Timeline for What aspect of Super User needs more attention?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
26 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 23, 2012 at 20:53 | comment | added | slhck | Thanks for your consideration! | |
| Jan 23, 2012 at 19:22 | comment | added | r4. | (I upvote questions as well. Especially if the person is new here). | |
| Jan 23, 2012 at 19:17 | comment | added | r4. | I will keep that in mind and do so from now on! It is due to the fact that it takes some time to come up with something decent to write. ((And maybe also partly because I was called 'listen jackass' by a commentor when I had retagged his question yesterday)). (I guess it is like the 'car driver' effect. That your next person, the internet surfer, is also a human beeing, is something that you sometimes partly forget). | |
| Jan 23, 2012 at 19:07 | comment | added | slhck | Sure. One more thing though: I noticed that there were quite a lot of downvotes on your profile now. Considering the large number of -1 scored questions on the frontpage today, I assume these were yours, since in my last year of visiting SU, I've never seen this. For none of those questions, you gave a comment telling the OP how to improve it. Please leave a comment when you downvote, telling the OP what specifically is wrong about the question, what information is missing, et cetera. Failure to do so is considered very rude here. | |
| Jan 23, 2012 at 16:21 | comment | added | r4. | Yes. I know of it's existence. Thanks anyways! | |
| Jan 23, 2012 at 16:13 | comment | added | slhck | You do know there's data.SE? ;) | |
| Jan 23, 2012 at 14:54 | comment | added | r4. | @slhck. I did statistics mostly for my own part. For doing statistics. (And a strong YES. Extracting statistics from the site would be interesting. I might do that someday but not right now. Since I would have to develop a script for extracting statistics). | |
| Jan 23, 2012 at 14:03 | comment | added | slhck | That leaves the question of what you want to do with these kinds of statistics. If you really want to have a discussion about downvoting behavior on new questions, I'd encourage you to ask a new Meta question with specific numbers. This would make it more visible to the community. | |
| Jan 23, 2012 at 13:56 | comment | added | r4. | For fun I did statistics of latest 100 posts. Here is comes ((one flaw since 1+1+2+2+9+48+20+13+3=99)). -6 x 1 // -4 x 1 // -3 x 2 // -2 x 2 // -1 x 9 // 0 x 48 // 1 x 20 // 2 x 13 // 3 x 3 // (I have voted down 8 times I think, since that would affect statistics). | |
| Jan 23, 2012 at 13:45 | comment | added | slhck | The point being: New users feel very strongly about being downvoted for no "apparent" reason (in the sense of something they can easily fix). By all means, bad stuff should be downvoted, but I don't think it's really necessary to be more aggressive on question downvoting other than it already is. | |
| Jan 23, 2012 at 13:37 | comment | added | slhck | I see now. What's the point though? I mean, you won't get everybody to do it. Feel free to use your (limited amount of) votes how you like, but if you downvote a question, please include a comment saying why you're doing so. If the reason mostly is "This is just an average question", then you should be asking yourself if you probably just should not have voted. | |
| Jan 23, 2012 at 13:32 | comment | added | r4. | @slhck I have heard what you have to say. Still. I would like to have more downvotes. F.e. (I thinking loud) If all users voted down much more the average question would have perhaps -2 votes. Then. -2 would be the "normal". Really bad questions would fast gain -5 votes. The good questions would have perhaps 1 vote. As now is, all questions which have low attention has mostly 0 votes. If this was a the superuser.com in a paralell universe I would like that superuser better. | |
| Jan 23, 2012 at 13:15 | comment | added | slhck |
> Here it is much more vague (to vague) what kinds of questions is "in scope of this site. Hence A LOT of "bad" questions — Please post concrete examples, otherwise you can post them in the Vote to Close chatroom, or flag them for moderator attention. I think the FAQ is quite clear on what's allowed and what's not.
|
|
| Jan 23, 2012 at 13:14 | comment | added | slhck | I don't see the particular issue. As far as I've been involved in community moderation, I believe we do a fairly good job of separating the good from the bad. | |
| Jan 23, 2012 at 13:14 | comment | added | Daniel Beck Mod | Good/bad is subjective. If someone else likes a simple RTFM question, because they learned something new they didn't bother sifting through man pages for before, then you need to accept it and move on. At least it's ±0 instead of +1. | |
| Jan 23, 2012 at 13:12 | comment | added | Daniel Beck Mod |
(Comment still regarding "A. ->") Well, yes. That's how voting works. You aren't the reference on what questions are good or bad. You could always comment on the question and point out why you think it's bad, this'll make others more likely to agree with you and also downvote (at least in my experience). See for example this duplicate.
|
|
| Jan 23, 2012 at 13:06 | comment | added | r4. | ((@Daniel. I was cut but the 'editing limitations here'. Hence above was written before your comment.)) My definition of a good question is a negating definition. Def. Good question: Not a bad one. | |
| Jan 23, 2012 at 13:02 | comment | added | r4. | The most striking fact to me is this. SO is very very quick at removing spam, and politely asking users to refrase questions like, "I would like to start web development. Is rails a good framework.". Here it is much more vague (to vague) what kinds of questions is "in scope of this site. Hence A LOT of "bad" questions. (Personal opinion). | |
| Jan 23, 2012 at 13:01 | comment | added | r4. | A. -> I don't think his question is a good one. B -> Hence I vote down "his crappy question X". BUT Then YOU (another user) comes. C. -> You think his question is in fact rather good. D. -> Hence you correct me by you voting up. , SUM, question back at zero. OR. E -> One other user thinks like me. Votes down question X. -> Question X at -2. | |
| Jan 23, 2012 at 12:56 | comment | added | Daniel Beck Mod | In that case, it's covered by no research effort and not clear, that are already on the tooltip, don't you think. As an avid and public down voter of bad questions, I agree with you, but I don't think there are many bad questions that don't get down voted already. Still, it'd be interesting to see what you would think are good, concrete examples of the problem you describe. | |
| Jan 23, 2012 at 12:52 | comment | added | r4. | (For starters. I am NOT voting down on things that I am not interested in so your analogies is a bit far fetched). What I am thinking is this. I think question X is a very very vague question. I don't get it at all. WHAT?!? How can he even ask such a question. Use google, another fourum etc, ask his friends first In one sentance **DO YOUR RESERACH. The most striking fact to me is this. | |
| Jan 23, 2012 at 12:26 | comment | added | Daniel Beck Mod | It's not like down voting of e.g. OS X questions makes it more likely I answer Windows questions I don't have any clue about. If you want more interesting questions on this site, you can always ask them yourself. Even if you have an answer, it doesn't have to be the only or best one... | |
| Jan 23, 2012 at 12:24 | comment | added | Daniel Beck Mod |
All questions on any site with some substance are "less important" to the majority of users. That's not a useful rule to base votes on. There are enough Java, Python, and even Haskell users on SO to drown even C# questions in down votes. Users that aren't interested simply ignore those questions and browse their favorite tags, like what happens e.g. with osx questions on this site. And the users you down vote are left wondering what they did wrong, when the only reason is that you're not interested in their choice of hardware, text editor, or OS. Please reconsider your policy.
|
|
| Jan 23, 2012 at 12:20 | comment | added | r4. | To put it this way. A "less important question". This is obviously highly speculative and different from person to person. I.e. a not too great question. Therefor my opinion is that such questions deserves to be voted down. My own opinion is that this goes for probably half the questions of this site. (I can see one pattern. That such a question is often created by a very new user). This site is practically drowning in "low quality questions" (personal opinion). | |
| Jan 23, 2012 at 11:46 | comment | added | Daniel Beck Mod | Define low quality. We already have three official reasons to down vote questions: No research effort (my favorite), unclear, and not useful. The last one is obviously not useful to anyone, otherwise I could down vote all Windows questions. So, what else is there to down vote? Do you have concrete examples? | |
| Jan 23, 2012 at 11:06 | history | answered | r4. | CC BY-SA 3.0 |