[ramboacid]

I've been around the forums for about a month now, and I still don't know what mole snacks are really. I mean, I've already done a search on the site, and more or less the best picture I got for why people give or take mole snacks is for whatever reason they want. So my question is, what criteria do you use when you click the "give mole snack"/"take mole snack" link at the side of every post?

Just to get things started, I'll give my two cents.

I generally give mole snacks when I feel someone goes above and beyond working with another user to solve a problem, or when someone puts in exemplary effort into a post answering someone else's question. Often times, I'll give a mole snack to another newbie (like me) when they're simply polite and/or seem enthusiastic on the forum, just to give them some positive reinforcement.

I try to stay away from giving negative mole snacks, as I personally don't feel qualified to deem someone else's post/pedagogy/methodology as "bad." I think I've only ever taken a mole snack once, and that was from a spammer trying to advertise red shoes or something in six different threads.

[Borek]

This is more or less what I do as well, although - because of my role on the site - I will also take mole snacks from people that break forum rules.

In the case of spammers I don't give mole snacks, I just ban them immediately 

[Arkcon]

I like to give snacks when people give good answers, and I especially like it when someone shows a sudden burst of insight to solving a problem for themselves.  I also like it when people come up with a very creative way to try and talk someone through the problem without giving away the answer, that sort of work deserves a reward.

I take points away mostly for people who demand that rules don't apply to them -- not just for not following our rules, taking away snacks for that's just dull.  It's for when someone demands that we give only complete answers and "stop wasting my time", or that copyrights don't actually apply to their needs.  I've also taken snacks away from crackpots who demand we accept their random proof of alchemy or refutation of thermodynamics.  Because I'd rather everyone knew at a glance something was wrong with this person, and maybe click on their name to see all their posts, and understand what's up with this person.

[cheese (MSW)]

That snacks are anonymous and the awardee doesn’t even know which question got the snack means the system is subject to abuse.
Let me tell you of my experience with my three –ve mole snacks.  As I recall, I wracked them up before I had I received a single +ve snack.  Two were I suspect (as stated snacks are anonymous) from responders who in my opinion were "BSing" and I challenged them to back up their statements with facts which, subsequently, they were unable to do (one tried to BS further).  BSing has no place in science and someone with my experience will see right through you if you try.  (I have a tried to find a more genteel expression for bullsh*t but without success.)  The third –ve snack was my first and I believe came from the  "Deity" member (again correct me if I’m wrong) who was attempting to put me as a new member in my place because I implied I knew a lot about chemistry.  Two problems however: I do know a LOT of inorganic chemistry and the response from the Deity Member was wrong (his background in advanced inorganic chemistry as deduced from his introduction is weak).  For him to subsequently say –ve snacks are given to people that break the rules is therefore not completely true.   If you disagree with a person’s view have the courage to say so.   This is how science progresses. To give a –ve snack because you disagree with a person’s honestly-held view is totally reprehensible.  I was also told that my –ve snacks were bad luck; another said he tried harder when he received a bunch of –ve snacks at the beginning.   Those comments are rubbish!  Luck is not involved in explanations of science, and there is no need to try harder when the explanation given represents the current state of understanding of the issue under discussion.  When I am making a (hopefully educated) guess I state as such. 
I never give (±)snacks and I play strictly according to the rules of scientific ethics.  I am here to share my extensive knowledge of inorganic and general chemistry.   A note of thanks would be appreciated but not necessary. 
Incidentally, I have come over from Yahoo! Answers Chemistry that has even more problems than Chemical Forums.  My major concern with Y!A is "top contributors" tumbling over themselves to spoon-feed students with homework answers.  Furthermore, their answers are usually not referenced and are often wrong!  I also brought a number of special symbols with me (stolen from other Y! Answers, ☠) many of which, by coincidence, have now been incorporated into the symbol lexicon available for this forum.   

[Borek]

snacks are anonymous

They are not. Last few are listed on the right side of the screen.

The third –ve snack was my first and I believe came from the  "Deity" member (again correct me if I’m wrong) who was attempting to put me as a new member in my place because I implied I knew a lot about chemistry.

I happen to be the only deity member here, so I guess you refer to me. I don't think it was me who took the snack, although I don't remember and it can't be checked now, as log holds only 24 hours of information. What I am sure about is that if it was me it was not because you were right and I was wrong, as I know my limitations.

I also brought a number of special symbols with me (stolen from other Y! Answers, ☠) many of which, by coincidence, have now been incorporated into the symbol lexicon available for this forum.

Coincidence it happened right now. I had no access to the forum code before so I couldn't do it earlier, even if I wanted to for at least two years. I am afraid we were the last science related forum to implement an easy way of using these symbols in posts.

[Arkcon]

cheese (MSW): I know that anonymous snack system can get to people from time to time.  I've lost dozens, and I didn't really know why.  Of course, I began to suspect, once I tried to work with really stubborn people, that it was them, logging in just to take a snack from me out of spite.  In fact, lately, some noob has been doing just that, as I could see from the log.  For a while, I was really pissed off at having so many negative snacks ... but if the "gimmie gimmie" kids are the ones taking them from me, I'm kinda proud of my negative snacks, they let me know I haven't been too easy on people.

[cheese (MSW)]

I thought that might get people going! And I've collected another -ve snack!
But I have my secret method of revenge.   
On Yahoo!Answers we call people that vote for friends or deliberately vote for wrong
answers trolls and they are obviously at work here.
Here are the first three lines of my symbols:
→ ←   ↓↑ ↑↓  ↑ ↑  e⁻↔ e⁻     →Δ→     ⇄  ⇋  → hν →   ←Δoct→   ⇋ Δ/hν ⇋   Δδ(AB) ~ JAB → hν/Δ →   
 α  β  γ  ←δ+  δ-→  ε  θ  α μ ν  λ  χ η ħ  ν (↓↑) σ bonds  π bond     pπ-pπ    δ-←X-A-X →δ-    δ-←X-A↑-X →δ-
  π → π*      σ → σ*  π* → σ*  d→ π*  σ/π  Å 4πr^2 Ψ^2  25 °C <109.5 ° <120°  180°  -nFE° = ΔG = ΔH – TΔS  -RTlnKeq   
Cut & paste them for future use.
I'm afraid you guys are not in my class.

[Borek]

↓↑

Makes sense. Will have to remember to add them.

[cheese (MSW)]

So Deity Member will you deny that you gave me my latest -ve snack?
Do you have a BSc in Chemistry Borek?  Anyone who allows himself to
be called Deity Member opens him- herself up for derision.
When I was an undergrad I received lectures from Derek Barton
(Nobel Prize 69) and Geoffrey Wilkinson (Nobel Prize 73).  Now they
were awe inspiring, but still mortals.   

Arkon: Your response defies logic!  You admit to a major flaw in the system, but
you nothing to correct it and indeed you now take pride in your -ve snacks.
What are we teaching the next generation??  We must be scrupulously honest and
insist others do the same.

On Y!A students were taking my answer and deleting the question no doubt
to pass the answer off as their own for their assignment.  This despicable practice
happened sometimes several times every day.  At least Chem Forums prevents this.
 
 

[408]

They are not. Last few are listed on the right side of the screen.

huh? where?


I give positive snacks when:
somebody answers my question
when somebody does chemistry at home
when somebody is not an idiot

negative when:
person is an idiot.

[Borek]

They are not. Last few are listed on the right side of the screen.

huh? where?

You don't see them?

[408]

yeah, that must be a mod thing I cannot see it.

apparently I was active this morning 

[Borek]

So Deity Member will you deny that you gave me my latest -ve snack?

I don't remember taking snacks from you. Doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Do you have a BSc in Chemistry Borek?

Does it matter? Technically I have no chemical training.

Anyone who allows himself to be called Deity Member opens him- herself up for derision.

Only from those not understanding how the forum works. This is a title awarded automatically to anyone with over 10k posts, it has nothing to do with the science part. Could even be it is a default configuration of the SMF, I am sure I have seen it on other forums. Up to now it never attracted attention, you are the first person to bring it up.

[Borek]

yeah, that must be a mod thing I cannot see it.

Strange.

Can anyone else confirm if they are seeing it or not?

Edit: I see from the code it is visible to Mods and Admins only, I don't think that was the Mitch's intent (see here).

[fledarmus]

The last five mole snacks given or received were visible for a brief time, then disappeared again.

I usually give or take mole snacks based on the tone of the question or the answer. If the question is demanding and especially if the person asking it responds negatively to the suggestion that they should spend some time thinking about the question themselves, I sometimes give a -ve. If the person answering the question is condescending or arrogant, I frequently give a -ve. Neither of those types of responses help the forum, especially the answerers, regardless of how correct the answer is.

Positive mole snacks go to questioners that struggle on their own to find the answers and pick up on the hints that they get, and to answerers that I think do a really good job of picking out exactly what the questioner is having missing and give just enough help to get them to the answer.

And occasionally I accidentally give a mole snack to somebody when I'm trying to use my laptop to read the forum because the touchpad is very sensitive and sometimes reads a click where I am just trying to move the cursor.