Vanilla 1.1.9 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
This question http://mathoverflow.net/questions/105495/what-can-an-algebraic-geometer-do-outside-academia-closed looks like it's undergoing a tug of war between closers and those who would reopen (there are 4 votes to reopen last I checked). I don't think the question is appropriate for this site, but anyway it seems like a good idea to have people bring their opinions into the open, rather than have the tug of war.
is it still a tug of war?
Yes, I think you could say that.
I thought there would be discussion if I simply made a note of what was happening there. Basic etiquette, which is sometimes observed here, would seem to call for those involved in the tug of war to explain their reasons for re-opening and re-closing. Time was we used to have these discussions here.
But there may have been a drop in the level of etiquette since that time. In fact, I almost quit MO entirely a few months ago because I was so put off by some rude behavior.
It seems to me that the software handles the open/close tug-of-wars very well, resulting in the nice compromise that borderline questions are closed for a part of the time and open for part of the time, roughly in proportion to the community support. These changes in status do not seem problematic or worrisome, and there seems little need or likelihood for the community to come to a consensus. If the questions were bumped when their status changed, then I might feel differently, but it seems that the questions can simply slide quietly down the main page, sometimes closed and sometimes open, while people express their views through their votes.
In particular, I don't really see an etiquette issue concerning people who decline to come to meta to discuss their reasons for voting as they did.
(Note: I am not involved in any way concerning the question giving rise to this thread, and I did not vote on that question to close or re-open.)
Todd, I voted but didn't comment here. I suppose it's because I didn't have anything new to say: similar situations have already arisen enough times that the points of view on both sides have been well aired ("career advice is of interest to many professional mathematicians", "but sex advice is also of interest to many professional mathematicians", etc.).
I half-agree with JDH's point, which is something I hadn't thought of before. Where I disagree is that the process tends to stabilize after a while, and in a case like this, the state in which it stabilizes is pretty arbitrary — but might have emotional significance for the original poster, if they construe it as the final judgement of the MO community.
It seems to me that the software handles the open/close tug-of-wars very well
Actually, I'm not so sure it does, since the closers are publicly visible and the re-openers aren't. (You'll see that closers often do feel constrained to explain, because of some perceived slight such as whether algebraic geometers are being disrespected. Not so the re-openers.) But anyway, we used to have such discussions in cases of controversy. Something apparently has changed.
similar situations have already arisen enough times that the points of view on both sides have been well aired
But some might not be aware of the history of such situations. I for one had gotten the impression, perhaps wrongly, that career advice questions from anonymous posters were frowned upon by most of the community.
Point taken, Todd. It's good to have these discussions in the open, even if some of us are repeating ourselves.
Just a technical detail (as I briefly said why I voted to close already, and the closers point of view is rather the more well-documented one, and since in general since some time I try to limit my contribution to meta severly):
In principle one can see who voted to reopen
http://mathoverflow.net/revisions/105495/list (and via changing the number accordingly this works for any question)
Note: While this technical detail could be taken to contradict what Todd Trimble said, I still agree with his sentiment. Not only but also as it can be a bit inconvenient to get to this list (if there is no editing history), even if one knows it exists, and it is never so prominently visible who voted to reopen.
Ah, thanks quid. That's good to know.
@Frank Thorne: note that there is no such thing as voting to reopen a question anonymously. Just as with closing, if your vote to reopen is effective, it becomes public information that you voted to reopen (as quid explained).
I also voted to reopen. I believe that a question like this has the potential to be harmful, but also very useful; as such, I am inclined to keep it open until and unless the answers and comments seem to be doing more net harm than net good.
1 to 17 of 17