Timeline for Can we PLEASE get a definitive answer on what to do with low-quality software recommendation answers?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
23 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 20, 2017 at 10:18 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://superuser.com/ with https://superuser.com/
|
|
| Mar 17, 2017 at 9:30 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.superuser.com/ with https://meta.superuser.com/
|
|
| Apr 15, 2015 at 0:36 | answer | added | killermist | timeline score: -1 | |
| Apr 11, 2015 at 20:34 | history | edited | fixer1234 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
corrected rep requirement for answer deletion queue
|
| Apr 11, 2015 at 5:37 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/super_user/status/586764911130312704 | ||
| Apr 3, 2015 at 19:42 | history | edited | fixer1234 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
updated based on reference found in another Meta post
|
| Apr 2, 2015 at 17:36 | comment | added | slhck Mod | I understand all that. All I'm saying is that in my opinion it's not strictly required in this case to make it qualify as an answer. My standards definitely have become a little lower though, I must confess. Anyway this is not an authoritative answer. | |
| Apr 2, 2015 at 17:27 | comment | added | fixer1234 | @slhck: the way to make it better is to explain how to accomplish the result using either tool. Just saying a product can do it is not a solution. If someone writes in with an Excel problem, would an answer be, "Excel is a tool that can do that"? The answer doesn't need to be a tutorial. It can be as simple as listing the menu locations and basic steps, or showing a simple example, or a screenshot that shows the gist of what to do. | |
| Apr 2, 2015 at 17:14 | comment | added | slhck Mod | But really, with that answer, how would you improve it other than mentioning the feature that allows what the OP wants to do? I totally agree that this answer looks a little effortless, but imagine you're searching for the same problem as the OP has, and you'd learn that there are two alternatives that offer you exactly what you need—how is that not a viable answer to the question? Granted, it's not a stellar answer, but I cannot imagine how it could be made better. And I don't see a reason to delete it, since it may actually be helpful. | |
| Apr 2, 2015 at 17:09 | comment | added | fixer1234 | @slhck: If the question is not off-topic, the only thing the answer needs to contain is a solution to the question, the question being a problem, not "name a program". Pasting a lot of information about features, etc. doesn't fix the answer, it just turns it into an advertisement. Fixing a link-only answer requires writing an actual answer. Why write an entire answer for someone else when you can just post your own? The fix for a link-only answer is either for the author to write an answer, or move it to a comment as a helpful hint if it is actually useful. | |
| Apr 2, 2015 at 13:40 | comment | added | slhck Mod | "Until today, there was no ambiguity about link-only answers:" — not in my book. I'd still decline "link-only" flags if it's easy enough to fix the answer yourself. Especially with software recommendation answers, how many other things they have to contain other than just a link also heavily depends on the question. That's where it's not easy to create a rule that fits every situation. | |
| Apr 1, 2015 at 22:01 | history | edited | fixer1234 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 404 characters in body
|
| Apr 1, 2015 at 15:36 | comment | added | fixer1234 | @allquixotic: I agree, but the basic question isn't about disposition of the answers, it's about how to respond to them prior to that; the use of mod flags. Until today, there was no ambiguity about link-only answers: flag for deletion. Software request questions: close as off-topic (but mod flag not required with 3K rep). Solutionless software rec answers: ambiguous guidance, but mod flag implied. As of today, there's nothing wrong with any of it; no mod flags. To flag or not to flag; that is the question. | |
| Apr 1, 2015 at 13:33 | comment | added | allquixotic | @fixer1234 I've heard a few people say that the rules are kept intentionally nebulous and open to interpretation, so that individual situations can be dealt with on a case by case basis if there is a nuance to them that would tip the scales one way or the other. It's extremely frustrating to have to work with a "fudge factor" as a person who prefers hard and fast rules (I'm in that same camp), but unfortunately, that's the reality of SE. Nebulous rules are nebulous. You'll find it's the same way with every other point of rules: topicality, Q/A quality, etc. | |
| Apr 1, 2015 at 13:13 | comment | added | James Mertz | @fixer1234 if you're getting bald and drunk from SU.... you need a different outlet. | |
| Apr 1, 2015 at 13:11 | answer | added | James Mertz | timeline score: 1 | |
| Apr 1, 2015 at 11:41 | comment | added | fixer1234 | @JourneymanGeek: You were one of the mods who said the appropriate action was to flag for deletion. Trying to understand the standards sure is a frustrating process. What we would like to see in questions and answers is clear enough, but what to do with ones that aren't seems to change from day to day, if it's defined at all. It's enough to make a person tear their hair out or drive a person to drink. So now we know what is responsible for me being a bald, drunk. :-) | |
| Apr 1, 2015 at 11:23 | comment | added | fixer1234 | @slhck: regarding the link-only flag, until maybe a few months ago, this appeared about half the time near the bottom of the flag reasons list. The wording was something like "link-only answer (not spam)". | |
| Apr 1, 2015 at 11:19 | comment | added | fixer1234 | @slhck: Guess I'm totally lost. All of the prior discussion I've seen is that we don't want software lists; that the answer should describe how to solve the problem, not just mention a piece of software. Also, if just mentioning a product is actually an answer to the question, it means the question is off-topic (product request). So if the opposite is true, there is a whole bunch of irrelevant discussion on Meta. Also, I wasn't referring to the VLQ flags, rather link-only answers and software recommendations that are link-only or not much more. | |
| Apr 1, 2015 at 11:13 | comment | added | Journeyman Geek Mod | I'd also add that SU, and SE as a whole generally has tended to have a light touch on moderation. Not allowing software recs came as a community decision, and a interpretation of the rules against product recs I'd treat a lq software rec answer just like any other. Downvotes and comments are probably effective community actions here. | |
| Apr 1, 2015 at 10:59 | comment | added | slhck Mod | With regard to that specific answer, I don't see what's particularly wrong with it. It could be useful for people looking for an alternative, and the only thing you could to improve it is copypaste a feature list or something. But outright delete it without asking the OP to improve? I don't know. | |
| Apr 1, 2015 at 10:58 | comment | added | slhck Mod | Just a historical note: we've never had any consensus on when to use VLQ flags and what to use them for. The topic comes up every now and then. My proposal is (and has always been) to remove the flag altogether because it is confusing and interpreted differently by moderators. "There used to be a dedicated flag reason for link-only answer (not spam), applicable to any answer, software rec or otherwise" -- AFAIK that was never there? Where did you see this? | |
| Apr 1, 2015 at 9:24 | history | asked | fixer1234 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |