-35

Here's what I got in my inbox last night.

Hello,

We're writing in reference to your Stack Overflow account:

https://stackoverflow.com/users/6752050/273k

We noticed that you consistently cast delete votes on questions mere minutes after they get closed. We believe this represents an abuse of your privileges.

The system allows to immediately vote to delete questions that score -3 or less in order to get rid of utterly unsalvageable trash that should've never been posted.

This basically covers stuff that isn't quite eligible for red flags but is outside of the site's scope in an unredeemable way. Something like "Should I get a Ph.D. or find a job?", "How is the AI market going to evolve in the next 5 years", job ads (might also red flag those) and totally irrelevant stuff like which is the best ice cream flavor.

That the system allows you to delete such crap does not mean that you have to always press the button.

Questions that clearly fit Stack Overflow's scope but have issues that warrant closure should be just closed. By immediately deleting them, you are stripping the OP of their right to fix their question. You are also preventing reopen voters to disagree with the closure.

Or put it another way, there is no reason to anticipate the Roomba in these cases. If a question is really unfixable, then the reopen queue will keep it closed and the Roomba eventually will sweep the garbage up.

As you may be aware, this at times makes its way to Meta. This post is only the last one. Though, do note: your delete-vote pattern has been in our radar for some time now. That Meta post is simply the last straw.

We appreciate your dedication to keeping the site clean. However you are being overzealous; and we are tired of seeing complaints in Meta about these insta-deletions.

Moving forward please do not cast any more delete votes on questions before the 10-days Roomba would get them.

If you really want to see a question go away, you can bookmark it and go back to it after 10 days have passed. If it's still there, you may vote to delete.

We trust in your continued cooperation.

Regards, Stack Overflow Moderation Team

I don't think they have the right to be above the Stack Overflow rules that allow me to vote to delete a post at any time. Note, I can't delete a post independently, this a collective decision, but their message has a tone as if I delete posts independently and use my privileges with full power, although I rarely reach even a half of my day limit.

Their argument that a user is unable to improve and re-open a deleted question is pulled by the ears. If a user really interested in getting an answer, they can improve and vote to undelete a question or post a new improved question. See How does deleting work? What can cause a post to be deleted, and what does that actually mean? What are the criteria for deletion?.

Should not we disallow moderators to pursue users for their votes?

From the comments and answers:

  1. There is no clear policies and guidelines how to behave with opinion-sensitive bad questions.
  2. Collective decisions are intended to reduce opinion sensitivities.
  3. Opinions of moderators, even if they are not collective, are considered right regardless of collective decisions of users.
  4. Moderators implement their own policy w/o a discussion - users may not decide immediately what is bad.
  5. Moderators have not attempted to convey their own policies to me nor kindly asked me to follow them and enabled punitive functions like taking me on their radar and restricting rights to my opinions immediately (simultaneously restricting my immediate votes).
20
  • 10
    "the SO rules that allow me to vote to delete a post at any time." can you cite such rules and more importantly guidelines?
    – VLAZ
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 17:16
  • 6
    Very likely related to Why delete a 'reasonable' (potentially fixable) question within 20 minutes of it being posted?
    – Ivar
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 17:22
  • 3
    @Ivar <rude comment>indeed that is linked from the quoted moderator mail</rude comment>
    – Alexei Levenkov
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 17:23
  • 12
    "you are stripping the OP of their right to fix their question" - what? Deleted questions can also be edited. There's just an extra step required (undeleting). That mod message goes against the principles behind voting
    – Zoe - Save the data dump Mod
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 17:24
  • 12
    @273K I'm not sure where you read that you're supposed to toss in a del-vote immediately with the close vote minutes after a question is closed and said question is not so egregiously bad that it can't wait for the Roomba. So, can you be more specific where the guidelines for that are?
    – VLAZ
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 17:24
  • 19
    @Zoe But who is going to vote to undelete it?
    – Dharman Mod
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 17:29
  • 9
    @Dharman 10k and 20k users? Alternatively mods, seeing as the major problem is that deleted posts with undelete votes are a pain in the ass to find. However, that's a limitation that should be addressed at a system-level, and not by enforcing policy that hasn't been discussed
    – Zoe - Save the data dump Mod
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 17:32
  • 11
    @cocomac It isn't a great use of mod time, but the only good alternative is having a good system for detecting improved posts and escalating them to a queue for 10k and 20k users. Seeing as the company is busy making a chatbot that will fail rather than adding something like this, there aren't any other options
    – Zoe - Save the data dump Mod
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 17:37
  • 9
    "the SO rules that allow me to vote to delete a post at any time." The same affordance that allows you to cast delete votes also allows you to cast close votes, would you say then that it is valid to close a question that is on-topic / not a duplicate and otherwise completely valid for Stack Overflow? Having a privilege to take an action does not mean all such actions are valid / justified.
    – Abdul Aziz Barkat
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 18:06
  • 2
    other people did it too, historically, hasn't been all that effective.
    – Kevin B
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 18:18
  • 28
    @Zoe the situation is heavily imbalanced in favor of delete voters. Delete voters see the question in the new/active tab, undelete voters have to go fishing in the 10k tools. The viable option is clearly to not delete those posts right after a few minutes, so the OP has a chance to work on it and possibly spare everybody (mods and curators) a lot of work. Also mods can't alway assess the technical merits of an edited deleted question and decide single-handedly if it merits undeletion.
    – blackgreen Mod
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 18:20
  • 15
    That you didn't (delete the post) on your own doesn't matter, @273K . You may have not been the only user to have received that message; several users who frequently vote to close and delete may have well got the same warning. That multiple people are in the wrong doesn't make it right.
    – Thom A
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 18:21
  • 4
    @273K Note that I did not say "delete" or "close" I said "cast delete votes" or "cast close votes", i.e. I am implying that the action to cast a close vote was considered incorrect use of your privilege by the moderators, I am quite sure it also means that the same by other users was also considered incorrect.
    – Abdul Aziz Barkat
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 18:25
  • 3
    Mods used that Roomba argument in their mail as well? That's ... funny actually.
    – Tom
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 19:24
  • 3
    Side note: This is kinda like the ubiquitous "Why did this one question get me banned?" Meta question. This isn't one rapid-fire delete vote. It's a pattern. That one question is merely the post that kicked off the investigation. Surprised I haven't gotten one of these yet.
    – user4581301
    Commented Aug 29, 2023 at 1:41

4 Answers 4

Reset to default
47

A closed question is not a dead question. It's pending edits from question author. It MUST NOT be deleted immediately unless it's so bad it can never be on-topic. Let the author gather more information, edit it, and submit for review. If the question remains closed and negatively-scoring after 10 days, the system will delete it automatically.

Trusted users (20k+) are given the privilege to vote to delete instantly. As the help page says:

Closed questions that are of no lasting value whatsoever should be deleted.

Questions that should be immediately deleted are ones that would be off-topic, no matter how much the author edits it. These are the questions that are blatantly off-topic. By removing them quickly, you do a favour to the author (they don't waste more time and accumulate more downvotes) and the rest of us who don't have to see it anymore.

By deleting questions that could be improved, you do a disservice to the author, who will be closer to Q-ban and unable to submit the question for reopening, and to the rest of us, who will be deprived of the chance to review the closure.

Do not blindly delete questions just because the system offers you a button to do so! The system is designed in such a way that only a select few have the option to insta-delete because we expect users to determine what is safe to be deleted instantly.

14
  • 4
    It’s not great that at least one other moderator fundamentally disagrees with you here. Quoting Zoe: However, that's a limitation that should be addressed at a system-level, and not by enforcing policy that hasn't been discussed. Maybe this should be discussed before everyone gives their opinions as gospel?
    – Clive
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 17:51
  • 15
    @Clive Yes, moderators will disagree. Nothing new here. I think that the main point is that fast deleting posts that aren't completely off topic and can potentially be edited and salvaged is not appropriate usage of delete votes. On the other hand, sometimes casting delete votes fast is warranted. It is all about balance.
    – Dalija Prasnikar Mod
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 17:56
  • 1
    @Clive: There is FAQ on meta.SE where under "What are the criteria for deletion?" they write: "For questions, if it no longer adds anything to the site, it should be deleted. Basically, this includes most closed questions that cannot be improved and reopened.". Exactly those aspects are noted in the current answer.
    – Tsyvarev
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 18:00
  • 3
    @DalijaPrasnikar It MUST NOT be deleted immediately doesn’t appear to strike “balance”, does it. It appear to be a directive, from a moderator. But another moderator says no, that’s not accurate. I’m not bothered if people disagree, or what the outcome is, but you can’t have a fundamental imbalance between moderation like this. Needs to be discussed and an agreement communicated to the masses.
    – Clive
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 18:01
  • @Clive I am not creating a new policy.
    – Dharman Mod
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 18:03
  • 4
    I didn’t ask you to, I’m asking you to discuss one that doesn’t exist yet (again see Zoe’s comments)
    – Clive
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 18:05
  • 2
    @Clive If the moderators say that user has a pattern of casting fast delete votes, then it is possible there is no balance in that behavior and that at least some of those questions should have stayed on the site longer. I am deleting a lot, so it is not that I am against deletion.
    – Dalija Prasnikar Mod
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 18:06
  • 2
    Same here @DalijaPrasnikar, like you, and I imagine thousands of other people, I’m smart and experienced enough to know when something is very unlikely to be in salvaged, and will happily delete it straight away. It’s a surprise to me that this is only the expected behaviour from some of the moderators, and that others like Dharman have a different opinion. That’s what I’m trying to get to the bottom of. I haven’t seen anything to convince me that how I’m acting is contrary to expectations yet, just one person’s opinion against an equally valid counter opinion, so…I will carry on for now :)
    – Clive
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 18:10
  • 14
    @Clive i think there's some incorrect conclusions being drawn, at least that's my interpretation. Dharman isn't saying we should never instantly cast a delete vote after closure, rather, that it isn't always ok to instantly cast a delete vote upon closure, and that it should instead be rather rare for that to be necessary.
    – Kevin B
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 18:14
  • Oh, well if that’s the case then apologies to all, I’ve interpreted it badly. That’s exactly the philosophy I’ve been working to anyway @KevinB. But at the same time, it wouldn’t hurt for there to be a proper policy. The argument that it doesn’t hurt the site to not delete something immediately, is completely cancelled out by the opposite argument that it doesn’t hurt the site to delete it either (assuming a suitably experienced person judges it unsalvagabe)
    – Clive
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 18:16
  • 8
    @Clive My answer says that we expect users to know what to do delete and that they delete stuff that should be removed quickly as soon as possible. This is not a new policy. The problem arises when users make a habit of voting to delete anything that the system allows them to. Some questions should not be immediately deleted.
    – Dharman Mod
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 18:52
  • 1
    @Dharman yeah I definitely didn’t get that from your answer, possibly because of the first paragraph, reading it again. For the record, what you said in your previous comment is exactly what I was expecting any policy to look like so all good
    – Clive
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 19:00
  • @Dharman, I agree with your position. But to be fair "no lasting value whatsoever" is very debatable phrase. I see how unclear question can be deemed as having "no lasting value whatsoever" by some users. Can we clarify this clause on help page somehow?
    – markalex
    Commented Aug 29, 2023 at 9:26
  • These are all signals that the process itself is too open for derailment. What you say is very true, "Let the author gather more information, edit it, and submit for review.". No need to hurry, just let it develop for a bit. One could say the same for downvoting a closed question. It may not be deleted but if the question receives 30 downvotes while it is closed, that is practically making it as dead as deleting it would. Very hard to recover from that state. But I don't think anyone would fault someone for casting the downvote, it is being used as intended.
    – Gimby
    Commented Aug 29, 2023 at 14:56
25

Having the ability to use a tool doesn't give someone free reign to use it however they see fit. When these tools are used in a way that is destructive to the normal operation of the site... it's not unreasonable for a mod to reach out to correct that behavior.

1
  • 5
    Yup. "I don't think they have the right to be above the Stack Overflow rules that allow me to vote to delete a post at any time." is the same as saying "I don't think they have the right to be above the Stack Overflow rules that allow me to click 'add a comment' and type whatever I want into the text box at any time." Just because SO has given you a privilege, doesn't mean you're always in the right when using it.
    – scohe001
    Commented Aug 29, 2023 at 12:52
11

Their argument that a user is unable to improve and re-open a deleted question is pulled by the ears. If a user really interested in getting an answer, they can improve and vote to undelete a question or post a new improved question.

Users posting a new (duplicate) question because their other one was closed or deleted is frowned upon. While they can, they really shouldn’t.

Also… users can get more discouraged when their question gets deleted.

I don't think they have the right to be above the SO rules that allow me to vote to delete a post at any time.

As MegaIng put it, if closed questions with enough downvotes were meant to be immediately deleted, it would happen automatically. But it doesn’t, and that’s because some degree of discretion is intended, partly to give users a chance to improve their posts and get them re-opened.

Also… giving users a chance to improve their questions before deleting them doesn’t cause harm. If they don’t, the Roomba will do it. Otherwise, y’all high rep users could be spending that time on other tasks, including the re-open queue.

If a question is truly egregious bad, then delete it. But otherwise, I’d wait for the roomba.

32
  • 2
    giving users a chance to improve their question That user confirmed it could not improve the question, that comment has been deleted.
    – 3CxEZiVlQ
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 17:29
  • 1
    "Users posting a new (duplicate) question because their other one was closed or deleted is frowned upon." not just frowned upon in theory. The question ban algorithm is likely to be influenced more into banning them as the deleted question weights towards that outcome. If a user just re-posts it or hasn't edited it enough, then it weights more towards question ban.
    – VLAZ
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 17:30
  • 20
    @273K and? What's the rush? Again, it was minutes after closure. Do you really believe nothing can change at all for days and the user can't update the question usefully? Even if so, where is the rush to remove the question now? How does it harm the site with its existence?
    – VLAZ
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 17:33
  • 3
    @Dharman Users often don't know the consequences of having heavily downvoted question that can easily accumulate more downvotes. also they often don't know how to delete the question. So when question is unsalvageable, casting fast delete vote can be act of mercy because it will at least prevent further accumulation of downvotes. But it really depends on the situation.
    – Dalija Prasnikar Mod
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 18:04
  • 2
    @VLAZ how does it harm the site to delete it? If it’s unsalvagable, what would be the use in keeping it around? To get more downvotes like Dalija mentioned?
    – Clive
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 18:22
  • 1
    @Clive friction is introduced to prevent users from doing something. Closure is a temporary state meant to get out of via editing. By throwing more friction at the author intentionally, that undermines why closures exist. Again, though - why delete NOW? How are you even certain that it'd only be accruing downvotes for the next few days? Attention to untouched question drops off dramatically after they are posted. What's the worse that happens - the question gets few more downvotes, gets roomba'd and...that harms the site how?
    – VLAZ
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 18:29
  • 2
    @VLAZ Who said that harms the site? Not me. It doesn’t. And neither does deleting an unsalvagable question with speed. So I think what we’re clearly establishing here is that neither action actually harms the site. This is personal opinion, and whether one receives one of these warning messages comes down to luck of the draw; the opinion of the moderator who happens to see what you did. That seems like a bad conclusion, but hey, wouldn’t be the first time would it!
    – Clive
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 18:35
  • 1
    @Clive you have proof that it's unsalvagable? And I mean proof that there is absolutely zero, nada, none at all chance the question could not have been improved at all in several days.
    – VLAZ
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 18:41
  • 2
    @VLAZ you have proof that it isn’t? Your level for burden of proof doesn’t sound like what we normally use here, by the way. One is not expected to exhaustively scour the extremes of every possibility before voting
    – Clive
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 18:42
  • 2
    @Clive you're the one who brought up unsalvagable. Seems you need proof it is. If you don't, I see no benefit and only harm in assuming there is no potential way to be improved. And again, neither you nor 273k has explained WHY DELETE NOW? The best you have is that it's unsalvagable but you also can't prove it is.
    – VLAZ
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 18:47
  • 4
    No, the OP brought up unsalvagable (they had to, it’s obviously at the crux of this discussion). Why you think that brings with it some sort of individual’s burden of proof, I don’t know. It doesn’t. For every “proof” you demand, I can demand the anti-“proof” from you, it’s a pointless interaction. Intuition, knowledge, experience, and documented direction. That’s all this needs, like everything else on the site. This one is missing the latter of those, and it’s causing problems because everyone is acting on their own personal opinion, their own interpretation of what they’re seeing @VLAZ
    – Clive
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 18:55
  • 3
    @VLAZ Why not delete it now if an experienced community member judges it to be so worthy? It’s noise until it’s a good question isn’t it? But this is the point I’m trying to make: the actions are identical in terms of impact, whether or not you think one is good depends whether you prefer cleanliness over verbosity (or something like that). Until there are some guidelines, people like us who obviously have different points of view are just going to keep arguing in circles, because, by definition without guidance, we’re both right and we’re both wrong
    – Clive
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 19:13
  • 3
    What I’m claiming is that I use the delete link correctly, in the face of the guidance I’ve been given. This includes deleting things I believe the community has put its trust in me to be able to determine as delete-worthy, immediately and with gusto. When I see some official guidelines that suggest that isn’t what I should be doing, I’ll change my behaviour. But the responses to this question haven’t done that, in fact they’ve just demonstrated the need for an agreed policy. Everything else here is just individuals’ opinions, and while interesting to read, isn’t going to affect how people act
    – Clive
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 19:26
  • 3
    That guidance is essentially determining "lasting value", which IMO isn't clear enough. Instead of this, could we go and create some more clear guidence?
    – cocomac
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 19:38
  • 11
    That specific question has been discussed in depth on the other meta discussion. It was far from trash. It dit contain an MRE. Roomba would've gotten to the deletion eventually. There was absolutely no reason the question had to be deleted. Community consensus strongly agrees that that deletion was excessive, and even an abuse of the deletion privilege.
    – Cerbrus
    Commented Aug 28, 2023 at 19:57
1

I agree with the position of the moderators/Meta community here in that you should wait to delete questions if they can be edited into shape such that they might qualify for reopening.

At the very least, if a question is simply closes as lacking an MRE or needing details/clarity (and has no other problems), it should not be delete-voted until at least another day or two, even by 20k users eligible to cast delete votes immediately based on the score. Deleting this post just a few minutes after it was closed was absolutely excessive.

With that being said, I do take issue with some of the things said in that moderator message:

The system allows to immediately vote to delete questions that score -3 or less in order to get rid of utterly unsalvageable trash that should've never been posted.

This basically covers stuff that isn't quite eligible for red flags but is outside of the site's scope in an unredeemable way. Something like "Should I get a Ph.D. or find a job?", "How is the AI market going to evolve in the next 5 years", job ads (might also red flag those) and totally irrelevant stuff like which is the best ice cream flavor.

The help center guidance on delete votes at 10k does not use any such examples or metrics like "in order to get rid of utterly unsalvageable trash that should've never been posted". What the guidance does say is you should delete "questions with no lasting value". It then goes on to caution users about good answers on such questions, questions that may serve as good duplicate sign posts, and highly-upvoted questions.

The 20k expanded privilege page doesn't mention quality metrics at all. It only says "Voting to delete questions with a score of -3 or lower immediately after they are closed".

While I think most would agree that the examples in the mod message above have "no lasting value" on Stack Overflow, other questions that are about programming are arguably of no lasting value (typographical errors, nth duplicates, etc.) either.

Perhaps we need to have those privilege pages updated to clarify when the 10k and the expanded 20k delete vote privilege ought to be used (or not used)?

By immediately deleting [questions], you are stripping the OP of their right to fix their question.

This is just false. Users can edit their own deleted posts.

Moving forward please do not cast any more delete votes on questions before the 10-days Roomba would get them.

I'm assuming this is special guidance that only this specific user needs to follow because they've apparently caused problems? Given how opaque mod messages are, I can see the recipient of such a message being unclear on whether this is a site-wide expectation or specific information just for them.

You must log in to answer this question.

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