6
$\begingroup$

Edit (25 Feb 2021): as per the discussion on the Meta SE in the comments underneath my question there, it was suggested I ask a new question here on Quant SE Meta with a much narrower scope, such as "Should we allow fewer votes to close questions, instead of the current 5". Also, as per Bob's comment below, this is more likely to succeed in implementing, rather than his current request to allow users to make questions invisible.

So I will post a new question and ask as many users to vote on the question as possible (either up or down vote). Also please comment underneath the new question whether you feel we should allow only 2 or only 3 higher-rep users to close questions, instead of the current 5. If we get enough votes and discussion going, then the next step would be to ask for implementation on Meta.

I know similar questions (points) have been raised before, but I wanted to bring it up again because it seems that especially recently, Quant SE is regularly flooded with low quality questions.

Is there any way to simply delete these or make these invisible for everyone but the OP and the admins, without multiple users having to vote first to close these?

Or perhaps users with a certain reputation threshold (say 5K reputation: to make it clear that I do not intend to benefit in any way from this proposition) could make these low quality posts invisible (for anyone but the OP, the admin and themselves) without the admin having to take action? (We only have two admins on Quant SE, and they probably can't be here 24/7, only dedicating their time to deleting or making low quality posts invisible).

Perhaps there should be a renewed discussion about what Quant SE is really for and who the intended audience is: is it really just for professional quants? If the answer is yes, then the low quality posts should not feature here at all (and perhaps another SE website ought to be created, such as "Finance", where simpler questions can be asked).

Or perhaps Quant SE is not just for professional quants, but also for undergraduate students and aspiring quants: that is completely fine too, and perhaps makes Quant SE more lively and frequented by more users. But even in this case the very low quality posts should still not feature here, because they degrade the quality and the reputation of the website (albeit the bar can be somewhat lower than in the former case, of course).

$\endgroup$
23
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I definitely agree that I've seen, in the last few years, a decline of the ratio of questions and answers that I'm glad I read to questions that I wish I hadn't wasted time on reading. Looking at close votes log I get the impression that only a few people (out of those who can) vote to close. I think if simply more people bother to vote to close useless/inane "basic financial questions", then the overall quality will improve. $\endgroup$ Feb 21 at 15:06
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Interested in opinions of others as well of course. One observation (based on feeling): compared to other sites most posts here don't get a lot of votes. Moderation ability is unlocked by gathering up-votes. So on Quant.SE it takes a relatively long time before users can do any moderation. It doesn't seem likely these thresholds will change. We can however ensure that content that is valuable (to some, not necessarily you) gets the up-votes it deserves putting users over the threshold. $\endgroup$
    – Bob Jansen Mod
    Feb 22 at 13:08
  • $\begingroup$ @BobJansen: is there any way that instead of having to gather multiple close votes on a question, one user with a strong reputation can simply close the question and make it invisible? Most closed questions are still visible & I feel the low quality ones should not be. I understand that questions with <-4 votes become invisible, but very few questions reach that threshold (I personally don't like to be "mean" & instead of down-voting, I'd probably prefer making the question invisible & commenting to let the user know that unless the question is improved, it'll stay invisible & will be deleted) $\endgroup$ Feb 22 at 13:21
  • $\begingroup$ @BobJansen: PS: otherwise whenever I visit Quant SE, I try to up-vote as many questions possible (within reason) to encourage good contributions (and of course I try to up-vote answers even more so). It's a good point you raise. $\endgroup$ Feb 22 at 13:23
  • $\begingroup$ That's great! On StackOverflow 10k rep users get more rights but unfortunately not here. This is definitely something I will raise once more people hit 10k though. We only have 11(!) now. $\endgroup$
    – Bob Jansen Mod
    Feb 22 at 13:25
  • $\begingroup$ @BobJansen: I see that on StackOverflow, users with 10K rep can delete questions. Perhaps, you could request that users with 5K rep can make questions invisible, until the OP improves the question (or until enough users vote to close the question, which should then subsequently get deleted). I think such request could potentially fly, because making a question invisible is not as strong a privilege as deleting a question. Realistically, 10K rep is unreachable to most users on Quant SE. $\endgroup$ Feb 22 at 13:55
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Why is it that questions and answers get fewer votes on Quant.SE? How can we encourage more voting because, as Bob says, this occurs to be the easiest way to enable more people to vote to close inappropriate questions? On a related note, I also noticed that an awful lot of questions do not get accepted, even if they contain outstanding answers ... $\endgroup$
    – Kevin
    Feb 22 at 15:48
  • $\begingroup$ @Kevin: when I first joined the SE network, I wasn't familiar with the "tick" symbol to accept a question, took me a while to figure out that "up-voting" an answer is not the same as "accepting". But the same exact problem is on Math SE, probably even worse. I think there is enough of users on Quant SE to vote to close questions, but I think with the amount of low-quality questions, it doesn't make sense for multiple users to have to vote to close questions: it would be much more efficient if a single user (or say max two users) could make questions invisible till they'r improved / closed. $\endgroup$ Feb 22 at 16:45
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I raised this on the moderator only Stack. If it gets migrated to meta.stackexchange.com I will post it $\endgroup$
    – Bob Jansen Mod
    Feb 23 at 7:09
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ It would be nice if closed questions with no answers were purged from the site/made invisible. That's what you have in mind, @JanStuller right? Examples from last 24h: 1, 2, 3, 4. $\endgroup$
    – Kevin
    Feb 23 at 15:24
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Kevin: exactly that. I believe it's a waste of people's energy to have to (i) downvote the question (ii) vote to close it and then for the admins to have to (ii) delete such questions eventually if they decide to. If a user with (say) reputation > 5K could make such questions invisible and put the OP "on notice" for a few days to give them a chance to improve the question, it would be much more efficient. Also, if such questions were not improved, they should either be deleted automatically after the given grace period or deleted by admins. $\endgroup$ Feb 23 at 15:48
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I fully support your proposal then, Jan. And I disagree with the answer on meta.SE. I don't want anyone to find a question about ''The difference of BS PDE and asset-or-nothing call PDE''. I don't think there's any value in keeping such questions. Some closed questions should stay visible (the comments may include valuable hints) but some/many closed questions are just utterly useless or complete nonsense and a user with (say) >2k rep should be able to make them invisible $\endgroup$
    – Kevin
    Feb 23 at 15:58
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Kevin That could also be achieved by deleting. I don't do this often because it didn't feel right. However, I'm considering doing it more often, especially if there is many close or down votes. $\endgroup$
    – Bob Jansen Mod
    Feb 23 at 16:20
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I created a post on Meta SE here, suggesting that users with 5K reputation could gain a privilege of being able to close or make low-quality questions invisible. It was pointed in the comments that three vote closing is in the pipeline, which would certainly also help. $\endgroup$ Feb 23 at 19:20
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I typically close questions automatically when they are too basic, and I delete them when the poster doesn't like that and reposts the same question. I don't like deleting questions outright because I think it provides a sour taste for potential new comers who might otherwise end up being a good contributor having adjusted to the content/style. $\endgroup$
    – Attack68 Mod
    Mar 1 at 18:35

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .