-2
$\begingroup$

there are few aspects on which would like to have some clarifications.

A

I would like to see how those two questions are duplicate:

How much would take and cost to construct a building/tower that reaches space? (with todays technology)

How much would take and cost to construct a building/tower that reaches space? (with todays technology) [duplicate]

is a duplicate of How to build a tower that reaches dozens of miles into space

Obviously, on our current Earth with our current tech, such towers would be impossible. However, this is Star Wars. How would the inhabitants of the Galaxy Far Far Away build a tower like this?

B

enter image description here

would be interesting to know why mod participates in that, just by a mistake or there is some official position there? Not the first time I notice a certain rush in a judgment, which probably creates not the beast "lead by an example" case.

D

flagged the question under a pretense that one of deciding parties involved was mod under mod privileges as it was deciding vote if not singlehandedly done (I do not know and can't know that, and sure I see 5 votes, but which button was pressed), pointing that, maybe a bit too excited doing so.

enter image description here

declined. Sure, I more than happy to agree it does not require mod intervention if there would be no mod intervention, to begin with. And as mods got involved in the question and the decision they clearly show it has some business with them, so no point to decline the flag for such a reason. I missed pointing out that connection, but there aren't that many mods and such.

edit

  • aspect C moved to it's own q

This question will be improved further, to focus and split it. But it turns out that my SQL skills are rusty beyond repair so digging for data is harder than would like it to be, so as there is plenty of information to process.

Also glad to see the overwhelming support in both questions, honored.

ed2

Abort abort, no improvements.

I was contemplating on life and everything, so as on information dug, so as to information answers and other things provided here and there, so as result got some revelations and come to certain conclusions.

the q stays as it is for history shake, and to focus it - it just gets only bigger. Not sure I have current the time to write another longest answer on wb, not there is a need for it.

I hope it will just go as yet another feedback on how things look from the user's perspective.

as a tip

  • people pay more attention, be more careful with border cases.
  • lack of knowledge does not mean impossibility, no one is all-knowing here and it is the reason for wb to exist. Kinda apply knowledge for strange situations.
  • we all long know that se model is not the best fit for wb, so be more in the spirit of it, not the form.

wb is a great place. peace/.

$\endgroup$
12
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ About C: What does “- Reinstate Monica” mean? $\endgroup$
    – VLAZ
    Feb 10 at 5:44
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ One question per question, please. Also notice that when the mod voted for closure his vote was the fifth, so it isn't much different from when a question is closed by five regular users. In the end mods are users of the site too. Also please don't feel discouraged by this closure - I like your posts. $\endgroup$ Feb 10 at 9:54
  • $\begingroup$ By the way, after re-reading your question I voted to reopen. It's one vote away from getting there. $\endgroup$ Feb 10 at 9:57
  • $\begingroup$ @TheSquare-CubeLaw, it's not their post $\endgroup$
    – L.Dutch Mod
    Feb 10 at 15:43
  • $\begingroup$ @L.Dutch-ReinstateMonica ever since I quit coffee my brain has been messed up. $\endgroup$ Feb 10 at 15:46
  • $\begingroup$ @TheSquare-CubeLaw sure I understand that life as a user does not end with mod status, omitted as obvious enough $\endgroup$
    – MolbOrg
    Feb 10 at 18:10
  • $\begingroup$ Speaking for myself, I initially voted to close it as "Needs details or clarity". I stand by that, see my comment on the post itself. $\endgroup$ Feb 12 at 20:09
  • $\begingroup$ @Tantalus'touch. can agree the question is somewhat border case, and it takes few readings to understand it. in essence, it boils down - are there ways for biblical proportions tower-ish structure to <strike>god</strike> space, without new materials, advanced materials, and technologies. that's an interesting question and has nothing to do with op's story. Answer probably yes, but u can't afford it. And it is sad that the only answer focuses on active structures, lol. in general things are fine on wb, but border cases and a bit more sophisticated questions are handled not so well $\endgroup$
    – MolbOrg
    Feb 12 at 22:36
  • $\begingroup$ @MolbOrg Perhaps they are, yes, but in this specific case, the sophistication is implicit, I was merely asking that the OP explicitly explain themselves in detail. BTW. I understood it right away, as it's something that I've actively studied before finding stackexchange - some orthodox ideas on the subject, yes, but from first-principles too. I don't see it as borderline, just basic and lacking in research. $\endgroup$ Feb 12 at 23:09
  • $\begingroup$ @Tantalus'touch. lol, it just another showcase of differences in people's perception, like your comment looks to me like "hey it story-based", when q looks like "hey I have an idea, but can't spew it out any better than that, can you guys still help me". it took me few readings to from "what the heck" to "okay maybe". And I actually can't even propose anything to make the wording or appear of q to look better(not a surprise with my skills), it is quite specific and the user put some thoughts in the formulation so it can't be that easily changed, without changing the essence of the question. $\endgroup$
    – MolbOrg
    Feb 13 at 0:07
  • $\begingroup$ Sure, not all of us see it the same, that's clear. It's good to question and discuss these things. I'm so glad I found se. $\endgroup$ Feb 13 at 0:12
  • $\begingroup$ @Tantalus'touch. yes, se and wb are good things. wb helped me a lot in its time for me to shape my thoughts and refine them, do not know another place that could have done that. $\endgroup$
    – MolbOrg
    Feb 13 at 0:20
2
$\begingroup$

would be interesting to know why mod participates in that, just by a mistake or there is some official position there?

Mods are not exempted nor removed from the review queue.

Mods and golden badged users have the privilege of single-vote closure, but as you can see in the screenshot my vote was the 5th and last one needed here for the closure. Being the 5th one, my vote counted as if I was a normal user.

Even when a moderator or a golden badged user votes to close a question, that doesn't prevent the rest of the community for voting to reopen, which takes us to your point D.

You voted to reopen the question and then used the flag to throw what sounds like a rant. What were you expecting out of it? Usually users who disagree with the closure explain their reasons by commenting the closed question, so that other members of the community can decide how to vote.

About point C, as already pointed out in the comments, you can find more info here.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. $\endgroup$
    – L.Dutch Mod
    Feb 13 at 4:01
2
$\begingroup$

Couple things to consider...

Point A
In reading the two queries side by side, I see an interesting conundrum.

To address your question, I'd argue that typologically they're both asking the same basic question. How does one build a really tall building? Nzall's query was asked five years ago and the other was asked about five days ago. That's classical grounds for duplicate closure.

And what is the conundrum? Neto actually specifies, though in a somewhat haphazard fashion, the criteria by which they'd like to see the question answered: materials, costs, design considerations, potential problems to be addressed & overcome. The older question does not.

Another problem: the other question asks about the Star Wars universe. If Nzall had asked that question two weeks ago, and Neto had asked hers five days ago, pretty images notwithstanding, I'd have voted to close that question as it deals specifically with a third party intellectual property (Star Wars / Lucasfilms / Diznee) because we generally refer such questions to Sci-Fi and Fantasy. Our job here in Worldbuilding is to help community members build their own fictional worlds, not help Nzall satisfy their random curiosity about someone else's work.

Conundrum: should I vote to reopen Neto's question (perhaps editing it in the process, or asking him to clean it up!), and vote to close the older question for being off topic? We've had some recent discussion to the effect (and if I understand right) that it's kind of considered bad form to VTC queries that go way back in time.

This is an interesting case because we find ourselves caught between the rock of the precedent query being somewhat culturally untouchable and the hard place of ids, ultimately more useful, query being an obvious duplicate.

Point D
Civility goes a long way, even when it's hidden away in a flag that only the Mod Squod will see.

This closure might be one of those moments where one can step back, take a look at both questions with fresh eyes and see the underlying similarities, as well as the differences. Also keep in mind that Mods are ordinary community members. L Dutch happens to be one of our more gifted regulars, asking & answering queries as well as tirelessly monitoring for problem questions before they turn into a cluster. You can clearly see his work in the many recent questions that have been single handedly closed for one issue or another.

Once those issues are taken care of, I'm always happy to VTR, and it's very possible that L Dutch is watching over those queries he's hammerclosed and may very well pry them open again!

$\endgroup$
7
  • $\begingroup$ Scify and fantasy part - exactly. One thing u didn't noticed however, the question wasn't asked by me but by some random dude 177 rep, whom I do not know anything. And he probably wont stick here for long. If u can see how the question can be improved, I would like to see such edit and maybe we can both particiapte on doing it better, where on my side I would like to help keep its technological flavor. As mod work, cleaning stuff singlehandedly I do not see it as a good thing, as it robs community for a chance of participating and learn etc. There is a lot to say, but I'm not eager to do so. $\endgroup$
    – MolbOrg
    Feb 13 at 20:40
  • $\begingroup$ Or we can do another test, as I did it with flag. "Just wait a bit, and if your question has merit beyond its duplicatiousness, the community will almost certainly see fit to reopen!" let's wait for a month it won't be open, so as I suspect it would not be closed if not..., there is just not enough quorum for that in this question, it is not enough irritating, so as it is not good enough. One reopen vote is mine, one from someone from meta, there was comment $\endgroup$
    – MolbOrg
    Feb 13 at 20:50
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ 1. XD Ah, indeed you're right! Will correctify anon. Actually, singlehanded mod work doesn't rob us of anything: we can still ask the OP to edit the question to make it better. WB rather frowns on "hijacking" other people's queries, but we certainly can edit to clarify so long as we don't presume to speak for the OP. 2. If a question is not reopened within a month (or fortnight more like), chances are good it's not that great a question to begin with. $\endgroup$
    – elemtilas
    Feb 13 at 23:05
  • $\begingroup$ the point about close open wasn't in that's a great question it is passable the most, and if not a subtle mistakes made during that, there would not be a question at all. But even that is a rarity among technological questions and it is like a drop in a desert on wb. all have their specialties, and I would like to have a little bit more tech-savvy people here, as there is not enough hard scify in the world, and u need to feed them technological questions. mod is an alpha dog, he teaches how to bite, and u even do not notice that, or it even may be true for u, but there are other ppl as well $\endgroup$
    – MolbOrg
    Feb 14 at 1:59
  • $\begingroup$ @MolbOrg -- Re hard scifi, the best thing you can do is ask & answer more hard scifi queries. Also, invite more tech savvy folks here. Re L Dutch, we do need our alpha dogs, though since you're veering towards the borders of Adhominem, I'd suggest you keep that to yourself. Unless a person deliberately engages in immoral or unethical (i.e. personally insulting or group insulting) behaviour, don't pay no mind! You think I don't notice these things. I do notice, e.g., that you've just demonstrated passive aggression. If that's your personal issue, please leave it at the door! $\endgroup$
    – elemtilas
    Feb 14 at 18:52
  • $\begingroup$ Nice comment, keep it up, cheers) $\endgroup$
    – MolbOrg
    Feb 14 at 21:46
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ This actually does create an interesting conundrum. Question A is closed because it's talking about a third party property. However, this results in Question B, which is not about said property, being closed because it's a duplicate. The end result is that now we have no open question about building a space elevator and no one can ask that question. $\endgroup$ Feb 14 at 22:45

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .
https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8220/would-like-have-some-clarifications-on-whats-going-on-here-and-on-wb-in-general/8221#8221
worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2021-43
179946
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:3LF3T53RUNKSKYOERFYKHVSAUTVQ2NXS
<urn:uuid:4d399605-0feb-4ed0-a4b1-034e159911bc>
2021-10-20T10:44:18Z
151.101.65.69
text/html
sha1:3KD4JXCC6M7QIP7WZSAFUA5AZKDMPMRL
<urn:uuid:39832d1b-e35b-4392-8c50-735df98da8c7>
https://worldbuilding.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/8220/would-like-have-some-clarifications-on-whats-going-on-here-and-on-wb-in-general/8221#8221
response
<urn:uuid:bccab425-9b03-4bb4-8519-e8803a7da1df>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2021-43
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for October 2021
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-190
software: Apache Nutch 1.18 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.2-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/