1

On the main page of tex.stackexchange.com right now is a link to a chat room:

In which the relative merits of Word and LaTeX are discussed.

I don't like to see that there. I think that TeX-SX has stayed fairly civil on the relative merits of different systems: our task is to sing the praises of TeX, not to be nasty about other stuff. The etiquette that I've seen so far has been along the lines of: "Of course we think that TeX is the best thing since sliced bread, didn't you read the sign on the door? But if you're nice to us, we'll be nice to you and we'll show you the error of your ways by example, not by preaching.".

What I've read so far of that discussion does not follow that etiquette. Indeed, what I've read so far is a pretty pointless discussion. Moreover, the room seems to be closed so no new discussion can take place, and it doesn't seem to have been started by or involve anyone from the TeX-SX site.

So why is it linked from our main page as if it were anything to do with or endorsed by us?

Please remove it!

Improve this question
8
  • 2
    Cross-post; I've already answered the original
    – balpha StaffMod
    Mar 7, 2011 at 8:13
  • Here's the room Andrew have in mind: chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/176
    – mindcorrosive
    Mar 7, 2011 at 8:14
  • 2
    Incidentally, I brutally ignore downvotes that aren't accompanied by explanation.
    – Andrew Stacey
    Mar 7, 2011 at 9:05
  • @balpha I'm deleting the room, please tell me when frozen rooms are no longer advertised so I can undelete it.
    – badp
    Mar 7, 2011 at 10:32
  • [status-completed] for the "frozen room being advertised" thing
    – balpha StaffMod
    Mar 7, 2011 at 16:06
  • Why in the world is this downvoted three times? I'd be less than thrilled if "Discuss the vast superiority of Windows" suddenly appeared in the UL room list
    – Michael Mrozek
    Mar 7, 2011 at 16:16
  • @Michael That doesn't change the fact your users can start such a room at any time.
    – badp
    Mar 8, 2011 at 13:36
  • @badp No, but if I then asked about it on meta I wouldn't except a sudden flurry of downvotes; it was a completely reasonable question
    – Michael Mrozek
    Mar 8, 2011 at 15:04

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
3

It was a discussion about TeX and LaTeX (and Word), so I reassigned it after the fact to TeX and LaTeX, rather than Gaming, on grounds of topicality. I agree it was unpleasant, but that's no ground for "censorship."

(I did ask for reassignment during the chatting itself, but my moderator flag has been ignored.)

Since the room is frozen, it'll fade away soon enough. Chat more to make it go away :)

Oh, additionally. Site policy does not need apply to chat. Bad subjective content, such as polls, asking for opinion or just relaxed exchange of ideas is fine there. It also is unenforceable, because there's no way of preventing somebody from taking part into TeX chatrooms and TeX chatrooms alone, short of a chat.stackexchange-wide chat ban. That would be inappropriate.

Improve this answer
5
  • I have no wish to censor it. It is its presence on the main page which to someone unfamiliar with the inner workings of the SE empire (such as myself) might look like endorsement or "here's a site we think you should look at". Neither of which is the case.
    – Andrew Stacey
    Mar 7, 2011 at 8:30
  • By "chat more", do you mean that we should have more chat rooms? Activity in our main room presumably wouldn't bump it off the page. (Nonetheless, there are a couple of other rooms, I'll go and chat there to get rid of the offending room)
    – Andrew Stacey
    Mar 7, 2011 at 8:32
  • Okay, I've put chat messages in other rooms, a whole new room has been opened and briefly appeared on the main page, but the offending room appears to resurface again and again, like that annoying tune you heard in the store at the weekend and can't get out of your head!
    – Andrew Stacey
    Mar 7, 2011 at 9:09
  • @Andrew I'll now delete the room; I'll undelete it when balpha confirms frozen rooms are no longer advertised.
    – badp
    Mar 7, 2011 at 10:31
  • That's the case already
    – balpha StaffMod
    Mar 7, 2011 at 10:45

You must log in to answer this question.

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