3

There's a note on the main moderator page {sitename}/admin regarding moderator activity statistics highlighting:

screenshot of notes on moderators page

I'm curious which rules are used for applying this highlighting, in particular:

  • What's the source data for calculation a median (are moderators on vacation taken into account)?
  • Which table columns are eligible for highlighting (e.g. flags, comments, posts, votes, etc.)?
  • Which selected period is eligible for highlighting (e.g. day, week, month, etc.)?

There is a tooltip for "50% or less" link visible only on desktop browsers:

tooltip on 50% or less link

So, looks like in case when the median is less than 20 (quantity?) the values for that parameter (column) won't be highlighted ever. But according my experience even when median is 34, values like 2 or 1 don't highlighted (neither in red, nor brown), although these values are obviously less than 10% of 34.

Median is 34, but 2 and 1 don't highlighted

Another moment with votes: when both up- and down- votes are specified in the single column. What's the median for that? Sum of them? But sorting by clicking of column title works on another way. Additionally that's not clear what types of actions are considered as "atypical".

Hereby, there is a lot of confusions on that page, that would be great to resolve.

Improve this question
8
  • 8
    This appears to be a duplicate of your prior question: "The logic of moderators statistics highlighting", which was automatically deleted by the Roomba. I have mixed feelings about it being reposted.
    – Makyen
    Commented Feb 6 at 22:28
  • 5
    @Makyen Per this positively-received post of mine, and a Help Center article it quotes from, it's OK to repost Roomba'd questions in certain cases. The older post got downvoted as its earlier revisions weren't very clear; while it's been edited to be clearer, there wasn't enough time for its score to go back up to 0 before the script would kick in and delete it. Even if it were successfully undeleted, it would only have a few days to a few minutes, depending on what time of the week it happened, to get back to 0 score.
    – Sonic the Anonymous Hedgehog
    Commented Feb 6 at 22:55
  • 3
    RE: Point 1 - Moderators marked as 'on vacation' can still perform actions on the site, thus it would make sense to include them in the calculation. No idea for Point 2 tbh I haven't paid much attention to them. Point 3 would take the currently selected date filter into account I think?.
    – Robotnik
    Commented Feb 6 at 22:59
  • 2
    @SonictheAnonymousHedgehog There's a significant difference between a post receiving a single downvote and receiving 11 downvotes. I'm not taking a position on if this question should have been posted, and haven't voted on either this one or the deleted one. I just don't think that the upvotes on your answer there indicate a consensus that a question should be permitted to be reposted regardless of its reception. A question getting a single downvote and then being notably improved is a significantly different circumstance.
    – Makyen
    Commented Feb 7 at 1:36
  • 3
    @SonictheAnonymousHedgehog I am significantly concerned with setting a precedent that a substantially downvoted question just gets to be reposted for another run at the system while dropping the history of its voting. One of the arguments in the quotes you used is that it's "less work", however that doesn't appear to consider the 600+ times that regular viewers spent reading the prior question, nor the probably similar amount of time spent by the community on this one. Admittedly, most of the times I see that happen, the question is objectively bad and/or off-topic, whereas this one isn't.
    – Makyen
    Commented Feb 7 at 1:42
  • 1
    @Makyen That's true. However, first, this question was significantly improved from the earlier revisions of the earlier question which were the latest revisions at the time it received its questions - it's not an exact repost. Second, this precedent already exists: this positively-received question is a repost of this negatively-received Roomba'd question; the earlier question got downvotes because it seemed like a rant while the later question, while initially an exact repost, I edited immediately after it was posted to make it less rant-y and clearer
    – Sonic the Anonymous Hedgehog
    Commented Feb 7 at 1:56
  • (continuing) In an ideal world, the system would not immediately re-delete Roomba'd questions that got undeleted (instead resetting the timer so, say, a RemoveDeadQuestions question would have another 30 days before it's subject to deletion again). It would also consider recent activity on the question, and not delete questions that the author is trying to improve and have upvoted. However, it doesn't do any of those things. I agree with Shog's advice that a Roomba'd question should be allowed to be reposted with improvements so it gets a fresh start and isn't bogged down by its past.
    – Sonic the Anonymous Hedgehog
    Commented Feb 7 at 2:00
  • 4
    (continuing) Imagine if someone else had posted the second question, someone who wasn't aware of the past deleted question, and made a higher-quality post than the original. You'd allow their question to continue, right? I don't see why the fact that the same author wrote it should be considered.
    – Sonic the Anonymous Hedgehog
    Commented Feb 7 at 2:06

0

Reset to default

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .