-7

Says the FAQ:

One or two bad posts will not cause you to be blocked from using the site.

But from reviewing my history on thirteen accounts, apparently four minuses override any number of pluses and neutrals. That's just the votes on answers: if you look at reputation also, it seems even more inaccurate.

I sincerely would like to hear something constructive, i.e., helping to construct something good, about this.

As suggested in the comments below, the implied threat of soon-to-be-blocked should not have occurred. But if the warning were actually valid, the question still stands: Please offer some explanation beyond sending me to FAQs that only confirm it should not have occurred.

Improve this question
5
  • 1
    Do you have any deleted questions or answers?
    – icktoofay
    Commented May 7, 2014 at 3:03
  • UNCLEAR ?!? How about "Please provide something more constructive than 'somebody doesn't like your work'" Is that clear enough?
    – WGroleau
    Commented May 7, 2014 at 18:05
  • 5
    No it is not. You haven't said what site it's happening on, and you seem to feel it uses a pan-site calculation, which it does not. Further, you don't want explanation of the message, you want to rant that it is wrong. If you specify a site, people can take a look and see if this (very new) feature has a bug or not. If you just argue with people then how will you ever get an answer?
    – Kate Gregory
    Commented May 7, 2014 at 19:22
  • 1
    I'm still not really sure what exactly is happening to you, you just seem to dance around the actual problem. However this seems to be more of a question now so I'll cast the last reopen vote.
    – ɥʇǝS
    Commented May 7, 2014 at 21:56
  • If I didn't want explanation of the message, I wouldn't have asked for explanation of the message. And since there was no reason for it (confirmed by others) on the site where it occurred (which was identified long before you posted that) it was reasonable to assume that the calculation was getting data from elsewhere. Now it seems it was just some sort of fluke. But the principle remains: we seem very good at telling people "your stuff sucks" without helping them figure out how to do anything about it.
    – WGroleau
    Commented May 8, 2014 at 2:07

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
10

You're not blocked. When you see that warning, you're still able to use the site in all the usual ways. We just suggest that you might be heading towards a block based on your previously posted content.

That said, the feature is new and it's possible that its developer missed something during implementation. If you feel you're seeing the warning when you shouldn't be, let us know so that blame can be appropriately assigned and any potential bugs weeded out.

Edit: I set up a local copy of English.SE and for the life of me I cannot reproduce a block warning using your profile. I just see the normal "answer help" text we show folks who are anonymous or below 100 reputation:

enter image description here

As far as I can tell, everything is working as intended here. If you have specific suggestions for improvement (wording, etc.) or a screenshot that demonstrates the answer block warning, please feel free to make a new or report, whichever's appropriate. This question has probably gone as far as it can without just getting more and more confusing.

Improve this answer
19
  • 7
    This is a thing? Oh, hallelujah.
    – Michael Petrotta
    Commented May 7, 2014 at 3:25
  • 3
    @MichaelPetrotta As of earlier today: meta.stackexchange.com/a/231118/155160 :)
    – Adam Lear StaffMod
    Commented May 7, 2014 at 3:26
  • @MichaelPetrotta: I (almost) literally said the same thing earlier today.
    – Nick Stauner
    Commented May 7, 2014 at 3:31
  • I know I'm not blocked—I wouldn't have typed the question if I thought I would not be allowed to post it. I was not aware that the feature is new, but as I stated in the background of my question, it does seem inaccurate. If not, some assistance/education would be more useful than “shape up or ship out!”
    – WGroleau
    Commented May 7, 2014 at 3:48
  • @WGroleau I'm not sure what you consider to be inaccurate. (For that matter, what site(s)/which warning are we talking here?) Both messages include links to explanations about the blocks we have in place and guidance on how to avoid them. What sort of thing do you feel is missing?
    – Adam Lear StaffMod
    Commented May 7, 2014 at 3:50
  • 1
    @WGroleau The part you quoted in your post here is still true - one or two bad posts aren't going to get you blocked. The point of these warnings is to help folks avoid getting blocked whereas before they would potentially get blindsided by it.
    – Adam Lear StaffMod
    Commented May 7, 2014 at 3:54
  • I have read the FAQs "how do I ask a question?" and "how do I answer a question?" They give me no reason to think that the "approaching block" is reasonable. Nor does my history. The implication of the message is that I am getting close to being blocked. If that is not the case then the message is inaccurate. If that is the case then the algorithm is inaccurate—at least judging by the votes and comments on the questions I've asked.
    – WGroleau
    Commented May 7, 2014 at 4:00
  • @WGroleau Let's back up. What site are you seeing the warning on? And is it a question warning or an answer warning?
    – Adam Lear StaffMod
    Commented May 7, 2014 at 4:02
  • To answer another question, what sites: the message appeared when I started to put an answer on a site in which I had one previous answer, and that had zero votes either way. So it looks like the algorithm is system-wide, suggesting that which site I saw it on is irrelevant.
    – WGroleau
    Commented May 7, 2014 at 4:04
  • 4
    @WGroleau No, seriously. Which site? It's okay to name names. :)
    – Adam Lear StaffMod
    Commented May 7, 2014 at 4:06
  • I see that this is about to be another of the "not well received." It may be my second -8. The other one, like this one, apparently committed the sin of trying to improve the system instead of worshiping it. I thought (and still do) that stack exchange was a good idea, but sometimes it seems like a minority of snobs are winning.
    – WGroleau
    Commented May 7, 2014 at 4:14
  • 1
    @WGroleau Thanks. Hrm. Yeah, you certainly shouldn't be seeing a warning for a single zero-score CW answer on a site. I'll try to reproduce this tomorrow morning, but in the meantime, if you happen to have a screenshot of the warning handy, that'd help.
    – Adam Lear StaffMod
    Commented May 7, 2014 at 4:19
  • 4
    @WGroleau I looked up the logs from English.SE and you weren't shown any warnings there. For that matter, the last time you visited that site was on March 23, long before the "past posts were not well-received" warnings became a thing.
    – Adam Lear StaffMod
    Commented May 7, 2014 at 5:29
  • 2
    It was yesterday afternoon. If the warning had not sent me off checking history and such, I would have added an answer to english.stackexchange.com/questions/168557/…
    – WGroleau
    Commented May 7, 2014 at 18:02
  • 2
    @WGroleau I tried to repro this and was ultimately unsuccessful. See my edit.
    – Adam Lear StaffMod
    Commented May 7, 2014 at 21:27

You must log in to answer this question.

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