-5

Following yet another blog post that will undoubtedly raise the distance between SE and their core user community, I am wondering whether anyone has any good idea on how to counteract the new top-down directive, or at the very least limit the damage.

A few ideas out of the top of my head (mind you, most are bad):

  • Comment on the blog post itself? Note that any criticism will likely be censored regardless of the tone.
  • Focus efforts on downvoting old mastodontic bad questions that have been upvoted massively, mostly because of the great answers? Note that we don't really want to delete those (Makoto's answer to my old question on the matter comes to mind and I still agree). What would be the consequences of focusing moderation on questions whose users do not deserve any reputation boost for some garbage they dumped back in the day, when the rules weren't as clear?
  • Stop upvoting questions altogethers in protest? That sounds silly even as I type it.

Bonus question

What will be the risks of massive fraud now that, not only substantial reputation is up for grabs, but also a lot of moderators are gone due to the other recent debacles?

  • 7
    There's nothing we can do. There's too much noise. Everyone is complaining about everything. – Von Huffman Nov 13 '19 at 20:11
  • @Lyd complaining alone brings nothing to the table. Doing something would be great, though, and my ideas aren't. Hence the question. – Mena Nov 13 '19 at 20:17
  • 3
    Why would you need to do anything? If you think there's going to be a bunch of problems because you think people are getting rep who don't "deserve" it, it's more productive to worry about 1. why people on your site are upvoting bad questions and 2. how to educate people on your site about how to use their privileges correctly. – Em C Nov 13 '19 at 20:19
  • @EmC nuance: I suspect there might be damage. 1 and 2 are kind of out of my or your league as far as I can tell. – Mena Nov 13 '19 at 20:23
  • 2
    Not really, that's site voting culture. Talk to people on your local meta, get to understand people's reasons, are people just not aware of your standards, do you just disagree on what's a good question... for instance my site has pushed for better commenting when flagging, particularly linking to meta FAQs, to raise awareness of site policies for people who aren't as engaged in meta. – Em C Nov 13 '19 at 20:28
  • Please add: "Should we downvote a question when it's bad?" to the list. Because this now involves to consider a subsequent "drive-by" upvote by a "friendly and welcoming" user, which would end in a positive score – hek2mgl Dec 12 '19 at 11:54
17

Nothing.

Keep voting on posts, not people.

Keep voting up good questions, keep voting down bad questions.

In the meantime, how about we wait and see if there's even any damage?

| improve this answer | |
  • 1
    What if the damage, if any, is irreversible? – Mena Nov 13 '19 at 20:21
  • 1
    @Mena Given this is a reversion, it is clearly reversible. – anonymous Nov 13 '19 at 20:22
  • 5
    @Mena You are approaching this too abstractly to be useful. What damage? What are you afraid of with this decision? What long term negative impact is fueling this new outrage? – Von Huffman Nov 13 '19 at 20:22
  • 1
    @Lyd no outrage my side, just disappointment. Another top-down decision with no consultation of the base - and retroactive, no less. I'm pretty worried and have no clue what to do here. – Mena Nov 13 '19 at 20:26
  • 1
    @Mena That's how companies work. Yes, they need us for content, that doesn't make us all CEOs. It's a mutual benefit relationship, not a democracy. We might know how to cook or code, but running a company is another beast. Where does this expectation that we need to approve every SE decision come from? – Von Huffman Nov 13 '19 at 20:31
  • @Lyd in this specific case, because "we" often know better. Not counting myself in here - after all I am asking the question. My wish is to keep my favorite SE site (guess which) in good health. The recent decisions from SE-the-company seem to systematically go against that. I'm not demanding that the community should have a say on any SE decision, only that the communities that make the sites great should be listened to. Just like a company should listen to its customers, or in this case, money makers. – Mena Nov 13 '19 at 20:38
  • Sleepy time for me, so I'll accept this answer for now. But I don't think that's good enough. – Mena Nov 13 '19 at 22:25

You must log in to answer this question.

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