Jon Ericson jericson

## autoreviewcomments.user.js
// ==UserScript==
// @name           AutoReviewComments
// @namespace      benjol
// @version        1.1.9
// @description    Add pro-forma comments dialog for reviewing (pre-flag)
// @include        http://*stackoverflow.com/questions*
// @include        http://*stackoverflow.com/review*
// @include        http://*stackoverflow.com/admin/dashboard*
// @include        http://*serverfault.com/questions*
// @include        http://*serverfault.com/review*

## What kind of site do we ultimately want to have?
There have been a lot of discussions on meta about different aspects of site direction, but none directly focused on the fundamental question: What kind of site do we want to have? What should our culture be? In particular, what style of answers are we looking for?

This question is fundamentally about **where do we want to be in the end**, and not about *how we get there*.

**We all agree that contributions must 'show their work'. Exactly where and how we draw the line is an implementation detail and outside the scope of this question.**

We've provided answers that capture the main positions we know about. Please feel free to add your own if you have another outcome in mind.

Please up-vote answers you find acceptable, down-vote ones you don't, and abstain if you don't feel strongly either way. Please also up-vote the question no matter which of these you do, so we can gauge participation.

## Bring your own framework
Bring your own framework
------------------------

We want a site that allows contributors to speak from within their framework. Overall, this broadens the appeal of the site, and it preserves the richness of expression when answers are given in the natural context of the one giving the answer, even if this means expressing one's framework or opinions as unqualified facts.

Our aim is to be 'expert' in the context of the internet. This will not be the best home for those who do not think deeply about the texts or those who cannot communicate clearly and effectively. But it is not our aim to be home only to academics or full-time theologians: that would narrow the user-base too far and not be sustainable.

Under this option is is generally OK to make statements that assert 'truth', omitting qualifications such as 'Group X believes…'.

This outcome is where we are currently heading. This is not a reason in itself for it to be chosen, but it is the least risky option. It's clear our traffic is growing, and altho

## Avoid truth assertions
Avoid truth assertions
----------------------

We want a site with broad appeal that welcomes diverse perspectives. This site focuses on the *text* and the process of interpreting it, using tools such as language, history, archaeology, and science.  None of that is inherently religious, which is what *distinguishes* BH from other Internet sites about the Bible.

One of our core tenets is that hermeneutical process is (or ought to be) open to examination from all sides. Religious claims are often not open to examination. Not only that, but they're polarizing.  Therefore, unqualified statements of religious truth are out of place here; this is a site about hermeneutics, not a site about Truth.<sup>1</sup>

Welcoming assertions of religious truth drives away some key groups of users, to the detriment of the site.  This has been raised on meta by several users.<sup>2</sup>  If the current trend continues we will lose the Hebrew-bible-based, rabbinic persepctive, since few Christian users here have any background

## gist:6834369

      
              1 file
            
          
              0 forks
            
          
              0 comments
            
          
              0 stars
            
          
                jericson
                / gist:6834369
            
            
              Created
              October 4, 2013 23:11
            
              
                Good answers prompt new questions.
              
          
    Good answers respect their questions

If you have a few minutes to be philosophical, take a moment to read A Day at the Park.  I find it very useful to the question at hand.  A key line:

My favorite kind of answers are those that my questions give birth to.

Both of the original answers to this question are solutions to the same problem: sometimes answers destroy curiousity.  Bring your own framework addresses concern that novel approaches may lose their place at the table if room is only allowed for "standard" answers.  We would then be left with the answers that have already been accepted by various orthodoxies.  Avoid truth assertions contends that answers that fail to qualify truth statements crowd out honest scholarship and alienate other potential answers.
I was more than willing to post both of thos

  
## Islam.SE
Hello,

I'm writing in reference to your Islam Stack Exchange account:

http://islam.stackexchange.com/users/602/hadi

We recently noticed a substantial number of votes on your account are for *specific users*. Please note that votes on Islam Stack Exchange should be cast to reflect the quality, accuracy, and relevance of the posts being voted on.

Islam Stack Exchange is still in the early stages of growth. There aren't yet a [huge number of voters](http://islam.stackexchange.com/users?tab=Voters&filter=week) on the site, which means a relatively small number of votes can have dramatic influence. Islam.SE has also struggled with [sectarianism](http://meta.islam.stackexchange.com/questions/275/why-sectarianism-is-ruining-your-site) over the years. So it's especially disruptive when votes are exclusively for people answering from a specific division of Islam.

## Election announcement template
SITE_FULL_NAME's [ELECTION_NUMBER moderator election][1] has come to a close, the votes have been tallied, and the NUMBER_OF_CANIDATES new moderators are:

[![MOD1_NAME][mod1pic]][mod1] [![MOD2_NAME][mod2pic]][mod2] [![MOD3_NAME][mod3pic]][mod3]

Please thank them for volunteering, and share your assistance and advice with them as they learn the ropes!

For details on how the voting played out, you can download the election results [here][1], or [view a summary report online][7].


  [1]: SITE_DOMAIN/election/1

## Systematic Theology
* [What powers are granted to Jesus' ministers?](http://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/6321)
* [Do the word's, 'Graven Image', in Exodus 20:4, also apply to pictures or any representation of objects in the world](http://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/6283)
* [What does "Scripture" in the NT refer to?](http://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/4316)
* [Who can control the Holy Spirit aside from God?](http://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/7402)
* [The dilemma of God's love](http://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/7548)
* [The understanding of who Apostles are](http://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions

## Hairboat's revenge
Text,CreationDate,DeletionDate,Site Name
"""this simple case seems not to be subject to [gotchas of floating point representation]."" A very fast way to find out is to use one of [IEEE 754 calculators](http://www.h-schmidt.net/FloatConverter/IEEE754.html). Enter the desired value, and check the resultant representation. For 2.78 you get `2.7799999713897705`.","2015-12-16 18:53:47","","Stack Overflow"
"(just temporary. wil remove in few mins.)","2015-12-14 21:35:02","2015-12-14 21:40:56","Stack Overflow"
"...............","2015-12-27 08:00:55","2015-12-27 08:04:13","Stack Overflow"
"@Aify - in-house proprietary library (on top of DBI)","2015-12-15 04:03:30","","Stack Overflow"
"@Arronical, I guess the polite thing to do would be get the hat and delete the comment....","2015-12-16 15:17:03","2015-12-16 15:27:43","Stack Overflow"
"@assylias, you just want a hat... Sorry Jon :)","2015-12-15 14:10:43","2015-12-15 16:10:39","Stack Overflow"
"@BenjaminGruenbaum agreed.","2015-12-17 17:14:57","2015-12-17 17:39:45","S

## Moderator vacation
# Moderator vacation
Stack Overflow uniquely requires moderators to operate with a [standard of duty](http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/287878/should-stack-overflow-moderators-have-a-standard-of-duty). Even so, moderators generally feel a sense of obligation to be around in case of problems. Such voluntary dedication is much appreciated and often means people really enjoy what they are doing. But _everyone_ [needs a vacation](http://jericson.github.io/2015/07/21/vacation.html) from time to time.

Currently, we have no good way for moderators to communicate their vacation plans to either to Community Managers (we suggest they email us), other moderators (this usually happens in chat) or other users (more on this momentarily). In addition, the temptation remains to "just handle that one flag" if a moderator happens to browse their site while theoretically off-duty. Finally, I believe "vacation" might be a graceful way for moderators to step down if the job stops being fun and rewarding.

## Proposal

Pro
	// ==UserScript==
	// @name AutoReviewComments
	// @namespace benjol
	// @version 1.1.9
	// @description Add pro-forma comments dialog for reviewing (pre-flag)
	// @include http://stackoverflow.com/questions
	// @include http://stackoverflow.com/review
	// @include http://stackoverflow.com/admin/dashboard
	// @include http://serverfault.com/questions
	// @include http://serverfault.com/review
	There have been a lot of discussions on meta about different aspects of site direction, but none directly focused on the fundamental question: What kind of site do we want to have? What should our culture be? In particular, what style of answers are we looking for?

	This question is fundamentally about where do we want to be in the end, and not about how we get there.

	We all agree that contributions must 'show their work'. Exactly where and how we draw the line is an implementation detail and outside the scope of this question.

	We've provided answers that capture the main positions we know about. Please feel free to add your own if you have another outcome in mind.

	Please up-vote answers you find acceptable, down-vote ones you don't, and abstain if you don't feel strongly either way. Please also up-vote the question no matter which of these you do, so we can gauge participation.
	Bring your own framework
	------------------------

	We want a site that allows contributors to speak from within their framework. Overall, this broadens the appeal of the site, and it preserves the richness of expression when answers are given in the natural context of the one giving the answer, even if this means expressing one's framework or opinions as unqualified facts.

	Our aim is to be 'expert' in the context of the internet. This will not be the best home for those who do not think deeply about the texts or those who cannot communicate clearly and effectively. But it is not our aim to be home only to academics or full-time theologians: that would narrow the user-base too far and not be sustainable.

	Under this option is is generally OK to make statements that assert 'truth', omitting qualifications such as 'Group X believes…'.

	This outcome is where we are currently heading. This is not a reason in itself for it to be chosen, but it is the least risky option. It's clear our traffic is growing, and altho
	Avoid truth assertions
	----------------------

	We want a site with broad appeal that welcomes diverse perspectives. This site focuses on the text and the process of interpreting it, using tools such as language, history, archaeology, and science. None of that is inherently religious, which is what distinguishes BH from other Internet sites about the Bible.

	One of our core tenets is that hermeneutical process is (or ought to be) open to examination from all sides. Religious claims are often not open to examination. Not only that, but they're polarizing. Therefore, unqualified statements of religious truth are out of place here; this is a site about hermeneutics, not a site about Truth.<sup>1</sup>

	Welcoming assertions of religious truth drives away some key groups of users, to the detriment of the site. This has been raised on meta by several users.<sup>2</sup> If the current trend continues we will lose the Hebrew-bible-based, rabbinic persepctive, since few Christian users here have any background
	Hello,

	I'm writing in reference to your Islam Stack Exchange account:

	http://islam.stackexchange.com/users/602/hadi

	We recently noticed a substantial number of votes on your account are for specific users. Please note that votes on Islam Stack Exchange should be cast to reflect the quality, accuracy, and relevance of the posts being voted on.

	Islam Stack Exchange is still in the early stages of growth. There aren't yet a [huge number of voters](http://islam.stackexchange.com/users?tab=Voters&filter=week) on the site, which means a relatively small number of votes can have dramatic influence. Islam.SE has also struggled with [sectarianism](http://meta.islam.stackexchange.com/questions/275/why-sectarianism-is-ruining-your-site) over the years. So it's especially disruptive when votes are exclusively for people answering from a specific division of Islam.
	SITE_FULL_NAME's [ELECTION_NUMBER moderator election][1] has come to a close, the votes have been tallied, and the NUMBER_OF_CANIDATES new moderators are:

	[![MOD1_NAME][mod1pic]][mod1] [![MOD2_NAME][mod2pic]][mod2] [![MOD3_NAME][mod3pic]][mod3]

	Please thank them for volunteering, and share your assistance and advice with them as they learn the ropes!

	For details on how the voting played out, you can download the election results [here][1], or [view a summary report online][7].


	[1]: SITE_DOMAIN/election/1
	* [What powers are granted to Jesus' ministers?](http://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/6321)
	* [Do the word's, 'Graven Image', in Exodus 20:4, also apply to pictures or any representation of objects in the world](http://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/6283)
	* [What does "Scripture" in the NT refer to?](http://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/4316)
	* [Who can control the Holy Spirit aside from God?](http://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/7402)
	* [The dilemma of God's love](http://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/7548)
	* [The understanding of who Apostles are](http://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions
	Text,CreationDate,DeletionDate,Site Name
	"""this simple case seems not to be subject to [gotchas of floating point representation]."" A very fast way to find out is to use one of [IEEE 754 calculators](http://www.h-schmidt.net/FloatConverter/IEEE754.html). Enter the desired value, and check the resultant representation. For 2.78 you get `2.7799999713897705`.","2015-12-16 18:53:47","","Stack Overflow"
	"(just temporary. wil remove in few mins.)","2015-12-14 21:35:02","2015-12-14 21:40:56","Stack Overflow"
	"...............","2015-12-27 08:00:55","2015-12-27 08:04:13","Stack Overflow"
	"@Aify - in-house proprietary library (on top of DBI)","2015-12-15 04:03:30","","Stack Overflow"
	"@Arronical, I guess the polite thing to do would be get the hat and delete the comment....","2015-12-16 15:17:03","2015-12-16 15:27:43","Stack Overflow"
	"@assylias, you just want a hat... Sorry Jon :)","2015-12-15 14:10:43","2015-12-15 16:10:39","Stack Overflow"
	"@BenjaminGruenbaum agreed.","2015-12-17 17:14:57","2015-12-17 17:39:45","S
	# Moderator vacation
	Stack Overflow uniquely requires moderators to operate with a [standard of duty](http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/287878/should-stack-overflow-moderators-have-a-standard-of-duty). Even so, moderators generally feel a sense of obligation to be around in case of problems. Such voluntary dedication is much appreciated and often means people really enjoy what they are doing. But _everyone_ [needs a vacation](http://jericson.github.io/2015/07/21/vacation.html) from time to time.

	Currently, we have no good way for moderators to communicate their vacation plans to either to Community Managers (we suggest they email us), other moderators (this usually happens in chat) or other users (more on this momentarily). In addition, the temptation remains to "just handle that one flag" if a moderator happens to browse their site while theoretically off-duty. Finally, I believe "vacation" might be a graceful way for moderators to step down if the job stops being fun and rewarding.

	## Proposal

	Pro