Timeline for Pausing the 1-rep voting experiment on Stack Overflow: reflecting on the feedback and rethinking the approach
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
31 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 30, 2024 at 15:45 | comment | added | Michael come lately | Step 3: Profit? Or is that further down? | |
| Apr 24, 2024 at 15:53 | comment | added | Catija | @Braiam Cool - so we even have community support ;) Using your search parameters (updated for today), there's 1.2 million - oof. :/ That's 5% | |
| Apr 24, 2024 at 15:31 | comment | added | Braiam | "Shog, Robert and I wrote a document about this in 2019" hey, I also did write about it. | |
| Apr 11, 2024 at 21:19 | comment | added | TylerH | No surprise at all that I agree completely with everything in this post. It's almost like we discussed this ad nauseum in attempts to get the ball rolling on each and every one of these things in the past... it's a damn shame we have the company focused on things like AI instead. | |
| Apr 7, 2024 at 23:43 | comment | added | AncientSwordRage | I unironically was going to post "SE needs to hire whoever wrote this" before I saw the author... | |
| Apr 7, 2024 at 7:05 | comment | added | Catija | @PeterMortensen I'm not quite sure I follow what you're saying. Is that a supplemental statement or a disagreement with something I wrote? I'm not quite certain. | |
| Apr 7, 2024 at 7:03 | comment | added | Catija | @DavidC.Rankin I mean... that's a way of thinking about it... but it isn't always so simple. Many people who sock don't realize it's not allowed. And, to be clear, having socks is fine... it's what people do with them that becomes an issue. SO has always focused on moderation that allows for mistakes and correcting behavior. Very little, including socking inappropriately, will lead to permanent bans. It's just not how we do things here. | |
| Apr 7, 2024 at 1:40 | comment | added | David C. Rankin | I don't know, but if people are found socking - exhibiting Dishonesty, then they need to be permanently banned - Period. Quality and Integrity are what makes SO/SE stand out among the rest. I'm all for making that practice easier to discover and police. 6-figure rep takes significantly more time than reflected in some accounts. | |
| Apr 6, 2024 at 19:29 | comment | added | Peter Mortensen | Some very valuable content is effectively deleted because the search engines refuse to surface it (for whatever reason). That is especially true for the questions and answers from 2008 and 2009. Much of that content is not outdated. Search engine results are often low-quality questions and answers from 2015 (+/- 5 years). Try to search for some very basic beginner-level concepts/problems that must have been asked in the first few weeks or months of Stack Overflow's existence. | |
| Apr 6, 2024 at 19:10 | history | edited | Peter Mortensen | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Second iteration. Expanded.
|
| Apr 6, 2024 at 19:03 | history | edited | Peter Mortensen | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Active reading [<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reddit>]. Expanded.
|
| Apr 6, 2024 at 17:08 | comment | added | Karl Knechtel | Merging is hard because clear duplicates are rarely exact enough despite being clear. | |
| Apr 6, 2024 at 11:54 | comment | added | bad_coder | @JourneymanGeek that's just idle chatter because it doesn't address the value of the content lost in the question or the comments nor the importance of having previous references contributing to discoverability. Programming problems are often solved through a shred of hint - which is a lot better than nothing. | |
| Apr 6, 2024 at 11:29 | comment | added | Journeyman Geek | @bad_coder lets say I'm someone with the same problem - if I ask the question myself, and someone who knows enough to walk me through the problem is around, or better yet happens to find the question and posts an answer, it feels better to me than having an old unanswered question which people come across without an answer. | |
| Apr 6, 2024 at 10:17 | comment | added | bad_coder | I've explained too many times to several curators that those 0 score questions that haven't roombaed aren't a real problem and often they're the only post on niche tags addressing open problems that haven't been solved yet - anywhere. You'd basically be deleting all the Wisdom of the Ancients and there'd be no more DenverCoder9 :P | |
| Apr 6, 2024 at 5:49 | comment | added | user447356 | As someone else wrote, this is really a breath of fresh air in times we really need it. Thanks, and really sorry that they let you go instead of doing the opposite. | |
| Apr 6, 2024 at 5:37 | history | edited | Catija | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
minor changes to clarify/fix issues.
|
| Apr 6, 2024 at 3:47 | comment | added | Shog9 | This is one of those times I just want an "applause" reaction. Very nice rundown! | |
| Apr 6, 2024 at 0:23 | comment | added | Catija | @user1937198 Yeah, you'll want to look at a year but... my numbers are from 2019, so it makes sense there's more than that now. :P I would share that doc with people over the years but never got anyone to bite. | |
| Apr 6, 2024 at 0:22 | comment | added | user1937198 | Theres over 2 million posts, that are over 3 months old, have 0 score or less, and less than 10 views per year. | |
| Apr 5, 2024 at 23:49 | comment | added | Catija | @starball Tried to clarify the first two. I was being a bit glib... how much true value can be in 0-score questions with no answers and 2+ comments? My point with rep is that there are other (possibly better) ways to show trust and expertise than relying on rep, which is given for both asking and answering... do you think someone who's only asked has much SME to trust? | |
| Apr 5, 2024 at 23:48 | history | edited | Catija | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1 character in body
|
| Apr 5, 2024 at 22:14 | comment | added | zcoop98 | I absolutely love the energy of this answer. Ambitious projects can be awesome – but they have to be targeted correctly. The "ambitious goal" of the original proposal was to... vote more. Woo. Yes, curation is positive & crucial & without votes SE wouldn't exist, but is that really a good entry point when we have a backlog of millions of questions? Why not take a crack at that, or something equally as material/ tangible first? I would be so excited to see the power of a big project that the community actually believed in and felt comfortable getting behind. It'd be refreshing, frankly. | |
| Apr 5, 2024 at 21:45 | history | edited | starballMod | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 55 characters in body
|
| Apr 5, 2024 at 21:43 | history | edited | starballMod | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 57 characters in body
|
| Apr 5, 2024 at 21:42 | comment | added | starball Mod | related to edit privileges, shameless plug: For edit-suggestors with a streak of N approvals, only require one approval for their next suggested edit, and journeyman geek's Opining a successful-edit-count-based two tier suggested edit system. | |
| Apr 5, 2024 at 21:39 | comment | added | starball Mod | "If reputation doesn't give privileges, does it matter" - of course! it's social clout, and that motivates people, and can give a degree of support to how much you can trust what that person writes in an answer in a related tag (people have suggested somehow showing rep in user card based on tag rep rather than total rep). | |
| Apr 5, 2024 at 21:29 | comment | added | starball Mod | "but I don't really think that's worth the time at this point" do you just mean the diamonds in the trash part, or the whole thing on taking out the trash? could you reword to make that bit a little more clear? I'm guessing just the "diamonds in the trash part", but I want to be sure. | |
| Apr 5, 2024 at 21:24 | history | edited | starballMod | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
speling
|
| Apr 5, 2024 at 21:22 | comment | added | starball Mod | nit/petition to change "shouldn't be asked: duplicates" to "shouldn't be asked: duplicates that make poor and/or non-unique signposts"? (a mouthful :P, but I think an important one?) | |
| Apr 5, 2024 at 20:57 | history | answered | Catija | CC BY-SA 4.0 |