3
\$\begingroup\$

There is a post notice for answers in need of support, but I'm unclear as to how that post notice is placed.

If we see something that needs support, what is the process for noting that? Obviously a comment isn't a bad idea, but many times people don't want to comment because they don't want to engage in a conversation or for any other reason.

Is there a process we should follow?

| |
\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Wait, is there a flag for that now? Is it only announced as of yet, or is there some other reason I can't see it? Or are you referring to the post banner? \$\endgroup\$ – Someone_Evil May 19 at 13:15
  • \$\begingroup\$ @someone_evil misuse of terms by me. I should have said post notice. \$\endgroup\$ – NautArch May 19 at 13:30
  • \$\begingroup\$ No worries, I mostly just got really hopeful that we'd get a clear flag for that (presumably feeding into the LQP review queue). \$\endgroup\$ – Someone_Evil May 19 at 13:33
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ related: What's up with this "please edit to add citations" banner? \$\endgroup\$ – nitsua60 May 19 at 13:57
10
\$\begingroup\$

It's a post notice. Diamond moderators can add and remove it. There's no flag associated with it.

Leave a comment requesting the clarification or support that's needed. If it's egregious then also raise a flag for moderator attention suggesting we add a post notice.

“Egregious” here is key. We don't add them to just every single answer that needs additional citation; comments alone can handle that. We use these in cases where we want to step in and send a clear signal to somebody (the author and/or other users): for example, when someone's leaving an answer to a high-profile question making bold uncited claims. If that post notice is on the answer, it's likely either getting improved soon or deleted soon.

| |
\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Who or what defines egregious? Where is the line? Should we not do anything to make moderators aware of potentially egregious? \$\endgroup\$ – NautArch May 19 at 13:29
  • 7
    \$\begingroup\$ You're asking for definition that doesn't exist. It's hand-wavey. I've described it in as much detail as I think I can. It's not like we have a specific definition or point system to go by; we just add the post notice when it seems like it's necessary. \$\endgroup\$ – doppelgreener May 19 at 13:32
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ @NautArch Not only doesn't exist, I'm not sure it can even exist. Every post is different and there's no way that I've seen or can think of to quantify it. In the end it, comes down to moderator judgement and more goes into it than we could possibly capture in some type of definition. \$\endgroup\$ – Rubiksmoose May 19 at 13:35
  • \$\begingroup\$ So should we not flag anything to bring something potential to the moderators attention? \$\endgroup\$ – NautArch May 19 at 13:43
  • 6
    \$\begingroup\$ I suspect you may have misread, 'cause I didn't say "don't flag anything". Just, save it for when it seems really necessary. Or put differently: "don't flag absolutely everything", we don't want to be inundated with cases comments can handle just fine. \$\endgroup\$ – doppelgreener May 19 at 13:46
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ I was asking generally, but maybe I should have made this about a specific question. I had gotten feedback about a flag for this on a question where I thought there was a consensus on needing a certain type of experience. When the answer specifically said they didn't have that experience, I thought it could use the post notice, but it was declined. Should I add the details of that specific question? I kept it general so I could better understand when to bring to the moderators attention. \$\endgroup\$ – NautArch May 19 at 14:00
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ @NautArch: To save you the time of having to ask a separate question: I declined that flag (with the pre-listed reason along the lines of "only flag stuff that requires mod intervention"), because OP already mentioned in the answer that they hadn't played a WM-style game but supported their answer with their experience with a sandbox-style non-WM game. Anything beyond that can be handled by votes and such, and doesn't really need us to do anything. If people feel that the answerer's support for their answer is insufficient/irrelevant, they can make that judgment themselves. \$\endgroup\$ – V2Blast May 19 at 21:12
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ Essentially, the point of me declining that flag was that our job as mods is not to judge "is this answer good enough" or "is this answer supported well enough". The point of the post notice is to basically indicate "this answer doesn't support itself (and/or give any explanation) at all [and may be deleted if it isn't edited to do so]". \$\endgroup\$ – V2Blast May 19 at 21:19
  • \$\begingroup\$ @v2blast okay, I'm a little confused, but I'll accept and move on. My concern was that west Marches is a very specific type of sandbox and the something similar isn't the same. I had asked in chat and folks agreed. I posted a comment under the question and folks agreed. I'll try and be more understanding of when to flag, but I'll likely just avoid it as I don't really understand the line. \$\endgroup\$ – NautArch May 19 at 22:36
  • \$\begingroup\$ "If that post notice is on the answer, it's likely either getting improved soon or deleted soon." Is there any review process for these notices? For instance, this answer has had it for over two months and hasn't been improved. I know I've seen others that were years old, though I can't recall if any were on this site specifically. \$\endgroup\$ – John Montgomery May 19 at 23:21
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @NautArch: It's fine to leave a comment asking them to support the answer better, or explaining why you don't think their experience is comparable to an actual WM game. But it's not really a case that requires moderator intervention. They have supported their answer with something - whether or not that support is good enough or relevant enough is just a judgment people can make for themselves, not something the mods decree from on high. \$\endgroup\$ – V2Blast May 19 at 23:25
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ @JohnMontgomery: There's no review queue of posts with post notices that I'm aware of, so if a post falls off the front page (or if it's a post I don't personally look at unless flagged, since it's not an RPG I play :P), then usually the post that has the post notice will just stay where it is unless someone flags it or votes to delete it. Since that linked answer just kinda says "yes" and effectively nothing else, I've deleted it now. (There does seem to be a "low-quality posts" queue; VLQ/NAA flags make a post appear in that queue.) \$\endgroup\$ – V2Blast May 19 at 23:28
  • \$\begingroup\$ @V2Blast I meant like if the diamond mods had some sort of interface for it or tracked the ones they placed or anything like that. So I should just flag them if I see them then? \$\endgroup\$ – John Montgomery May 19 at 23:42
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ @JohnMontgomery: If you think the question/answer should be deleted, then yeah, vote to delete them if you have the privilege, or otherwise flag them with the appropriate reason. And no, there's no mod interface/listing specifically for posts that have post notices. \$\endgroup\$ – V2Blast May 19 at 23:53
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @JohnMontgomery: ...Turns out I was wrong about there being no post-notices queue/list. There's actually an Annotated Posts page, with tabs for both locked posts and ones with post notices! It's even publicly visible to everyone. Turns out I didn't know about it because it's not linked from any part of the interface... \$\endgroup\$ – V2Blast May 29 at 0:25
3
\$\begingroup\$

It's probably not a flag, but a post notice. They can only be added (and removed) by ♦ moderators. RPG has three 'standard' answer notices and a fourth RPG-specific one, as can be seen in the Data Explorer.

I'm a moderator on three other sites in the network and regularly apply answer notices when I see a low quality answer (often after it has been flagged as Very Low Quality) of which I think it might be able to be edited into a proper answer. I guess you could use a custom moderator flag asking to apply a post notice, but I haven't seen anybody do that so far and I'm not sure what the moderators here think about this.

| |
\$\endgroup\$
0
\$\begingroup\$

Here's how this works, based on my experience. This is emergent behavior, not policy, and some of it is probably undesired.

  1. The post notice tends to go (~20% chance) on answers with no-to-moderate citations on questions that are active and that a mod is personally interested in and where the answer is out of left field (this is part of why I think moderator system proficiency matters).

  2. The post notice tends to go (~1% chance) on the inevitable unsupported but upvoted 'popular opinion' answers to highly-active idea-generation questions that aren't being closed.

  3. The post notice tends to go (~100% chance) on all other unsupported answers posted before the banners are put on things where a post notice was placed on an answer pursuant to section 2.

  4. The post notice tends to go (~60% chance) on all answers, regardless of support or lack thereof, where a post notice was placed because of number 2 and the post does not cite a respected published resource (e.g. answers citing personal experience or blog posts for a system where those aren't respected much or "I talked to at GenCon in 19XX and they said X" or "I am and I say Y")

  5. The post notice tends to go (~50% chance) on flagrant opinion answers by high-rep users when those are contrary to the opinion of a mod or other high-rep user, which is practically all the time.

  6. The post notice tends to go (~5% chance) on unsupported posts by users with 3K-7K rep. The chance rises significantly if a user doesn't change their behaviour after receiving a notice.

  7. The post notice does not go on posts by new users unless the post has bad grammar and is wrong. If a post has bad grammar and is wrong and the user sticks around to defend it, it may (~25% chance) get the post notice. That chance skyrockets if the bad, ungrammatical, unsupported post is not at a negative total vote score, but that's practically never (such posts are usually edited for grammar or downvoted into oblivion or both).

  8. The post notice (or maybe a similar one?) goes on (~70%) answers that recommend homebrew without indication that the homebrew has been tested at all on a question where a mod is participating and after the poster ignores comments suggesting they support their claims.

  9. The post notice goes where chat summons it, but I know not the ways of chat.

| |
\$\endgroup\$
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ You some interesting observations here (and some that doesn't mesh with my experience as well). You also have two #3s ;-) I'm also confused by what you mean in both #3s. Can you clarify? \$\endgroup\$ – Rubiksmoose May 27 at 19:02
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ There are a lot of unsupported popular opinion answers to idea-generation questions. Most of it is never touched by a mod. When a mod does interact with a question, though, then they tend to banner all the unsupported answers there if they banner any of them. They also tend to banner some answers that are supported there, as collateral damage, but they hardly ever (I have never seen it happen) don't banner an unsupported answer to the question we are putting banners on answers to now. \$\endgroup\$ – Please stop being evil May 27 at 21:27
  • \$\begingroup\$ Thanks for the clarification! I understand what you mean now. \$\endgroup\$ – Rubiksmoose May 27 at 21:36
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ If I may ask for another clarification, with regards to #5 what do you mean by "which is practically all the time"? I'm reading it as you saying that mods disagree with answers all the time which makes me think I'm reading that wrong, since that is not my experience. I'd say the majority of answers on the site are good and agreeable as far as my judgement can tell. What am I missing? \$\endgroup\$ – Rubiksmoose May 27 at 21:39
  • \$\begingroup\$ When a high-rep user posts a flagrantly unsupported answer (this is rare), then, when someone else with high rep disagrees with that position (when the former happens, this is extremely common) then the banner goes up. If everyone with high rep agrees with the underlying opinion position that has no support, the banner doesn't go up. Someone disagreeing with that unsupported claim is the impetus for banner up-going. \$\endgroup\$ – Please stop being evil May 28 at 0:13

You must log in to answer this question.

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