Timeline for Further Experimentation with Comment Reputation Requirements
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 19, 2025 at 9:57 | comment | added | CharonX | Yes, I think the aim is not real engagement, rather the goal is "activity" - it does not matter to the CEOs if the activity would be SPAM or AI slop. If the numbers look pretty and they can (appear to) make lots of money (in the short term) they'll gladly invite in 99.9% SPAM content. Of course, service would degrade and the site would deteriorate into ruin over the course of a few years, but by then they'd have earned a fat bonus, and likely sold off the site to someone else. | |
| Jul 29, 2025 at 15:45 | comment | added | ColleenV | It doesn't matter what kind of engagement to the company. The initial comment experiment stated the key metric as "We will be measuring the overall volume of comments between the control group and the variant group." meta.stackoverflow.com/a/433826/3735425 They didn't measure the other stuff because the goal is not to build the community, it's to increase engagement and that will magically create a community. | |
| Jul 29, 2025 at 15:40 | comment | added | ColleenV | My understanding is the goal is more engagement because engagement equals ad revenue and AI food. All engagement is valuable so yes SO is going to be a forum whether we like it or not. The new activity widget thing leads directly to being able to follow profiles. Dropping everyone into the main chat room of a site instead of letting people figure out they can look at transcripts or start their own rooms was no accident either. They are chasing the engagement dragon. | |
| Jul 29, 2025 at 15:09 | history | answered | user400654 | CC BY-SA 4.0 |