56

Meta SE is where a lot of discussion about things that affect the entire network take place. While most privileges should be locked behind the usual rep progression, there are some that shouldn't be.

  • Downvoting posts (already available at 100 rep, so association bonus is enough)

And:

  • Viewing deleted posts (note: only viewing, I'm not talking about casting delete or undelete votes)
  • Viewing vote counts (already available via user-script, but I see no reason to force people to hack around)

Some important posts get deleted; plenty of unimportant posts that are referred to elsewhere also get deleted. There's no reason these should be hidden behind the 10k rep barrier here on Meta SE. There's no reason why people who have got the privilege on other sites should then waste their time and effort dragging rep up to 10k here on Meta, just to see what's informing the discussion here.

Seeing the voting distribution is also important to get a feel of what the community thinks about the post (all the more so when comments get wiped out). A post at +63/0 is quite differently received from one at +126/-63.


I suggest that these privileges be made more widely available, by:

  • Checking for these privileges being available to the user on any other SE site, or
  • Making them available at a lower rep threshold (like with downvoting, but not necessarily at 100), or
  • Some other factor (any suggestions?)

I posted this originally as a comment, but IMHO this is becoming more important now.

| improve this question | | | | |
  • 1
    Just for joke: A post at +100/-2000 isn't much different from another at +400/-2300 – iBug is disappointed in SE Oct 23 '19 at 4:47
  • 1
    This is unfair to those who made the effort to earn 10k on MSE. – Sonic the Stay-Home Hedgehog Oct 23 '19 at 4:51
  • 3
    @iBug The point OP raised is that the ratio of votes, not just the difference, is also important. It is important also to see the raw data, that is the actual up and down votes. – Timur Shtatland Oct 23 '19 at 4:52
  • 2
    @SonictheAnonymousHedgehog Every reduction in rep requirement for something is unfair to those who's made it through effort. – iBug is disappointed in SE Oct 23 '19 at 4:53
  • 14
    @SonictheAnonymousHedgehog and the current situation is unfair to all the users of all the other sites when now-deleted posts may have affected policy or other changes that affects all those other sites. – muru Oct 23 '19 at 4:57
  • I quite agree for the vote count, and have been happy when I reached 1000 rep. Now, rearding deleted posts, I'm not sure. I have seen awful and stupid, now deleted, posts during this mess, and I think they are better buried deep down. – dim Oct 23 '19 at 5:34
  • 2
    @dim I agree with that somewhat. That's why I didn't make this feature request say "make deleted posts visible to everyone". My preferred option, indeed, is to make it available to people who already have experience with deleted posts elsewhere, and the drama that accompanies them. – muru Oct 23 '19 at 5:38
  • 3
    Hooray! status-review! Thank you for considering it! – muru Oct 23 '19 at 9:19
  • Downvoting a post is only available once though for answers, if all your rep comes from the assoc bonus innit? The moment you downvote an answer, you go to 100 rep, and there goes the privilege. (For questions this doesn't apply obviously, as long as you do not go below the 100) – Adriaan Oct 23 '19 at 14:58
  • 1
    @Adriaan twice, actually, since the privilege is still available at exactly 100, but it's relatively easy to get a few rep from suggested edits and such, and so continue to downvote as needed. Getting to 1k or 10k, though, is a much higher barrier. – muru Oct 23 '19 at 15:09
28

This is an excellent suggestion. This meta needs more oversight of deleted posts from users with 10k somewhere else on the network. There is an interesting parallel to the way chat flags work

Users with the privilege to see deleted posts or view vote splits on any single network site should have the same privilege on this main meta (but not vote to delete or undelete as mentioned in the question).

The argument that regular meta drama makes it easier to earn rep here by adding answers of dubious worth seems without merit.

15

The request has some merit (so I've upvoted it), but in a sense it's already happening. Traffic on Meta Stack Exchange is three times the usual, and users are upvoting (and downvoting) much more often than they did: about ten times the usual according to this SEDE query:

enter image description here

Most of those are upvotes, and those give a lot more reputation than downvotes cost anyway. Therefore, users are gaining much more reputation than normal (I've rep capped every day since September 30th without even trying to) and are gaining privileges much earlier than normal.

For the vote counts, you can install a userscript or if that doesn't work for you, view the timeline. Deleted posts are deleted for a reason, and if deleting a post really raises some questions, other users will post a question about the deletion anyway (example 1, example 2). Basically, the only thing you miss by not viewing deleted posts is more drama.

| improve this answer | | | | |
  • 13
    No, people posting screenshots or describing second hand is not enough. The revision history also matters many times. Hiding stuff is only contributing to the drama. And I have already mentioned and discarded the script for viewing vote counts. – muru Oct 23 '19 at 5:21
  • 3
    I feel hard locks on posts is much more appropriate on a discussion-heavy place such as meta here. Feel free to remove all non-mod interaction for these outdated posts. But I think deletion should be saved for spam and such. – Gloweye Oct 23 '19 at 7:21
  • 3
    But most of the votes go to people who already have a lot of meta-rep, because them's the ones who post most questions and answers that get a lot of votes. Only a handful of (previously) low-rep users will be taken significantly nearer to whichever privilege threshold. – Daniel Fischer Oct 25 '19 at 23:36
12
+50

I rather deleted posts on meta be visible to all users with high rep on any site, as it is better then people posting images of deleted posts (including on twitter). At present due to these posts being hidden from people who (many of us feel) should be able to see them, they are being made visable to people who have no investment in StackExchange who I think should not be seeing them.

(From the deleted posts I have views, about 1/3 of the posts removed for being offensive look to me like there is nothing offensive about them, just a few people not agree with what they say.)

| improve this answer | | | | |

You must log in to answer this question.

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