30

Creating a 'slush pile' for miscellaneous questions goes squarely against the purpose for which Stack Exchange was created. Our goal is not to create "general sites" for technology or anything else. Instead we create very specific sites for each community's area of expertise. See About Stack Exchange. That's why instead of allowing questions on any topic, ...


23

Yes the up votes and down vote limits per proposal on Area 51 should match. This related question from Jan 2014 (I just found it) seems to indicate that those expressing a preference, prefer to match limits. The argument is made at the related question, that matching these would deviate from the standards at Stack Exchange. I disagree, on Stack Exchange ...


18

The SE model works well by attracting experts. In short, how do you attract experts on (by definition) the broadest possible topic in the universe?!


15

I'd went even further and suggest, that the limit of the downvotes should equal the number of used upvotes. Voting on example questions has other purpose as voting on the launched sites. Here I use votes to say, which question I'd like to see on the site, and which I wouldn't like to see. Saying what I'd like to see is more important, so the upvotes should ...


12

No. Absolutely, positively, no. This has been an issue for Pastafarianism. A lot of people opposed the proposal, and so a lot of questions were downvoted. This issue was raised in a question by James Jenkins that has since been cited numerous times. The logic of those who downvote because they dislike the proposal is perhaps as follows: The proposal needs ...


11

Unfortunately, no — Area 51 would not be more effective without down-votes under the current process. Yes, we might be able to push more proposals through, but without a means of expressing disagreement, offbeat (and sometimes frankly bad) ideas can only trickle upward even with only a small contingent of users who may be unfamiliar with the underlying ...


7

As reported from the FAQ, there is a limit of 5 up-votes per proposal, and a limit of 30 votes per day. This means that you could up-vote 5 questions for a proposal, and down-vote 25 questions the first day; down-vote 30 questions of the same proposal the next days. While I would expect serial down-votes for a proposal's questions to be detected, I feel ...


6

No, it's not appropriate. You should judge the example question independent of the proposal. This should work in both directions. Many people upvote junk questions only because they support the proposal, which is as bad as downvoting good questions because of unsupporting of the proposal. However, many people feel harassed on the basis of the proposal ...


6

Time, reputation (up or down) tends to fall away as proposals are deleted. Deleting a poorly received question will also remove lost reputation. BUT On Area 51 it does not always happen in real time. Periodically reputation is recalculated. One day you have some rep the next day 30% is gone. Manual recalculations can be initiated by moderators. If ...


4

There is no requirement on any Stack Exchange site to explain your downvotes. And there shouldn't be. Should everyone explain why they upvote? If you think someone should be required to comment when downvoting, you should think they need to leave one when upvoting, too. It is precisely the same mechanism - just in the other direction. If someone wishes to ...


4

Question and answer blocking was not implemented in the proposal process, and there are no plans to do so; it doesn't really make sense in that context (not without significant re-engineering). The "Discussion Zone" is actually a meta support site, so post bans are either turned off or set so high that it would be exceedingly difficult to trigger "...


3

No, Area 51 is not hooked into that system — at least not for the "example questions"; I'm not entirely sure about the meta/discussion section.


3

I'm still fairly new to Area 51, but I would think that adding a Meta/Discussion Zone question openly voicing concerns about a proposal would be a more effective and mature way to handle sites that one might disapprove of. I say "more effective" because, if the concern is really valid and is widely supported, other users may read it and be persuaded.


3

Kind of, if you collect a lot of down votes you can lose abilities. See Related Hypothetically, what if you fall below 25 rep? & How does a user with no activity get to 35 rep on Area51?


3

The Area 51 code was derived from our main Q&A model, but the concept of "reputation" is not a perfect fit for what we are trying to accomplish here. Area 51 is not a knowledge-building Q&A site where you're necessarily supposed to show off your prowess as an avid "expert site builder." So the rewards aren't really focused on the reputation you get, ...


2

An additional reason to require comments is to be sure the negative points being assigned to the user who posted the question are justified and not arbitrary. Maybe the person leaving the down-vote doesn't understand the question because he or she has very little knowledge of what the question discusses. Or maybe someone is revenge-down-voting a question ...


1

Nope, that is not right. Not sure if the related comments are still around, but previous comments by SE Staff indicate they just don't care enough to address it. Most believe it is not significant, In theory it will be corrected in Area 52 which is currently not under development I am over simplifying and being slightly down cast in my wording, because ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible