Timeline for Modernizing curation: A proposal for The Workshop and The Archive
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 18, 2025 at 15:26 | comment | added | l4mpi | @DalijaPrasnikar "Again, those questions are not crap" - that may be YOUR opinion and experience, but my experience is very different. I did have SG enabled for a few days and then turned it off because almost everything I saw was not something I wanted to see. And yes, I stopped answering except for very rare cases as a) it is rare to find a good answerable question in my fav tags and b) I heavily disagree with the course SE has taken over the last decade and thus reduced my contributions. I mainly curate a bit during downtime at work to slow the rate of SO becoming a trash heap. | |
| Dec 18, 2025 at 13:38 | comment | added | Dalija Prasnikar Mod | @l4mpi Again, those questions are not crap. You are inventing a problem that does not exist as such questions would otherwise land directly on main site. If you are not interested in interaction nobody forces you to open such questions. But they should be visible because that is the only way to push more questions into SG and actually reduce amount of crap questions which don't land in SG. Since the last answer you posted in 2023, it is not like seeing all those questions would somehow prevent you from finding good questions you can answer. | |
| Dec 18, 2025 at 12:43 | comment | added | l4mpi | @DalijaPrasnikar and re "not everything in SG is crap, you can skip it" - see this comment from yesterday. I am not interested to wade through crap to find useful things, so if SE allows me to filter out some of the content that has a very high probability of being crap and also only allows very restricted curation interactions then of course I am going to enable that filter. | |
| Dec 18, 2025 at 12:40 | comment | added | l4mpi | @DalijaPrasnikar disagree. Nobody needed to teach me what was expected of me; I learned this by observation and then jumped straight into answering questions. My first question was pretty well received even though it was about a topic I had little experience with. The horse has bolted a decade ago but we could have very well gotten higher quality standards by being more elitist instead of more welcoming (and yes that might have led to less "engagement" and content over the last decade and might not have resulted in an $1.8b valuation, but I care about quality first and foremost). | |
| Dec 18, 2025 at 11:46 | comment | added | Dalija Prasnikar Mod | @l4mpi You cannot get higher quality standards without teaching users what is expected of them. Not all SG questions are crap. Those that are not can be directly published on main site and answered. If some question is crap, you can skip it. You don't have to interact with it in any way if you don't want to. You can also mark questions as off-topic (asked on wrong site) or duplicate which are equivalent to casting close votes and for those you don't have to leave any other comment nor help user in any other way. | |
| Dec 18, 2025 at 10:21 | comment | added | l4mpi | @DalijaPrasnikar I'm not interested in personally "onboarding" users by conversing with them in SG until their question is OK; and as other curation options (dv/cv) are not available I don't want to see SG posts. I want to deal with users who at least have basic compentency in the topic they are asking about (aka minimal required understanding - you might remember that CR). This includes not wanting to deal with people who fail to understand the SO QA model. And I want to note I personally never asked for "better onboarding", I asked for higher quality standards for more than a decade. | |
| Dec 18, 2025 at 9:55 | comment | added | Dalija Prasnikar Mod | @l4mpi What is the difference in seeing SG questions comparing to regular questions? Without SG those questions would end up directly on site. SG was meant to help new users learn about how to ask good questions, we continuously asked for better onboarding and now when we have it, it should be used. You are free to ignore and not open such questions, but it makes zero sense for not showing it to all users. This is not some experimental stuff that was forced upon us. This is what we asked for, | |
| Dec 18, 2025 at 9:17 | comment | added | l4mpi | @DalijaPrasnikar "Staging Ground questions definitely need to be shown all the time for all users" - so you're proposing to remove the opt-out setting that I deliberately enabled to not see that crap? If that were to happen, I might just stop visiting the site entirely. | |
| Dec 18, 2025 at 8:33 | comment | added | Mo_ | No. 2: use LLMs to scan the question and identify potential issues with it - I have a strong suspicion that a lot of suggested edits do exactly this. Do it in the dialog and we get rid of the overhead | |
| Dec 18, 2025 at 7:49 | comment | added | user400654 | @DrewReese/starball this is literally why instead of SG, i want SG's curation tools on Q&A. SG's tools are perfect for workshoping questions into shape, but it gets in the way of the user getting the help they need. I don't understand why we can't allow both processes to happen simultaneously, most of the "issues" i can think of, such as "don't invalidate existing answers" are policies that don't actually apply to this scenario. If the question isn't "complete" yet and someone answers wrongly due to missing information they took a guess at, they just answered wrongly. | |
| Dec 18, 2025 at 0:54 | comment | added | Drew Reese | @starball "it's not intended to be a place for helping answer the question / solve the problem, but rather a place to workshop the question itself." - OFC it's not, that's kind of the point of the SG, to whip a post into publishable state so it can be answered. Though I see what you mean now. I have myself occasionally provided trivial answers/solutions in SG posts that I know full well will fail miserably if published. | |
| Dec 18, 2025 at 0:23 | comment | added | starball Mod | @DrewReese note that SG currently has a non-technical "constraint" that it's not intended to be a place for helping answer the question / solve the problem, but rather a place to workshop the question itself. that could be changed though, and no immediate reason comes to mind for me why not, other than people might feel less incentive to do "actual" Q&A, but there may be some pros to that con (I see a lot of questions that I just don't think have long-term value, where their views over the years seem to back that up). | |
| Dec 17, 2025 at 23:33 | comment | added | Security Hound | I am fine with switching the question rate limit to new questions going to SG, but the moderation tool within SG needs to improve, it should possible to downvote bad questions in the SG | |
| Dec 17, 2025 at 23:06 | comment | added | Drew Reese | I'm wondering why all new questions by new/inexperienced users don't go through SG. SG already exists and is effectively "the workshop"... no need to re-invent the wheel, we already got one! | |
| Dec 17, 2025 at 20:11 | comment | added | Dalija Prasnikar Mod | Staging Ground questions definitely need to be shown all the time for all users in the question list, and possibly even by the time question is edited and not posted until it exist Staging Ground. That would bring more eyes to such questions and give more helpful suggestions from the actual experts in the subject topic. And all questions from new users and those who are question banned need to land into Staging Ground. I am not worried about lack of reviewers because if people want to answer questions they would have to do reviews. | |
| Dec 17, 2025 at 16:30 | history | answered | DharmanMod | CC BY-SA 4.0 |