life easier? –  KarmicDice Mar 23 '13 at 8:38
    
@KarmicDice: Again, why?, the post will be deleted much before that by 3 privileged users. It's not necessary in my opinion. It has nothing to do with moderators, they don't handle this stuff anyway (unless someone flags). 3 20K reputation users are fully capable of handling it. –  Second Rikudo Mar 23 '13 at 8:38
2  
@KarmicDice Automatic deletion of old questions already exists and is far harder to abuse than any low threshold low rep deletion process. People abused the spam flags as low threshold deletion when they were visible to users. Monitoring and spotting abuse of a downvote based system would be hard. –  Flexo Mar 23 '13 at 8:40
    
` Monitoring and spotting abuse of a downvote based system would be hard.` Hmmmm, I would but that... –  KarmicDice Mar 23 '13 at 8:43
    
but, I think we also have a reverse upvote system already... cant we implement reverse downvote system? I mean, just a suggestion... Pragmatically, it is challenging... agreed. –  KarmicDice Mar 23 '13 at 8:44
    
@KarmicDice: Automatic vote reversal is active regardless of the vote's direction (up/down). But that's not what he meant. –  Second Rikudo Mar 23 '13 at 8:45
    
@Bart: "Serial voting reversed" –  Second Rikudo Mar 23 '13 at 8:46
    
@MadaraUchiha Yeah, as you say, already exists –  Bart Mar 23 '13 at 8:46
    
Okay... Check my comment on the question.. as reply to Andrew Barber –  KarmicDice Mar 23 '13 at 8:55

Automatic deletion of anything should never happen on anything but very old questions, it should only be done by a human who can analyze the impact of removing a question, and then only with someone who has moderator-level privileges.

Don't forget that a normal (less than 10K) user cannot see his/her own deleted questions so by deleting instantly once a specific repuation threshold is reached, you are not giving the OP a real chance to fix it as some questions on active sites (like Stack Overflow) can hit number very quickly. In fairness it is not likely that the OP will be able to edit enough to salvage the question in most cases, but you still need to give them an opportunity.

share|improve this answer
    
Instant deletion of anything should never happen automatically on anything but very old questions, that makes it a bit not "instant" don't you think? :D –  Second Rikudo Mar 23 '13 at 8:42
    
I added the very old questions part to clarify the fact that automatic deletion does happen on old questions in specific circumstances. But the wording could stand some improvement –  psubsee2003 Mar 23 '13 at 8:44
    
@MadaraUchiha that works, thanks, I was just making the same edit –  psubsee2003 Mar 23 '13 at 8:45

You must log in to answer this question.

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