« first day (1436 days earlier)      last day (2100 days later) » 

/me gets downvote button ready
Q: Cannot review more than 19 low-quality posts

Final Contest and Related: Cannot review anymore after 19 reviews

haha, -1 already.
few seconds after submitting :D
Can you add a question?
@rene: what question? It is a bugreport.
@FinalContest Yeah, just noticed the tag. As it's already been reported, why are you re-reporting it? — Sam 1 min ago
5:04 PM
^^ that
haha, -2 already.
@FinalContest Ask nicely if you did something wrong of if something is borked and if it is if it can be fixed. The devs at SE are also just people...
@hichris123: because it is not asked on SO meta, and that was about 3-4 months ago?
@FinalContest ... so? Can't you bounty it? (and it doesn't matter if it's reported on a billion per-site metas... honestly I'm confused why you're creating a bug report knowing that it's already been reported)
A: Is cross-posting a question on multiple Stack Exchange sites permitted if the question is on-topic for each site?

DiagoNO Ask the question on the site you think is most applicable. If, like in this case, it does not get any answer, ask a moderator to migrate the question, or alternatively, delete it and re-ask it. Each site is focused on a specific topic area. If you have a question you feel is too ambiguous, e...

5:08 PM
@hichris123: downvote to hell then, who cares.
no, I definitely cannot put a bounty on it.
meta SO exists for a reason after all. It is a sub-community, period.
still, downvotes are not for duplicates.
feel free to close it as duplicate if you can.
There, bountied.
I will stand corrected if we have a canonical report on meta SO.
@hichris123 That ... wasn't spam.
@AnnaLear Yeah, I figured that out after flagging. :( (it does seem like half a question...)
one more job for moderators to disassociate ;)
@Bart: but exercise is proven, you can see no matter what bugreport is reported by me, it is downvoted to hell.
5:11 PM
@hichris123 It's an actual question. Very coherent and reasonably well written. Just in Russian. :)
by people who cannot even read it is a bugreport LOL
"Where is the question?" - "Fuck, cannot you just read such a short post?!"
@FinalContest Or 3 users simply don't appreciate you posting a bug-report which is a duplicate of a report you yourself link to ...
@AnnaLear hehe, yeah. Maybe that'll teach me to not flag posts as spam before translating them...
Thinking outside the box here though
@Bart: yeah, of course.
5:12 PM
@hichris123 Or learn Russian. ;)
@Bart: within such a short while for a valid bugreport, not appreciated. I almost believed it.
@AnnaLear or just use bing translator bing.com/translator
but you are free to point out any bugreport which is "duplicated", theoretically speaking, it really is not, that got 3 downvotes within such a short while. Good luck with that, I think you will have very hard task.
well, I do not care, it is just causing more work for moderators.
Sometimes I wonder if you just enjoy this whole victim role you put yourself into
you deleted it @FinalContest?
5:14 PM
Yeah @VotetoClose
@Bart: come on... you cannot come up with such a loser reply.
Dang.. I was going to edit in a question
do the stuff above, and prove that I am not a victim; otherwise it is pretty pointless to accuse someone with something if you cannot prove it.
anyway, images are deleted. :-)
show me one valid bugreport which got 3 downvotes within such a short while, and then we can talk about whether I am a victim or not.
which was "duplicated".
but it is clear that some people are total dumb on meta. "Where is the question?" for a bugreport ...
You posted a picture and a link. I guess people expected more than that.
Correction, two pictures.
Yet, he could not explain what?!
Come on, the guy even admitted he was stupid. That is at least a good point.
5:19 PM
@FinalContest people just expect more out of tenured users I guess
so the problem of FinalContest is that he has reputation
@Braiam: huh?!
take all the reputation away from me if you establish a completely collaborative site.
-1. Bugreports are unwelcome on SE. — Final Contest 2 mins ago
this whole reputation thing is completely stupid.
5:21 PM
@Bart: yeah, I follow the majority. Sorry for appreciating what they think.
@Braiam Well I think the main problem of that question was that he already knew there was a duplicate but posted a duplicate question anyways, but I can't re-read/or improve his question since he deleted it.
Nah, you're just a big whine @FinalContest
@FinalContest so if the majority starts a mob over an incorrect assumption you'd follow them.. better to stand on principals than what everyone else is doing
do not worry, that is not the last bugreport I will vote down.
5:23 PM
SE simply does not deserve bugreports anymore IMHO, hence they will get the negative votes from me.
You do realize that the score doesn't have much bearing on the outcome, right? You're not really punishing "SE" in any way.
But hey, knock yourself out.
@AnnaLear: huh?!
Sure @AnnaLear, that's exactly what someone who's part of the system would say :p
the scores have "much bearing", I literally deleted valid bugreports because of that and have not reported a couple every since.
5:26 PM
@AnnaLear drats! my evil plan was foiled
@FinalContest she's saying that they will still fix bug reports that have negative scores, and not fix ones with high scores
If a bug needs to be fixed, it doesn't matter if it's at +50 or -50, it's gonna be fixed. Similarly, if it's by design, it doesn't matter if the report has a score of +200. Higher score helps attract attention, sure, but that's about it.
And it is not really about just bugreports, but also further additions in comments which gained no further upvotes.... come on, you cannot really say this system is not fundamentally broken or objective rather than subjective.
I don't really see what your issue with this is. You don't have to report bugs to us, that's cool.
I definitely will not, although I kept 3-5 in secrets so far.
5:28 PM
Sounds good.
well, it is SE's loss, but I guess that will be also explained as "this guy is just lying and he does not have any serious bugreports", meh.
You sound like my 4 year old
Nah, I believe you. But it's your choice whether to report them or not. You're choosing not to and that's your right.
@FinalContest where has anyone called you a liar?
absolutely, and if you cannot see the loss there and say "sounds good", that is quite bad.
5:29 PM
I'm not gonna lose sleep over it. Either someone else will report them later, or we'll discover them on our own.
yeah, when many people suffer from it (hello commercial customers?), or will not be revealed and commercial customers step away, but whatever.
not reporting bug may be "OK", "Sounds good" is not constructive way of talking about it, I think, but meh.
Would I prefer it if you reported the issues you saw? Definitely. Am I going to try to convince you to do it? No. You're welcome to participate as much or as little as you want.
@FinalContest Draw your own conclusions : data.stackexchange.com/meta.stackoverflow/query/207576/…
anyway, good luck with the further work for moderators.
@Rene: sorry, but I do not care anymore.
any bugreport is defacto -1 from now on for me.
@FinalContest it's a freaking bug report. It's META. It's useless rep. Stop freaking caring and just post whatever you want to post. And then MOVE ON! ... And if all that is too much for you, just don't Meta. Stay away from it. Do whatever it is you enjoy doing on the site.
5:32 PM
I hope others will also get embarrassed and step away from reporting. It is chancy, so it can serve some good :-)
@Bart: stop that reputation bullshit.
You're the one getting freaked out over downvotes, not me
Being constructive and collaborative should have nothing to do with that continuous reputation mantra bullshit.
Well, if you want to waste your time downvoting ALL THE THINGS, go for it.
@AnnaLear: Sounds good.
That's the spirit.
5:34 PM
btw, I am writing to the management tonight.... just for your information.
How will we ever sleep.
My requests for license related issues are still unresolved. It has been several weeks now, almost a month.
@Bart: you will, the managers about suing might not if it goes that far.
it is license violation after all.
@FinalContest I'll be you they don't care, unless your letter shows up on letter head from a law firm
@Andy: a friendly reminder still goes before going the law-way.
I think it is fair that way.
the moderator and community management team could not manage it so far. If the main management team will not be able either, the law has to come, sadly.
5:37 PM
In other news, turns out that Stack Exchange doesn't have unlimited resources after all. Just like every other software shop.
You're here every single day @FinalContest. So you know full well that there are plenty of employees roaming around here. Why not ping one of them and ask for a status update?
@FinalContest Now I'm really curious which address you're writing to.
yeah, deleting comments for downvote reasons are more important topics than license violation, I agree, Robert. I would like to friendly remind you that moderators have been rejecting flags that the "team" suggested and it's been a month without fixing things. I think this is a valid limit to wait for.
@FinalContest your meta account is again scheduled for deletion. This will remove your name from anything you've written there. If you honestly want your stuff anonymized, consider this done. If you're just here to make trouble, then cancel the deletion and STFU.
5:39 PM
@Bart: the email thread is around 20 emails now.
what more to ping, really?
I guess I should be glad I'm not on the other end of that one then.
I think so, too.
law-issues are not unimportant.
@AnnaLear: let that be my deal from that point on tonight if the posts do not get disassociated that I indicated, as per license.
@rene: I do not understand how your query was relevant to my question, sorry... The first four entries I opened up are not duplicates....
@Bart: what is your explanation for starting with two downvotes for a valid bugreport and now it having 13 scores? meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/261967/…
the difference was disassociation, nothing else.
do you really not see any subjectivity there?
5:55 PM
I don't see why I need to explain anything there. It seems to have my upvote, and I only see a single downvote. Nothing to get worked up over.
yes, after the disassociation it became "normal flow". Before that, it had two downvotes to start with (without content change, of course). How do you explain this, honestly?
More people read it over time? This seems straightforward.
So ... you're the one applying "because it's me, Laszlo" to all of that. That doesn't make it true.
why do you keep repeat that mantra; just explain it, please.
why did it get highly upvoted from a downvoted bugreport after the disassociation?
What is there to explain? How the heck should I know what happened and why it happened?
5:58 PM
it was also duplicate on meta.
and it got upvoted semi-heavily, hello?
I know I'm somewhat of a deity to all of you, true, but I'm not all-knowing, nor all powerful.
Coincidence. I believe that bug report would have picked up upvotes regardless had you waited more than 3 hours before getting it disassociated.
One of the downvotes was retracted by the user who cast it, too. Before disassociation.
@AnnaLear: after the moderator brought the topic to him, yes.
before that, he was proud of his downvote when I asked why. He said he could not reproduce blabla, not that he could after the disassociation and moderator-talk, right?
and again, it is a clear duplicate, yet upvoted without my name on it.
the other got downvoted to hell quickly.
and before you claim, "oopsie, it is just another accident", let me bring your attention to this:
Q: Do not remove votes for non-fraud (puppet) user removal

Final ContestI just came across several user deletions the last couple of days in my history. I am not much concerned about the reputation, but for sure, score is a type of measure on Stack Overflow how good a post is. The help center says: This message means that a user who voted for one of your posts ...

6:03 PM
@FinalContest I understood your comment as Are there more bug reports that get downvotes while still being valid/legit bugs-reports to either support or defeat your point that you're victimized, whatever that means.
see my scores, and see the one on meta ... there is some significant difference between them.
what is the explanation there for the huge difference with the same content?
@Bart: honestly, I understand you do not see it fully subjective, but you really do not see any subjectivity there?
@FinalContest That's a feature request. Some don't like/want that feature perhaps.
@BArt: come on, 817 vs. -4.
@FinalContest Why do you find duplicates then ask the same question/feature request again?
6:05 PM
Q: Don't throw away all votes when a user is deleted

Mad ScientistCurrently, when a moderator deletes a user all of the user's votes are removed along with the user himself. I was pretty surprised at this behaviour when I first heard about it, and I don't think it is a good idea to throw away all of the votes just because the user is deleted. Votes are locked ...

@Rene: some people claimed it got downvotes because it was a "duplicate". The first four entries in your results are not duplicate.
@FinalContest I can't prove subjectivity. I won't assume subjectivity. And, correct me if I'm wrong, but you've pointed out subjectivity to moderators or the team and the response was "no such evidence"?
So what do you want me to say then?
you are wrong.
Why does that not surprise me?
because you think you are always correct
they wrote they have not found evidence for serial downvotes.
6:07 PM
so it is not the same as "subjectivity".
serialvote can be objective.
I do that regularly with crap posts that get deleted in no time.
this is why I hate dealing with humans...
but either way, I am yet to find an explanation for 817 vs. -4.
@FinalContest 4 people like to be contrary?
I'm sure you've already settled on an explanation
@FinalContest compress your post in less than 10 words and do the same with Mad's and you will notice a fundamental difference between both
which is why people doesn't agree with yours and does with Mad's
6:11 PM
@Braiam: come on, I expected more from you.... that is not a real argument. Bring up actual facts.
Tell that he says "A", but you say "B".
I am sure you can write the "20 words" down.
(in fact you wrote more to explain it around)
@FinalContest There's no accounting for voting. On the level of your meta question and on the level of the main site, there's no way to know why people vote. But I do have to say I had to read the comments and your feature request to understand it was about post score and not reputation. (That's probably because the two are very closely linked.)
but that way you don't learn anything @FinalContest
@Braiam: I do not learn anything from fact-free throwing either, I am afraid.
@JonEricson: honestly?
"I agree about the reputation removal if it is a fake account in question. However, if it is not, I am proposing not to remove the scores. Since scores are a valuable measure of the posts, I am personally inclined to think that these ought to remain around for user removal."
how is it not clear that I am talking about scores?
feel free to propose better wording because it goes beyond my league why that is not clear that I am referring to scores..
6:31 PM
So, yeah... Final is ignoring me here, so none of this is for his benefit...
But for the record - because he's stating this stuff publicly - I and several other members of the community team have invested a considerable amount of time and effort into investigating these reports of voting fraud, taken action where it was warranted, and responded honestly when there was no evidence. We're quite frankly sick of him crying wolf and refusing to believe any words that are not coming from inside his own head.
If I see him wasting one more employee's time here chasing ghosts, he's gonna be asked to take a break.
@Shog9 I always presumed "ignore this user" was something client side
@JonEricson: I kindly hoped for discussing the edit first here. I do not agree with it completely, and of course it will gain further downvotes as it is marked with my name. I really wished to disassociate it first. It was already flagged.
@FinalContest Feel free to revert.
@JonEricson: I will do that if you do not wish to discuss the edit as I do not agree with it in its current form (like help center removal).
Even the appreciate the willingness, it was not the right move to bump it before the disassociation. I am kind of sad about this edit due to that plan. Of course, it further gained another downvote even with the "new edit".
Say @JonEricson, thanks for the attempt to help out and clarify there.
6:40 PM
@AnnaLear: well, that is bad. I cannot remove my comments anymore apparently ...
Sorry, I had to honor your request. It is, after all, in our content license.
well, would it be possible to remove the comments, too?
haha, -4 -> -2 after the disassociation :D
and now someone turned the downvote to upvote...
@AnnaLear: Just another nudge regarding this ongoing bug:
Q: How is this user able to review posts so long after they were completed originally?

WernerThis is a revisit of Are certain users favored the opportunity to review posts? that seems to have grown stale without any solid answer. Just recently I was baffled by a user's ability to review a "First Post" almost 6 hours after it had been reviewed previously: In my experience, certain rev...

6:46 PM
@Werner thanks
let us create a smart downvote puppet to see if moderators catch it ... Now I am curious how far a "smart" downvoter can go ...
@Shog9 can't you just order all employees to ignore him as well?
@ShadowWizard order?
Advise ....
oops, ask.
6:54 PM
poke with a blunt stick, I think you meant
@Bart No problem. There's merit to the idea, but it would need more fleshing out.
but seriously, he is being useful on SO and help cleaning lots of mess in there. So if we'll just let him focus on that...
@ShadowWizard surely he can just focus on that. That doesn't require a "let him".
@Bart I mean let him by not sending him to suspension box
@Shog9 Doesn't that violate one of your benefits as an employee?
6:57 PM
the beautiful thing is that by ignoring Shog and me @FinalContest got no idea about the threat. Amazing.
Oh, nope. Just found it. You promise no sharp sticks.
@Andy the stick is meant to intimidate, not to injure.
@Andy It says nothing about the blunt variety.
It is a "weapon of terror", not a "weapon of war".
"weapon of annoyance"
7:00 PM
Damnit, I used up all of my stars again.
Seriously, high-rep users should get a higher daily quota of stars.
@Cupcake so you are the one spamming the star wall!!!@@@#$%%%
@Cupcake, I know your name and avatar imply it, but stop using them as sprinkles.
star quota should decrease the more you star things
I'm starring too many things?
7:00 PM
@Shog9 good! I'll be happy if you give Mr. Cake 1 star per day
Like you start with 500 stars. The first one leaves you with 499, the second with 497, the third with 494...
@ShadowWizard who's this "Mister Cake"?
@Braiam those who should know, know. :D
I thought you just star the things that you like. Why do people find that annoying?
7:02 PM
@Braiam The name is Cake .... Cup Cake ...
@Cupcake because, old habits die hard
@Bart that explains some things.... actually several things
once upon a time the wall showed exceptional messages, 99% posted by Bart. And now... well...
@Shog9 is this documented anywhere?
Should be a comment with today's rules, albeit in this case, it is even better to just burn it along with the question. — Final Contest 3 mins ago
If he ever complains about being targeted again .... that's not the first time ....
@Bart He's done it to me, too. sigh
On that note... delete votes anyone? stackoverflow.com/questions/19062252/…
7:06 PM
I fear your poor answer is now doomed, @Bart.
@hichris123 it's from the low quality review queue
Laszlo's flag sent it there
@FinalContest: I've removed the flooding of comments, and added the examples to the post.
@ShadowWizard if I don't respond to future comments, it might be because I'm curled up in a corner of my room because I just can't cope with it all.
@ShadowWizard ... wut? That's my own question. ;P
@hichris123 oh, thought you meant the comment on Bart's answer. lol
Nah. I do want to burn that question, but it has upvoted answers...
7:07 PM
@Bart no worry, we'll always remember you!
@hichris123 delete vote added. You're welcome. :)
@rene How?
@ShadowWizard Ooh, I can see two delete votes.
@ShadowWizard Ohw?
@hichris123 Guess who?
@rene You and Shadow probably. :)
7:10 PM
@hichris123 good that it makes you happy. :)
Thanks Shog.
And the user posting the top answer gets to keep the repz, you know. win win situation!
hey fellows
@Werner: thanks.
7:16 PM
hey @TGMCians
hi @TGMCians.
@TGMCians: do you have a suggestion for any existing pdf library on Android? Poppler is not yet ported AFAIK.
iText 4
ah, I should have mentioned C/C++ API preferrably :-)
LGPL might be a problem, too, due to static linking.
7:21 PM
MuPDF try this
hmm, that is GPL, even more restrictive than LGPL :p
oh okay I know about these two only
ah, who would have thought Bart is the first in a few seconds to complain about downvotes, even though it is valid and explained :D
"Just move on", yeah, right, hypocrisy ...
@hichris123: huh? You strongly claimed yourself as an Android expert and you got attention to a clearly very beginner Android/Programming question. Be careful what an expert means; that is my advice. Even you yourself requested the deletion of that rubbish question.
@FinalContest hmm? You mean the deleted one? I was a beginner at the time (8, 9 months ago?)
yeah, and 8-9 months raised you an expert, I see. =) I read some of the other "expert" posts, but I just decided not to act on that to avoid fraudulently and validly explained downvotes.
8:13 PM
@TGMCians: thanks for the suggestions.
definitely no.
@ColeJohnson: but it was edited in the meantime to a less offensive style, so I can understand the "Looks OK", too, historically.
@ColeJohnson No "stackoverflow" should be "Stack Overflow" ;)
@FinalContest it was edited 36 minutes ago, but the "Looks OK" was wrongly clicked 19 minutes ago
Yet, bmb may have read the history and got confused for a second which the latest was, or he misclicked, etc.
assume good faith :)
also, to be fair, the answer is total crap, too.
The question is too
8:39 PM
or any for that matter.
exactly my point, yeah.
I downvoted everything
@Idris How do I know its going to be closed? - no need to freak out for trying to answer a question — user3817229 37 mins ago
/me is back to finishing the email to SE
well, the one crap answer is gone
@ColeJohnson: bmb seems to be a software development manager, so he is probably bullet-proof against offensive posts and tries to actually focus on the point which is the right spirit IMHO.
Is it wrong to pass an audit for "too minor"? stackoverflow.com/review/suggested-edits/5270648
8:49 PM
@AnnaLear: Jay Hanlon that I have just sent my email to, in the hope of resolving the license infringement.
Am I being too rude here and here?
Yes ... now let me have a look
@ColeJohnson: no, but I hate bold in such cases. It is too much noise for no real gain.
@ColeJohnson I think you're good. A little heavy on the ! in the second one, but it doesn't read as rude to me.
8:51 PM
@ColeJohnson If encryption algorithms and character sets have feelings, then yes
Yeah, second one I would have toned down slightly, but not rude.
@ColeJohnson: but on the other hand, much more polite comments of mine were removed, so who knows.
@FinalContest obsolete flags?
@ColeJohnson: also, you cannot spell completely!
@ColeJohnson: nah, they were criticizing the answer that has not got deleted or rewritten from scratch.
@AnnaLear: in short, I could not manage to get the requested posts disassociated, neither through the moderator team, nor the community team. Perhaps, they are not the right people to handle this aspect of SE. I trust Jay that he will be able to point me to the people that can assist with this being resolved.
that is pretty much the gist of my email and intention.
I didn't really need a summary of your email, but thanks.
9:00 PM
"How about words.bighugelabs.com/api.php ? Would that suit your needs?"
I flagged that as low-quality and got declined by this reason:
LOL, and stack overflow is objective...
... that question's deleted, @FinalContest :P
There is hardly any technical inaccuracy in a post that does not have any factual inline content.
is this the new "decline reason" for every literally link-only answer?
I have never seen any link-only answer declined like that... Feels like a lame mistake or intention at first.
@rene Those aren't two branches, those are two different build configurations. They build off the same repo, but since meta also serves as a bit of a test environment/last sanity check before we push changes to all other sites, including SO, it tends to get built more frequently and its version # is different.
Under normal circumstances, the buildout process goes like this: push changes, wait for dev to build, make sure nothing exploded, build out to MSE, make sure nothing exploded, build out to everywhere else.
by 'make sure nothing exploded', you mean 'watch the bug reports for five minutes'?
Sorry, but this does not seem to make sense to me, I am afraid. This answer got flagged as low-quality and it had negative scores. Yet it had been declined by the same reason. It is either "let us kick into Final again because we can", or even negatively scored link-only answer flags are declined like that if it gets into a moderator hand. — Final Contest 1 min ago
9:10 PM
@Undo Exception logs, double-check the changes, run whatever was affected if possible to see what's what, etc.
Ideally nothing makes it even to meta that's so broken that it'd get a bug report in 5 minutes. ;)
oh ;)
I think the OP might have coworkers who might try to remove the question from the close review queue by editing it.
But not in any way that actually fixes the question.
9:14 PM
@AnnaLear And then there were the CloudFlare issues on SU.
@Cupcake: I do not agree with that close reason, but yeah, I agree about the fact of the closure itself.
