I think most important thing to moderate in any S.E. site is quality of question. Any question ask should be clear by user and if not then it should be edited by other users.

I want to bring the question to attention of all of you.

Who invented potential and kinetic energy?

Please read the question title and my answer, I know it is not answer to the question but it is answer to the title of the question.

I think HSM need moderators so quality of question is maintain.

| |
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ We'll get moderators pretty soon. The exact timeline varies from site to site and depends on a number of factors. Some sites have gone as long as 2 months without pro temp moderators, while others have had them appointed not long after leaving private beta. But in any case it will happen relatively soon. With that said, I don't think the sort of routine title editing you're suggesting is really especially a job for moderators, and judging quality is really the job of the whole community rather than moderators alone. $\endgroup$ – Logan M Nov 16 '14 at 10:57
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I don't think the question is poor because the author is misusing the term "invented", I think it's poor because it's quite vague. Generally speaking, scientific concepts don't just pop into existence fully formed, they appear under various different forms, mutate, are used differently by different authors, and eventually stabilize into their modern shape. In fact, I think we'll need policies regarding "who invented X" and "when was X invented" questions more generally. $\endgroup$ – Jack M Nov 16 '14 at 11:42
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ What we would actually need moderators for in this case is for converting your answer to a comment. $\endgroup$ – quid Nov 16 '14 at 12:40

You seem to misunderstand the role of moderators on SE sites. Moderators are not really here to monitor the questions' quality, this is what community moderation does normally (of course moderators also participate in this and sometimes need to step-in as moderators in case of conflict but by and large issues with the wording of a specific question is not a moderator-business).

You do have a point on the formulation, however, the appropriate courses of action are (or at least include)

  • comment,

  • edit,

  • vote to close,

  • possibly even answer a reasonable interpretation of the question (though this is more risky while in the present case not infeasible).

Yet, what should not be done is giving some witty pseudo-answer. Instead, use the tools of community moderation to improve the situation.

| |

I think there are two issues with the question you brought up:

  1. The word "invented": This is what inspired your answer, right? It's a poor choice of words by the OP, by the reasons you put forth in your answer. Without it, the question would be a lot better.
  2. It's a duplicate: Alexandre pointed out that this question is extremely similar. I at first didn't vote to close because I felt that his answer to that didn't address the (minor) point about the difference between potential and kinetic energy, which was really a nit-picky, irrelevant criticism to his otherwise good answer. Really, though the question is a duplicate, as he pointed out.

Neither of these issues need a moderator to fix them. This question currently has 4 close votes on it (3 and my recent one), and I'm sure it will get a 5th. The community will thus have dealt with it. As for the wording. . . This is up to the OP. While anyone with 1000+ reputation could edit it, and anyone at all could suggest an edit to be approved, it's a bit of a moot point, since the question is a duplicate.

| |

You must log in to answer this question.

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