Timeline for High reputation users having trouble understanding Super User?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 20, 2017 at 10:32 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.stackexchange.com/ with https://meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Apr 23, 2014 at 13:35 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Fixup of bad MSO links to MSE links migration
|
|
| Apr 23, 2014 at 9:11 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Migration of MSO links to MSE links
|
|
| Jul 22, 2010 at 18:01 | history | migrated | from meta.stackexchange.com (revisions) | ||
| Mar 29, 2010 at 4:37 | comment | added | DaveParillo | How about emailing high rep users a link to this question with a short introductory paragraph. I've been using SU for 6 months & I just learned a lot reading this. | |
| Feb 5, 2010 at 16:35 | comment | added | Ether | CW is still not well-understood, even on SO which has the most established user base. The most common opinion is that inappropriate questions become ok if they are marked CW, rather than the original intent for them to be collaboratively-edited collections of information. | |
| Feb 5, 2010 at 11:19 | comment | added | Jeff Atwood | well, all I can say is, my apologies, and this is why we have Ivo and Troggy as moderators now. I don't agree that "it is failing", though. | |
| Feb 5, 2010 at 9:45 | comment | added | Gnoupi | @Ivo - as a CW question, the point is for people to edit the main answer, not especially add another. Anyway, it was more a single thing, as I don't think that such sites should really have FAQs questions. The point of it was only to regroup some "guidelines", to be proposed as addon to related questions. But in the end, every such question is particular, there can't be a "universal" reference. Anyway, not the topic here. | |
| Feb 5, 2010 at 9:32 | comment | added | Ivo Flipse | My problem with that FAQ question is that it answers too many questions in one breath, so I can't really add more info without duplicating what's already said and it might not answer every related question | |
| Feb 5, 2010 at 9:13 | comment | added | alex | @Diago I'd rather have a smaller, healthier community that can deal with the additional traffic that will inevitably come. Those are just numbers, they don't impress me as a user. However, the behavior I see sometimes pisses me off. I gave up on SU because it was too frustrating! @Gnoupi nice effort, too bad I didn't see it (I'm not really active anymore on SU, it was too frustrating). | |
| Feb 5, 2010 at 9:07 | comment | added | Gnoupi | About the community flag, I noticed something impressive recently indeed. As this situation was happening often, I suggested to write a "super user approved" faq for some situations, like "what to do with a virus" (superuser.com/questions/100360/…). It's a CW question, and the goal is to have a concentrate of answers from the higher users. One answered, made a great post... And that's all. No other high rep came on it, to improve, or else. So what to take from it? That the question was not interesting to begin with? | |
| Feb 5, 2010 at 9:06 | comment | added | Diago | The problem is the counter to this. Us cracking the whip causes more people to stay away. I do agree it was tolerated for a while, but we weren't getting 1M hits a month. Addressing this is going to be a problem, and to be frank, if a high rep user does not want to play ball, then they should not be on the site. However putting all of them in the penalty box is not a solution either. | |
| Feb 5, 2010 at 9:00 | history | answered | alex | CC BY-SA 2.5 |