Timeline for Come Take a Look at our New Contributor Indicator!
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 29, 2018 at 12:20 | comment | added | Lightness Races in Orbit | "Automatic flags is another, but that only handles extreme cases where a sizable proportion of the needed help is helping the user off the site." Hehe | |
| Aug 22, 2018 at 14:11 | comment | added | T.E.D. | In my experience, there's a run-the-gauntlet-and-take-your-licks new user experience on every SE site. I'm a decade user, and a moderator, and it still happens to me if I jump onto a new site. It amazes me how many people aren't driven off by that. It mostly seems to be based on existing users not trusting new faces to stick around and behave well, until they have proven they will. So if existing users are already noticing noobs and treating them differently, I really don't see the harm in the SE software also trying to recognize them, and reminding existing users to not decapitate them. | |
| Aug 22, 2018 at 11:40 | comment | added | Richard | To be frank, I've spoken with users who've said that this flag (and the banner in the answer box warning them of the dire consequences of offending this new user) has made them fearful of answering and just not bothered. | |
| Aug 21, 2018 at 8:32 | comment | added | Gilles 'SO- stop being evil' | @Scott There's a difference between having to explicitly visit a queue and getting the information passively during normal browsing. | |
| Aug 21, 2018 at 3:31 | comment | added | Scott - Слава Україні | I’m conflicted about this. On the one hand, your discussion reminds me of a vaguely similar idea that U&L rejected. On the other hand, if somebody wants to “stalk” new users, all they have to do is lurk in the First Posts Review Queue. I don’t even understand how this proposal (labeling new users) would make it any easier for a “stalker” to find new users than it already is. | |
| Aug 20, 2018 at 0:36 | comment | added | cfr | @user202729 Refusing to answer -- as opposed to not answering -- is hostile. Not answering because they're new is hostile. | |
| Aug 19, 2018 at 18:11 | comment | added | Rand al'Thor | I agree very much with this answer. This is why I've always held out against using 'canned' comments - sure, they're easier to produce, but often less directly relevant. Giving a new user specific, on-point advice is much more likely to make them feel 'helped' than a canned comment that looks like it was produced by a bot. | |
| Aug 18, 2018 at 13:01 | comment | added | user271002 | Yes, it’s creepy. I can still remember writing my first answers, and I probably would have been in your third category. It was already bad enough having only 1 or 101 reputation clearly visible under my name. | |
| Aug 18, 2018 at 10:54 | comment | added | user202729 | .....? "refusing to answer" is not hostile. | |
| Aug 17, 2018 at 21:45 | comment | added | Mad Scientist | I think the issue here is throwing the FAQ at new users, not the new contributor indicator itself. I certainly agree with finding this kind of canned comment for new users somewhere between weird and creepy, but this already happens and I think should be treated as a separate issue. | |
| Aug 17, 2018 at 20:09 | history | answered | Gilles 'SO- stop being evil' | CC BY-SA 4.0 |