There is no easy solution for your problem. The original cause of the problem was without doubt the poor moderation culture of the cogsci SE.

Unfortunately, SE sites, as they grow, tend to become more and more closed, their rules tends far away from the common sense, they start to implement illogical, meaningless policies what they apply more and more against any rationality, with increasing harshness.

I wouldn't close out, that the CMs, at least partially understand the problem, but even they can't do too many. It is also possible that they simply ignore the problem (and also the site statistics). Sometimes I had a quite clear impression, that also the CMs tried to do something against a poor, sick site culture, but unfortunately it doesn't happen enough often.

It is easily visible, for example, that most of the small but active SE sites have around 5 regular close voters. It is because they are the minimal set of users capable to close questions.

It is not easy to say, what to do. If you restart the neural science proposal, it will be probably closed again as "cogsci clone", while the cogsci will still close the neural science questions. And then they will say it is ontopic. Yes, being ontopic in the site FAQ doesn't mean that it is being ontopic also in the review practice.

Simple solution for this problem clearly doesn't exist, longterm solution can.

First, get to a high rep on the cogsci and try to invest all of your influence to fix its community:

• Most of the VtC voters simply don't understand what are they taking part. They live in a world where they are taking care the site by closing bad questions. Awake them.
• Find other, mainly newbie users handled on unfair ways and try to explain this also for them.
• Between the "caretakers", identify the few really bad guys. Their primary characteristic, that they have a strong wish for power and that they are gaming. I.e. their goal is not write good answers and questions - although many of them does it, they can be even the best experts of the site. But, their unsaid goal is simply to get to the top in the site hierarchy. It is probably some psychological defect by them. For them, closing 3542 questions is quite similar as if you would play a first-person-shooter with your friend and you would shot his 3542 characters on the screen.

There is no easy solution for your problem. The original cause of the problem was without doubt the poor moderation culture of the cogsci SE.

Unfortunately, SE sites, as they grow, tend to become more and more closed, their rules tends far away from the common sense, they start to implement illogical, meaningless policies what they apply more and more against any rationality, with increasing harshness.

I wouldn't close out, that the CMs, at least partially understand the problem, but even they can't do too many. It is also possible that they simply ignore the problem (and also the site statistics). Sometimes I had a quite clear impression, that also the CMs tried to do something against a poor, sick site culture, but unfortunately it doesn't happen enough often.

It is easily visible, for example, that most of the small but active SE sites have around 5 regular close voters. It is because they are the minimal set of users capable to close questions.

It is not easy to say, what to do. If you restart the neural science proposal, it will be probably closed again as "cogsci clone", while the cogsci will still close the neural science questions. And then they will say it is ontopic. Yes, being ontopic in the site FAQ doesn't mean that it is being ontopic also in the review practice.

Simple solution for this problem clearly doesn't exist, longterm solution can.

First, get to a high rep on the cogsci and try to invest all of your influence to fix its community:

• Most of the VtC voters simply don't understand what are they taking part. They live in a world where they are taking care the site by closing bad questions. Awake them.
• Find other, mainly newbie users handled on unfair ways and try to explain this also for them.
• Between the "caretakers", identify the few really bad guys. Their primary characteristic, that they have a strong wish for power and that they are gaming. I.e. their goal is not tp read and write good questions and answers - although many of them does it, they can be even the best experts of the site. But, their unsaid goal is simply to get to the top in the site hierarchy. It is probably some psychological defect by them. For them, closing 3542 questions is quite similar as if you would play a first-person-shooter with your friend and you would shot his 3542 characters on the screen.

There is no easy solution for your problem. The original cause of the problem was without doubt the poor moderation culture of the cogsci SE.

Unfortunately, SE sites, as they grow, tend to become more and more closed, their rules tends far away from the common sense, they start to implement illogical, meaningless policies what they apply more and more against any rationality, with increasing harshness.

I wouldn't close out, that the CMs, at least partially understand the problem, but even they can't do too many. It is also possible that they simply ignore the problem (and also the site statistics). Sometimes I had a quite clear impression, that also the CMs tried to do something against a poor, sick site culture, but unfortunately it doesn't happen enough often.

It is easily visible, for example, that most of the small but active SE sites have around 5 regular close voters. It is because they are the minimal set of users capable to close questions.

It is not easy to say, what to do. If you restart the neural science proposal, it will be probably closed again as "cogsci clone", while the cogsci will still close the neural science questions. And then they will say it is ontopic. Yes, it is ontopic in the site FAQ, but it doesn't mean they won't close.

Simple solution for this problem clearly doesn't exist, longterm solution can.

First, get to a high rep on the cogsci and try to invest all of your influence to fix its community:

• Most of the VtC voters simply don't understand what are they taking part. They live in a world where they are taking care the site by closing bad questions. Awake them.
• Find other, mainly newbie users handled on unfair ways and try to explain this also for them.
• Between the "caretakers", identify the few really bad guys. Their primary characteristic, that they have a strong wish for power and that they are gaming. I.e. their goal is not write good answers and questions - although many of them does it, they can be even the best experts of the site. But, their unsaid goal is simply to get to the top in the site hierarchy. It is probably some psychological defect by them. For them, closing 3542 questions is quite similar as if you would play a first-person-shooter with your friend and you would shot his 3542 characters on the screen.

There is no easy solution for your problem. The original cause of the problem was without doubt the poor moderation culture of the cogsci SE.

Unfortunately, SE sites, as they grow, tend to become more and more closed, their rules tends far away from the common sense, they start to implement illogical, meaningless policies what they apply more and more against any rationality, with increasing harshness.

I wouldn't close out, that the CMs, at least partially understand the problem, but even they can't do too many. It is also possible that they simply ignore the problem (and also the site statistics). Sometimes I had a quite clear impression, that also the CMs tried to do something against a poor, sick site culture, but unfortunately it doesn't happen enough often.

It is easily visible, for example, that most of the small but active SE sites have around 5 regular close voters. It is because they are the minimal set of users capable to close questions.

It is not easy to say, what to do. If you restart the neural science proposal, it will be probably closed again as "cogsci clone", while the cogsci will still close the neural science questions. And then they will say it is ontopic. Yes, being ontopic in the site FAQ doesn't mean that it is being ontopic also in the review practice.

Simple solution for this problem clearly doesn't exist, longterm solution can.

First, get to a high rep on the cogsci and try to invest all of your influence to fix its community:

• Most of the VtC voters simply don't understand what are they taking part. They live in a world where they are taking care the site by closing bad questions. Awake them.
• Find other, mainly newbie users handled on unfair ways and try to explain this also for them.
• Between the "caretakers", identify the few really bad guys. Their primary characteristic, that they have a strong wish for power and that they are gaming. I.e. their goal is not write good answers and questions - although many of them does it, they can be even the best experts of the site. But, their unsaid goal is simply to get to the top in the site hierarchy. It is probably some psychological defect by them. For them, closing 3542 questions is quite similar as if you would play a first-person-shooter with your friend and you would shot his 3542 characters on the screen.