-4

Why would I ever create a new exam when I can just re-use an old exam and then accuse any student of obtaining a copy as cheating? was deleted as rude or abusive. Why?

5
  • 10
    I was not involved in the deletion of your question, and this is not an answer to your meta question. However, you have been here long enough that you should have a good sense of what we do here. The question was basically: "Is it ethical to reuse the same exam each year and accuse students of cheating when they find out the exam questions?" There is no reason such a post should require > 500 words, five numbered questions, and references to Edward Snowden and short skirts.
    – cag51 Mod
    Sep 4, 2022 at 18:32
  • 1
    @cag51 I have insufficient rep points to see the deleted question, but is it related to movies.stackexchange.com/questions/118499/… ?
    – Yemon Choi
    Sep 4, 2022 at 20:32
  • 1
    @YemonChoi - looks like it, the last link on that movies.SE post points toward the one under discussion here. Though, the (much longer) post on academia neglected to mention that the question was inspired by a movie.
    – cag51 Mod
    Sep 4, 2022 at 20:46
  • 5
    I wasn't involved in deleting the question either. However, pulling it up it strikes me as intending to provoke outright, and provoke a discussion, using currently trendy buzzwords and topics galore for maximum division. This is not a discussion site. Sep 6, 2022 at 18:58
  • 5
    Side note: this seems to be part of an eight year old occasional rehash of the concept of studying previous university exams questions and answers and whether that should or should not be considered cheating or an honor code/integrity violation. Recently the saga bled into Movies.SE. Oldest post from this asker on the subject that I can find is here: academia.stackexchange.com/questions/27872/… also see: academia.stackexchange.com/questions/27871/… Sep 11, 2022 at 6:13

2 Answers 2

10

I was not involved in the deletion of your question. But here is why I would arrive at the same decision:

Taken out of context, your last paragraph is misogynistic victim blaming.

Within context, I have the problem that your post is not really clear (it has too many unclear references and does not describe its line of thought well) and thus I cannot tell why that paragraph is there. Thus, I turn to the most lenient interpretation (in dubio pro reo) of why that paragraph is there: You want to illustrate the concept of victim blaming to somebody who never heard it. But even then, the word choices and tone of the paragraph are totally out of place and re-iterate the victim blaming itself, thus violating the Code of Conduct:

No bigotry.

We don’t tolerate any language likely to offend or alienate people based on […] gender, […]. […]. When in doubt, don't use language that might offend or alienate.

-4

Posting incomprehensible text is abuse. Please consult the help before posting questions.

11
  • 2
    We all write something that is accidentally incomprehensible occasionally and some of us are worse at avoiding this than others. Posting something incomprehensible only constitutes abuse if it is intentional. I see no indication that this applies here.
    – Wrzlprmft Mod
    Sep 11, 2022 at 7:21
  • @Wrzlprmft I do not agree that intent is required. I vote to close based on contents of a question, not intent. Sep 11, 2022 at 15:34
  • 2
    Sure, intent doesn’t matter for closing as unclear (or for any other reason), but abuse is something different. You wouldn’t flag every unclear question as abusive.
    – Wrzlprmft Mod
    Sep 11, 2022 at 15:40
  • Correct; but "unclear" is not an accurate description of this particular post. "Incomprehensible" is. Sep 11, 2022 at 16:22
  • 2
    Why juxtapose the two sentences in your previous comment then? This is not about closing the question for being incomprehensible (which I would agree with) but for considering it abusive for being incomprehensible.
    – Wrzlprmft Mod
    Sep 11, 2022 at 19:57
  • It was simply an example of a common situation where intent is not relevant. Talking about intent is pointless in the context of this site, where everything is just text someone posted. Sep 11, 2022 at 23:20
  • 1
    Talking about intent is pointless in the context of this site – If somebody post something that is intentionally incomprehensible, it’s vandalism, and the default action is to flag as rude/abusive and nuke or suspend the user (as diamond moderators). You would not do this if something is incomprehensible on account of an honest mistake (e.g., a sentence missing its verb). Of course, we cannot divine true intent, so everything of the above has to be modified with “with reasonable certainty”, but that applies to every analogue interaction as well.
    – Wrzlprmft Mod
    Sep 12, 2022 at 7:52
  • @Wrzlprmft Missing one word is not what I meant by incomprehensible text, and I think you knew that. Sep 13, 2022 at 0:13
  • 4
    No, then I honestly have no idea what you mean. I see missing one crucial word (from a short question) as bad as the post in question in terms of incomprehensibility – whether I look at how difficult it is to divine the actual question, the estimated lack of diligence, or the probability of intent. In particular I see no difference between this post and a short question with a crucial missing word that could make exactly one of them abusive by any criteria for abusiveness.
    – Wrzlprmft Mod
    Sep 13, 2022 at 7:11
  • 1
    Are we looking at the same question?? I have some issues with it, but incomprehensibility isn't one of them. Sep 14, 2022 at 15:49
  • @ScottSeidman Apparently not. Sep 14, 2022 at 21:44

You must log in to answer this question.

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