Timeline for Old posts and answers need protection?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 28, 2015 at 15:46 | history | edited | Excellll | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
spelling
|
| May 27, 2015 at 10:19 | history | edited | Peter Mortensen | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Copy edited (e.g. ref. <http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/definately>).
|
| May 26, 2015 at 17:55 | comment | added | Karan | @harrymc: I've already stated I'm not against option 1. It's not as heavy-handed as option 2, even though it might not satisfy you because it doesn't stop downvotes. BTW I'll say it again - since this needs to be done SE-wide it should be discussed on meta.SE. Edit: Regarding discussing it now, surely this isn't something only you have faced so far. There are people with 5x more rep than you on SE and I'm sure their old answers have been downvoted too for all sorts of invalid reasons. However as far as I can see no high-rep users have ever raised this issue (if they have please link to it). | |
| May 26, 2015 at 14:18 | comment | added | harrymc | @Karan: Answers can certainly be recognized as invalid even years after posting. It's the same difference as between "feasible" and "probable". My option 1 takes care of ensuring the downvoter's intention, as that's the main problem. I'm not saying my solutions are the best, just trying here to get the problem recognized. It might still take years for this problem to become really painful,but I felt we should start discussing it now. | |
| May 26, 2015 at 8:26 | comment | added | Journeyman Geek Mod | However acceptability changes. Sometimes a user might choose not to change his answer for reasons, even if someone's made it clear its not quite right. Considering we bump up old questions with no answers, when a question or answer was posted seems less important to me than its utility | |
| May 26, 2015 at 8:11 | comment | added | Karan | @harrymc: See my comment on Oliver's answer. There's no reason answers cannot be recognised as being invalid even after a significant gap of time. | |
| May 26, 2015 at 7:29 | comment | added | harrymc | @BiTinerary has answered this argument above: "If the question isn't informative enough, this should be addressed within a reasonable time period". It's somewhat preposterous to suppose that an answer was recognized as crap several years after being posted. It's far more likely that the voter isn't familiar with past technology. | |
| May 26, 2015 at 6:21 | comment | added | Journeyman Geek Mod | or downvoted cause someone with an XP system tried it, and it didn't work, or it was a single line, or a link only answer. Preventing people from voting on old question feels like a significant restriction on the ability to vote. It also means that if someone posted a crappy answer in the past, they're essentially immune to the consequences of a downvote. This feels like a pretty heavy handed way of dealing with it. | |
| May 26, 2015 at 5:58 | comment | added | harrymc | The reputation lose here is not really significant, but beside the personal side of seeing good answers downvoted, it also creates a real problem. For example, an answer on an XP post may lose reputation because of no applicability to newer Windows versions, so may be ignored as incorrect by someone still using XP. | |
| May 25, 2015 at 21:55 | history | answered | Journeyman GeekMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |