Return to Answer

I personally would have done this instead: I would have decoupled questions from answers and focused on finding and linking existing content to new questions (maybe without much voting). My premise would be that most new questions are duplicates, some aren't and curation/expert time is limited. This path you explicitly do not seem to follow.

I personally would have done this instead: I would have decoupled questions from answers and focused on finding and linking existing content to new questions (maybe without much voting). My premise would be that most new questions are duplicates, some aren't and curation/expert time is limited while being friendly to everyone doesn't cost a thing. And I would have also concentrated on improving existing content. But this path you explicitly do not seem to follow.

P.S.: I slept over it and now I think that the vision is basically a human super chatbot knowledge machine. A chatbot that can answer every question without any problems or reservations, extracts knowledge on the go and is powered by an endless supply of free human labor. Problem is that it still competes with AI chatbots, they might still be faster and cheaper and this endeavor might be futile. Additionally it's not clear if the knowledge base really needs the chatbot output to distil knowledge. Instead it might be more efficient to completely ignore that and start generating knowledge by other means, whatever they are.

Also, the step size of your experimental updates is much too large. Instead of for example "just" abolish close votes and downvotes you also want to change the UI and the roles of people. The probability that this altogether is positive is very small and would require you to rely on luck to get everything right. If you fail you will not know what was the cause. Believe it or not, but you learn more from doing smaller steps at a time.

P.S.: I slept over it and now I think that the vision is basically a human super chatbot knowledge machine. A chatbot that can answer every question without any problems or reservations, extracts knowledge on the go and is powered by an endless supply of free human labor. Problem is that it still competes with AI chatbots, they might still be faster and cheaper and this endeavor might be futile. Additionally it's not clear if the knowledge base really needs the chatbot output to distil knowledge. Instead it might be more efficient to completely ignore that and start generating knowledge by other means, whatever they are.

It seems that the answer to AI chatbots seems to be that you can write anything and human experts will give you tons of immediate help. I'm really not sure we can beat AI at its own game.

It seems that the answer to AI chatbots seems to be that you can write anything and human experts will give you tons of immediate help. I'm really not sure we can beat AI at its own game, especially not without high quality content.