Timeline for Wolfram Alpha not computer related?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 20, 2017 at 10:32 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.stackexchange.com/ with https://meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Apr 23, 2014 at 13:35 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Fixup of bad MSO links to MSE links migration
|
|
| Apr 23, 2014 at 9:11 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Migration of MSO links to MSE links
|
|
| Jul 22, 2010 at 18:01 | history | migrated | from meta.stackexchange.com (revisions) | ||
| Dec 16, 2009 at 4:00 | comment | added | Changeling | @Shog9: No I came back from Iraq a couple months ago to return back to my SE job and tried out SO again. Your reasoning makes sense. Thanks | |
| Dec 16, 2009 at 3:40 | comment | added | Shog9 | @Roboto: I don't know if you've been around SO long enough to remember it, but at one time commenting when closing was considerably more common. Fights broke out. Grudges were held. I avoided this as much as I could, but eventually my opinion changed: it's easier to keep the peace if you limit what's said to what is absolutely necessary. So now, I leave comments when I think it'll do some good, but make no attempt to "explain" close votes merely for the sake of doing so. If any user wants a better explanation than what's provided by the close reason itself, they can come here and ask for it. | |
| Dec 15, 2009 at 20:21 | comment | added | Changeling | @Shog9: I agree, but at the same time - why can't we mandate a comment? I don't have high enough rep on SO yet to be able to close so this may already be implemented, but even when downvoting it recommends a comment. At least this will give the person a chance to improve earlier before it is closed. | |
| Dec 15, 2009 at 19:44 | comment | added | Shog9 | @Roboto: let's be honest here... Some people will come to Meta and complain no matter what reason is listed for closing. The most common pattern has always been, "Questions X,Y and Z are still open, therefore mine should be as well"... | |
| Dec 15, 2009 at 12:29 | comment | added | Changeling | @haikus: That's not true. The closing system does not always mark the close reason accurately. It will choose the most likely close reason based on majority, but that is not necessarily accurate. This is why people keep coming back to Meta and complaining. | |
| Dec 14, 2009 at 13:40 | comment | added | alex | @John +1 @Roboto It doesn't necessarily require a comment. If 5 3k+ users or a moderator just told you it's "not computer related" through their close votes, then it's not computer related. This really is a support question, I would have voted to close as well. | |
| Dec 13, 2009 at 16:27 | comment | added | Changeling | Once again, closing should require a comment... this comes up time and time again. | |
| Dec 13, 2009 at 13:04 | comment | added | Ladybug Killer | Yeah, close reasons are not always as precise (or vague) as you need it. | |
| Dec 13, 2009 at 0:52 | comment | added | Macha | So basically, SU needs a "go bother the devs" close reason, instead of closing things as "not computer related" when they are? | |
| Dec 12, 2009 at 23:24 | history | answered | Ladybug Killer | CC BY-SA 2.5 |