Timeline for Empowering tag-badge holders part II - let's look at silver?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
29 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 29, 2022 at 12:44 | history | edited | gnat | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
minor typo corrected
|
| Apr 12, 2018 at 21:07 | history | edited | gnat | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
how to handle users who have both silver and bronze badges in different tags
|
| Apr 12, 2018 at 13:18 | history | edited | gnat | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
how to handle questions retagged after the vote was cast
|
| Feb 7, 2018 at 16:38 | comment | added | user50049 | @TylerH It's probably the only sane route to give a little extra weight at the silver level. We're in the process of untangling a lot of stuff around the moderation tools in general as we do channels / enterprise stuff; this is on my list of things to implement once all of that gets sorted out, and we establish a clear barrier in the code path of what's good for public vs what's actually needed for private instances and channels. Then we have to think about public channels, eventually. Short answer: haven't forgotten, it's just complicated. | |
| Feb 7, 2018 at 15:06 | comment | added | TylerH | @TimPost any update on getting something this implemented? | |
| Mar 20, 2017 at 10:31 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.stackexchange.com/ with https://meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Mar 20, 2017 at 9:43 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.stackoverflow.com/ with https://meta.stackoverflow.com/
|
|
| Sep 22, 2016 at 12:12 | comment | added | gnat | @IanRingrose last time I asked it was status-currently-considering. Overall, I wouldn't be surprised (but certainly will feel sad) if they will ignore this in se-quality-project efforts this Fall | |
| Sep 22, 2016 at 11:58 | comment | added | Ian Ringrose | Did anything get done about this in the end? | |
| Mar 17, 2016 at 15:43 | comment | added | gnat | @doppelgreener FWIW they currently run an experiment at Stack Overflow that you might be interested in. If it succeeds and if the change propagates network-wide, smaller sites will get more close votes and reviews. Don't hold your breath though because somewhat similar experiment at Programmers has failed | |
| Nov 6, 2014 at 15:28 | history | edited | gnat | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
minor wordsmithing
|
| Oct 9, 2014 at 23:28 | comment | added | doppelgreener | I'm a regular on Role-playing Games, a small site that gets a decent number of questions each day (20-30 most days?), but the number that gets closed each day is a very small number. Our situation is exactly as Gilles describes: this wouldn't have much use for us, but the dupehammer has been used effectively (if infrequently). I understand the utility of this idea, yet given it won't help me take care of my silver tags, I think it should be coupled with something else that makes sense on smaller sites like this one. (Silver tag badge holders on big sites that need it get to enjoy both features.) | |
| Oct 9, 2014 at 3:53 | comment | added | user50049 | @Gilles When we finish with the quality project and roll out some additional queues, those extra votes would definitely not go to waste, even on most of our small sites. There are some that simply don't ever see more than 5 questions per day, but those sites tend to cling to every single question that they get because they're quite limited. | |
| Oct 8, 2014 at 17:16 | comment | added | Gilles 'SO- stop being evil' | @Wrzlprmft Smaller sites do have a use for dupehammers. Smaller sites have fewer questions but also fewer close voters. | |
| Oct 8, 2014 at 16:52 | comment | added | Wrzlprmft | ”Worth noting how this is expected to impact smaller sites where typically gold tag badges are too rare for dupehammer to make a significant effect, but silver and bronze ones are more widespread.” – On the other hand, on smaller sites have no need for dupehammers. | |
| Oct 8, 2014 at 16:10 | comment | added | gnat | @Gilles I don't envisage this as a cure against running out of close votes, more as headroom to those active in the tag. Also worth noting that if one works in CV queue, they can easily get short on votes outside of the tag. As an example, at SO, I drop from 50 to 10-15 CVs in about 5 minutes after my usual roll at the queue, at Programmers I regularly drop from 24 to 1/2 or 1/3 of that after rolling through queue | |
| Oct 8, 2014 at 16:06 | comment | added | Gilles 'SO- stop being evil' | That's a nice idea, but only makes sense on a few sites. @TimPost On how many sites do people run out of close votes on a non-exceptional basis? | |
| Oct 8, 2014 at 14:29 | history | edited | gnat | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
consistent 10-20 math to dupehammers and reviews
|
| Oct 8, 2014 at 12:49 | history | edited | gnat | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Bang! Bang! Maxwell's *silver* hammer
|
| Oct 8, 2014 at 12:18 | history | edited | gnat | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
math to account for "15 more" :)
|
| Oct 8, 2014 at 12:10 | history | edited | gnat | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
clarified per discussion in comments
|
| Oct 8, 2014 at 11:52 | comment | added | user50049 | @gnat I'm thinking perhaps 5 at the bronze level, so people can actually do stuff right away. Then perhaps 15 more at the silver level, which becomes even more useful when you hit gold and unlock the other ability. When folks hit the bronze level, the extra votes will almost always come on the heels of unlocking another privilege just through rep, so this could be a really good way of bringing out even more enthusiasm for that achievement as well. I'm going to consider this some more, good idea, and thank you! | |
| Oct 8, 2014 at 11:45 | comment | added | gnat | @TimPost that's a good question. I thought of 1 extra vote as a way to tell people that feature exists and they can unlock it if they work hard in the tag - purely educational. But if you prefer also giving them some real power, 5 would be indeed better (and it will probably make active regulars at smaller sites love you:) | |
| Oct 8, 2014 at 11:41 | comment | added | user50049 | @gnat I'd really like to lead into these that way at the bronze level, but is one extra vote going to mean anything to folks? That's like pinning a picture of a ribbon on someone, congratulating them, and explaining that we can't yet trust you with the pin on the back of the real ribbon just yet. Maybe 5 instead? I'm not sure that's much different. I could also be completely understating and undervaluing the significance. | |
| Oct 8, 2014 at 11:37 | comment | added | gnat | @TimPost by the way, regarding "bronze level" feature, you can think of simply giving badge holders 1 (that's one - just one) extra vote / review - borrowing Shog's excellent idea, to encourage "just in time learning" | |
| Oct 8, 2014 at 11:32 | comment | added | user50049 | Not a bad idea at all. Earn this with silver, and it carries into your gold abilities. This definitely reinforces the 'tools to take care of your tags' spirit. | |
| Oct 8, 2014 at 11:29 | history | edited | gnat | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 3 characters in body
|
| Oct 8, 2014 at 11:27 | comment | added | Christian Rau | Sounds really good. While not too much of a rise in immediate power, it gives users inclined on reviewing a little more ability to do so (on large enough sites, of course). | |
| Oct 8, 2014 at 11:24 | history | answered | gnat | CC BY-SA 3.0 |