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
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 15, 2015 at 17:19 | comment | added | killermist | @fixer1234 If there were some mechanism for crusaders to be identified and have their review votes for or against low-quality questions/answers to only count for 1/4 or 1/8 vote, that would probably (exponentially) help. But, if they go fixing things instead of voting (because they realize their votes are now pointless for low-quality), because that's their new out, the newer users still miss the point, and quality still degrades. I've sadly learned the lesson, stare decisis. Let people vote on the quality of crap. Don't improve crap. | |
| Apr 15, 2015 at 16:45 | comment | added | killermist | @fixer1234 But, you're not wrong. A link, by itself, is " (very?) low quality". These kinds of answers should be smacked, in the form of downvotes, close votes, flags for VLQ, and the like. All of this, of course will be met with resistance by crusaders (except downvotes, which are still fortunately mostly anonymous). If a person can't create a cogent answer about why [thing x] will successfully do [function y] that the person needs, then a link-only answer needs to die. But, again crusaders will have a problem with that. | |
| Apr 15, 2015 at 3:26 | comment | added | fixer1234 | The "low quality" in the title may not have been the best choice of words. The VLQ "disagreements" were before my time, so I tend to forget that "low quality" carries a special meaning. My question was actually referring to software recommendation answers that are just link-only, or not much more; with anything "more" being nothing related to an actual solution (like naming a few random features that just gives it the added flavor of an advertisement). Software rec link-only answers seem to get special dispensation, and whether or not they should be flagged is not consistent policy. | |
| Apr 15, 2015 at 0:36 | history | answered | killermist | CC BY-SA 3.0 |