Timeline for Give high-rep users extra weight on close votes
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 3, 2014 at 20:42 | comment | added | Lightness Races in Orbit | @Deduplicator: That's not a bad idea. I'd start with 5 minutes, though. | |
| May 3, 2014 at 20:16 | comment | added | Deduplicator | If you really want to stop those quick-and-dirty answers to noxious questions, maybe prevent answers for the first minute and 1 minute longer for each close-voter? | |
| May 2, 2014 at 19:36 | comment | added | Lightness Races in Orbit | @Servy At least in the C++ tag, real questions hit 5 quickly and crap questions so not. The problem here I guess is one of setting a threshold, and that's problematic because on SO we effectively now have separate communities. Heck, maybe they need splitting up. | |
| May 2, 2014 at 19:31 | comment | added | Servy | @LightnessRacesinOrbit For the bikeshed questions, they'll get to 5 upvotes really fast; often faster than they can be closed. For any question that's not a bikeshed question, it'll really struggle to get 5 upvotes. You're basically killing straight out all but the most popular concepts. catch 22. | |
| May 2, 2014 at 19:27 | comment | added | Lightness Races in Orbit | Maybe questions shouldn't be answerable until they have ---5 upvotes--- +5 score, and upvoting questions should require 2k rep :p Still prone to idiots being "helpful" and pity upvoting but it would be less abuseable and a very clear signal as to what is and is not welcome here. Y'know, something objective and concrete that we could link to in the FAQ. | |
| May 2, 2014 at 19:22 | comment | added | Lightness Races in Orbit | @Servy Well ok that's fair. Still, I can't help but feel like there must be a better solution than trying to give unelected people enough power to nuke questions in as short a time as possible, where by that we mean 10-15 seconds. | |
| May 2, 2014 at 19:01 | comment | added | Servy | @LightnessRacesinOrbit I see a significant percentage of questions that get 1-2 close votes, then several answers, then get closed. Usually it does take a bit more than 10 seconds, and even when it doesn't, sometimes those few seconds is fast enough to beat out the first answers. I do agree though that there are potential concerns of abuse, which is why I'm still on the fence here. I disagree that this couldn't be potentially beneficial, if used well, but I do agree that it could be very harmful, if not used well. | |
| May 2, 2014 at 18:44 | comment | added | James King | The binding vote is the answer. Until mods say they can't cast their binding vote fast enough, I don't see why there should be a change. | |
| May 2, 2014 at 18:44 | comment | added | Lightness Races in Orbit | Low quality questions are already closed very quickly: reducing that time by 10s isn't going to make a dent. Besides, although I appreciate the sentiment and I certainly appreciate you searching for solutions, can you imagine a certain high rep user who famously fared poorly in the last mod elections wielding this sort of power? High rep isn't a good indicator for responsible behaviour. | |
| May 2, 2014 at 18:40 | comment | added | Servy | One big thing that this does is it makes it a lot easier for low quality questions to be closed before someone can stick in a low quality answer. When people stop getting answers for their very low quality questions they'll learn to stop posting them. Currently, in many tags, questions get closed, but too many of them have time for an answer to barely slip in first. | |
| May 2, 2014 at 18:39 | comment | added | Brad Larson Mod | As far as sources of bad questions, that's being attacked from at least one direction: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/230857/… . I think those changes to the question ban (both on the early warning side and for the repeat offenders) will be a significant help. | |
| May 2, 2014 at 18:34 | comment | added | Mysticial | @LightnessRacesinOrbit Not if you implement this: meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/252443/… :) | |
| May 2, 2014 at 18:33 | comment | added | Robert Harvey | Um, this isn't about keeping questions off the front page, it's about moving the bad ones off the front page. People are going to ask bad questions; you can't avoid that unless you have a sentient computer that can screen them first. | |
| May 2, 2014 at 18:32 | comment | added | Lightness Races in Orbit | @RobertHarvey: Because questions are posted before they are closed, not the other way around. | |
| May 2, 2014 at 18:32 | comment | added | Carrie Kendall | I agree thoroughly. | |
| May 2, 2014 at 18:32 | history | answered | Lightness Races in Orbit | CC BY-SA 3.0 |