3

I wasn't one of the closers, and in fact didn't see the question while it was open, so while I can't say for sure, I can tell you what I'm independently seeing. First off, this is effectively a Holocaust question, because one can't really separate how these events shook out from the Holocaust. We have a documented higher quality bar for Holocaust questions. ...


2

One basic dynamic I'd like to point out here, that will ..er.. underpin everything below, is that an answer being the top answer under a question is a huge advantage (assuming it doesn't suck). People read answers by scrolling down from the question. The further down the page you get, the less people are now reading. Answers get less chances for upvotes if ...


2

One basic dynamic I'd like to point out here, that will ..er.. underpin everything below, is that an answer being the top answer under a question is a huge advantage (assuming it doesn't suck). People read answers by scrolling down from the question. The further down the page you get, the less people are now reading. Answers get less chances for upvotes if ...


1

With Grant leading the assault force, a rarity of competence among the generals on both sides: 100% chance of falling on the 16th or perhaps 17th. With 16,000 men to defend a roughly 2 mile defensive perimeter, the Confederates were fielding 8000 men per mile. Despite numbers seemingly prophetic of World War 1 the fort succumbed on the second day of assault. ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible