Timeline for Should we decrease the number of close/reopen votes to 3?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 12 at 13:23 | comment | added | glS Mod | @NorbertSchuch yes that is also my thought. It might not make a big difference now, but I also don't see it doing any significant harm. Hard data to decide one way or the other would be great, but I'm not sure what could be used for the purpose tbh. At this point the precedent of the other sites that did it might be the best we have (albeit it's true that what works for one site doesn't necessarily work for another) | |
| Jun 12 at 13:09 | comment | added | Norbert Schuch | Agreed, it is hard to predict -- but I'd say it might improve the signal-to-noise ratio, or leave it as it is, but I don't see that it would have negative consequences, which makes me say we should give it a try. (AFAIK the sites which tried this were all happy with the outcome, or at least did not want to switch back.) | |
| Jun 12 at 13:04 | comment | added | glS Mod | @NorbertSchuch maybe.. I'm not excluding it, but it's hard to say, really. I guess we'll see if this happens | |
| Jun 12 at 13:00 | comment | added | Norbert Schuch | "I don't think this would make that much of an impact on this site" -- Independent of the volume, it might help to improve the signal-to-noise ratio, which IMO makes a difference independent of the volume (as this determines the mix one gets to see on the front page). | |
| Jun 12 at 12:55 | history | edited | glSMod | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 118 characters in body
|
| Jun 12 at 10:35 | history | answered | glSMod | CC BY-SA 4.0 |