Pete L. Clark comments on "Research statement" (4689)

Pete L. Clark — Sat, 10 Apr 2010 16:30:19 -0700

I don't think it was a mistake, rather a borderline judgment call.

However, I do think that the site has grown nicely in the last couple of months, to the point where we now have 50 people who can cast votes to close (from what I can see, somewhere around 2/3 of these people actually do so on occasion) and reopen. In such a situation, I think the moderators' ability to unilaterally open/close (and inability to cast votes like everyone else) should be used increasingly rarely, mostly in situations where there is something blatantly inappropriate going on and/or time is of the essence.

I look forward to the time when the moderators can, when they choose to, participate in the democratic process the same as the rest of us do.

Ben Webster comments on "Research statement" (4688)

Ben Webster — Sat, 10 Apr 2010 13:16:10 -0700

I've reopened and answered the Research Statement question (I'll note, it had two other votes to reopen). Perhaps this was a mistake, and if you think so, you can tell me here. My logic was that it is a question about a legitimate topic (job applications), and while slightly ridiculous-sounding, deserved to be addressed.

tea.mathoverflow.net - Discussion Feed (Research statement)

Pete L. Clark comments on "Research statement" (4689)

Ben Webster comments on "Research statement" (4688)