|
You see, it looks like two other members supported my ideas.
I thought I explained my point with was a bit different: the site is overwhelmed with dead questions. They are usually not dead because no one could not answer yet, but more usually because answering in the form "Add a solution" makes no sense at all. The problem is: author of good but just difficult question suffer, because the chances to get noticed become less and less with time.
Imagine how we pick question for answering. For example, I post the answer in form of solution to a small percent of the questions. In many cases I'm not competent enough, but in many cases I just click the one question and see that answering makes no sense. It looks like scanning the lost of questions takes more time then answering (even though I tend to put a lot of detail in the answer). This is bad, but we hardly can improve this situation.
What's worse, if the question was not notices for certain period of time, it has less and less chance to get noticed. Why will scan all the history from recent to old? One can click "unanswered questions" and see more of them per page, but the problem is then needle in a haystack. If dead questions were gradually removed, it would be much easier.
Unfortunately, this a part of a bigger problem: I can see that the Questions & Answer site gets worse and worse with time as more poor questions and more poor answers arrive increasingly compared to decent stuff. There is nothing wrong with it, but good stuff gets lost. Isn't it a time to think of harder moderation of such posts? I know, this is not an easy problem, but reputation of the site suffer.
Just think about it.
Thank you very much,
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
What's better? To find a way to encourage more questions to be answered, or to delete questions that aren't answered and simply have them reposted?
The issue you are seeing is that the Unanswered Question list is becoming large, so you'd like questions that are a certain age, and unanswered, removed. Would it not be better to provide this as a view ("Show recent unanswered") instead of permanently removing them? That way we allow others to have a chance at answering them.
As always, an unanswered question that truly can't be answered because it's far too open or too poorly phrased should be removed immediately.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
SAKryukov wrote: The Questions & Answers part of site is overwhelmed with dead questions which very unlikely will be ever answered.
Since the questions are presented in order asked, or updated, in pages, 20 per page, and you also have the option, in your settings for 'Forums, to hide posts you have viewed before: and, we have the option to filter by active, answered, unanswered, etc.
How does the total number of back-pages directly affect you ... assuming you do not review every single page (now #1963 of them, and growing) that's ever been posted very often ?SAKryukov wrote: Most of them really use resources and distract members' attention at the expense of decent posts
How is that these back posts distract your attention ? I'd like to understand exactly what you mean by that.
Now: the second issue you "mixed-in" in this paragraph: of the possible "burial" of "decent posts" in the large number of back-posts: I see that as a separate issue, entirely, and I agree with you on that, and think a remedy is called for by some mechanism like a selector button for "highest rated" posts (as found on StackOverFlow, for instance).SAKryukov wrote: Such dead questions could be automatically removed on certain condition (I'll discuss the conditions later), with notification sent to their author (so they would have a chance to legitimately re-post them after serious and proper re-formulation), but there is some risk of removing something good. This risk is not too high, because anyway, presently good but unanswered questions get sunk in the crowd of useless posts if they are not answered during certain period of time.
Yet we, the responders, do have two mechanisms available now: one is that if you have a certain "rep" you can delete questions ... that's one I have used only once, and am extremely reluctant to use. The other mechanism, the "bump," is to add a comment, or update, in order to promote the post back up in view-order: another mechanism, imho, is not constructive; I think it leads to "gaming the system."
But I find myself in agreement with you that under "certain conditions" posts should be automatically removed: I would make these very simple, for example:
1. a post that has been up for one month and had no solutions, or no comment that at least included a link: off with its head.
2. posts that have been up for a month that are vague, diffuse, and where the author does not respond to more than one query from responders asking for clarification ... if there is no perceived substance in the question: off with their heads.
Note that once again, in this paragraph, you mix-in the issue of salvaging good questions that have real substance, but just may not have been responded to for a while, which I agree is a good issue to raise.SAKryukov wrote: If this automatic sanitation is not acceptable, what would be the way to remove them in a human-judged way, by some consensus of experts? The volume is too high.
StackOverFlow uses a "posse" system (consensus of high-ranking members) to remove and cancel posts, flagged as "duplicates," "too general," etc., but usually leaves them up with an explanation of why they were cancelled, or halted (and often some of these "halted posts" actually have some good answers.SAKryukov wrote: One option is this: adding one more tab in the tab control here: http://www.codeproject.com/script/Answers/List.aspx[^]. This tab would list the candidates for permanent removal.
The criteria for putting a question on this list could be this: 1) not answered during certain period of time; 2) having certain score of reports like "unclear or incomplete", "re-post", "not a question", etc.
Okay, now you click on this Tab: and what do you see, and what can you, the responder do ? Vote for their removal, vote against their removal ? Please say more about this idea.
SAKryukov wrote: What would be a criteria for permanent removal? We could have a control like "vote to remove", so the removal could be done automatically on certain score of such reports. Such vote could require a written comment confirming the reason for removal. Some small number of point could be awarded to a member participated in this useful work.
Okay, this sounds pretty good to me, but don't we already have a mechanism in place on CP, for example, in the Lounge, where a certain number of 1 votes, or votes to remove, or reports of abuse, result in message elimination ? Couldn't this same mechanism be adopted to work in QA ?
To me, the most interesting issue you raise is the "elevation" of certain QA questions, and/or their answers, to some sort of "Valhalla:" where some of the very high-quality material that, I agree with you, is now "submerged" in the near 2000 pages of QA can remain easy-to-find, easy-to-get to.
But, to take the other-side of this entire set of concerns raised here: does the ability to view QA answers now by "Top Rated," "Popular", and "Active" render a lot of these considerations raised here ... still relevant ?
And, just to blow my one-note horn again: I once again parade the idea that a simple pop-up form that requires clarification of a question's basic parameters ... as a pre-condition of accepting a question for posting ... would go a long way to addressing the issues discussed here.
best, Bill
"Our life is a faint tracing on the surface of mystery, like the idle, curved tunnels of leaf miners on the surface of a leaf. We must somehow take a wider view, look at the whole landscape, really see it, and describe what's going on here. Then we can at least wail the right question into the swaddling band of darkness, or, if it comes to that, choir the proper praise." Annie Dillard
|
|
|
|
|
BillWoodruff wrote: StackOverFlow uses a "posse" system (consensus of high-ranking members) to remove and cancel posts, flagged as "duplicates," "too general," etc.
We have a similar system. Flag a question (or answer) and if 5 or more members flag it, it's gone.
I'm surprised that members aren't flagging more. We even give a 5-point bounty on each flagging.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Chris,
You are enlightening me so frequently that I may have to start addressing you as "Roshi Chris." 
Obviously the assumption I've made, that I read all the FAQs, or retained the details of what I read: are wrong.
best, Bill
"Our life is a faint tracing on the surface of mystery, like the idle, curved tunnels of leaf miners on the surface of a leaf. We must somehow take a wider view, look at the whole landscape, really see it, and describe what's going on here. Then we can at least wail the right question into the swaddling band of darkness, or, if it comes to that, choir the proper praise." Annie Dillard
|
|
|
|
|
I would say sod the points. Can't people just do things to try and help out for once without seeking points?
|
|
|
|
|
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I've just read this question in Q&A: Winform Manageable workflow program[^] and in my opinion it would be better suited in the Collaboration and Beta-Testing forum.
Is there anything that needs to be done to be empowered to do such things like moving a post from to a more appropriate forum? 
I reckon there is some kind of notification towards OP that the post has been moved, or is there?
Regards,
Manfred
"With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine."
Ross Callon, The Twelve Networking Truths, RFC1925
|
|
|
|
|
I normally just add a comment or response suggesting the OP repost it in the suggested forum and leave it up to them.
Unrequited desire is character building. OriginalGriff
I'm sitting here giving you a standing ovation - Len Goodman
|
|
|
|
|
Hello ,
Please tell me when the CP member can get authority to "Improve Question" and other ?
Also tell me what are other authorities which should CP get in his member ship.
Is there any such page in CP where I can get all this information.
Thanks in advance.
--Rahul D.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rahul Dhoble wrote: when the CP member can get authority to ...
All these things are based on reputation points, which in turn, are based on your contribution to the site. So more time spent answering questions instead of asking is likely to increase your reputation points, and thus lead to earning the right to do more. Just keep reading the forums (including the ones on subjects you are new to) and see how it works. Look at the useful answers to questions and feedback from the questioner and you will soon see how it's done. You can also gain points by writing articles, tips & tricks etc.
Unrequited desire is character building. OriginalGriff
I'm sitting here giving you a standing ovation - Len Goodman
|
|
|
|
|
This article[^] for various reasons was put live whilst still in draft (it's a case study in why proofreading while tired is a bad thing) . When I noticed this and submitted updated HTML for it as it was edited by an Editor so I can't update directly.
My Question: Did you get the new version submitted on the 30th? If not I'll re-submit.
My Suggestion: Some form of acknowledgment that a change has been recieved, an icon on the "My Articles" page for example.
I've had acknowledgement of completed updates but can't recall seeing anything about pending updates.
|
|
|
|
|
I've asked Sean to check if he got it. Did you send it via email or the online form?
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Online form. I have the HTML (at home, I'm supposedly working now) so I can easily re-send it when I get back if needed.
|
|
|
|
|
We've got it
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
The Code Project
|
|
|
|
|
Good, less effort for me 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Icons are displayed inside PRE tags which in my humble opinion should not be rendered there. The pre tag is for displaying code and not for emoticons.
It only seems to occur when the icon sequence is inside a string.
See here: wrong answer in loop[^]
A colon followed by a zero in this case is rendered as the *blushing* icon.
Regards,
Manfred
":0"
:0
"With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine."
Ross Callon, The Twelve Networking Truths, RFC1925
|
|
|
|
|
That ain't meant to happen! Where's my sonic screwdriver...
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
See the comments on this thread:[^].
A very disturbing pattern of frequent posting ... on QA questions ... of what I regard as off-topic warning messages directed to other people who answer questions for QA posters has emerged. These warnings are now being posted within hours of the original question, without giving the questioner time to respond to other comments already posted that may (?) clarify the original question.
In fact, I happen to agree, entirely, with the author of these "big red ventilations," SAK, that we need a solution to reducing the waste of time spent on QA trying to get posters to at least tag/qualify their posts in the most basic ways.
And, I have made detailed proposals on this forum, as to how that may be done in a way I consider not punitive, not intrusive, and constructive: a simple pop-up web-form where some fields must be filled in, or checked, or whatever before the question can be posted.
But, to allow any one person, no matter how high their rep, to confuse a QA thread with such a spate of messages, I think is not constructive, and not encouraging to beginners, "shy" people, people for whom English may not be their first language.
Recently, I reached "Platinum" status as "Authority," which I am a bit "humbled by," because: when I Iook at the amazing breadth, range, and depth, of answers across several .NET technologies of such "prodigies" as SAK, OriginalGriff, S Abhinav, Christian Gauss, and others, I really don't feel I deserve to have the same status.
Please, QA question-clarification is something that needs cleaning up: now. But, also, please, let us not allow QA itself to become an arena filled with static about this issue, and its possible solution, to the detriment of our purpose on QA, which, imho, is to serve the people who ask the questions.
best, Bill
"Our life is a faint tracing on the surface of mystery, like the idle, curved tunnels of leaf miners on the surface of a leaf. We must somehow take a wider view, look at the whole landscape, really see it, and describe what's going on here. Then we can at least wail the right question into the swaddling band of darkness, or, if it comes to that, choir the proper praise." Annie Dillard
|
|
|
|
|
I totally agree with SA's (and your own) sentiments on forcing those who would like help to at least help us try and help them. It doesn't take a lot of effort to pose a question in a way that gives us at least *something* to go on. I supported SA's post on this yesterday for these reasons, but I do agree with yourself, Bill, that continually posting this request will lead to noise.
So how do we fix these issues?
My hope and wish is that everyone with status takes 5 minutes a day to go through and clean out any questions posted inappropriately. The faster we clean the faster we teach all those participating that there has to be a minimum level of effort put in, and the faster SA can settle back into his frantic pace of answering questions instead of being frustrated to the point of needing to coat the walls blood red.
We need to teach users how to ask for help and help those who are providing the help in turn.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Chris,
You already have heard the "full monte" of my views on this issue, but the only further comment I would make is that frequent deletions (with the exception of immediately exterminating obvious homework), may be, in the long run, not constructive.
I suppose I could write comments on a QA question like:
"If you do not respond to or clarify within 24 hours the following specific questions, this message will be deleted," but, if I did that, I'd feel like a "Nazi"  . Just not my style.
Perhaps another idea worth exploring would be that QA answerers with a certain Rep could place questions in a special "questions on hold" section of QA, and then, when the OP tags/clarifies, restore them back into the main sections ?
So, once again, I urge you to consider some intermediate step which will encourage posters to tag/clarify their questions. I am sure you know how StackOverFlow operates via a "posse" method to remove posts, so I won't bring that up.
best, Bill
"Our life is a faint tracing on the surface of mystery, like the idle, curved tunnels of leaf miners on the surface of a leaf. We must somehow take a wider view, look at the whole landscape, really see it, and describe what's going on here. Then we can at least wail the right question into the swaddling band of darkness, or, if it comes to that, choir the proper praise." Annie Dillard
|
|
|
|
|
I agree the "big red text" from SA is not very helpful, but his sentiment is correct - too many people just don't give the info needed to answer the question. But I'm not happy with the "just delete it" idea either - as you say the whole idea of the site is to help these people, which deleting the question doesn't do.
How about (and I know it is more work for you, as if you didn't have enough already) a platinum-authority-and-above-only button, which sends a message to the OP that he needs to improve his question, and removes it from the unanswered list, until he does? That way Q&A isn't cluttered, but the OP gets told what he did wrong without getting his question summarily deleted?
Combined with guidelines as to when we use it, it could fill both requirements.
Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water
|
|
|
|
|
I think Chris might be working on a way for an email to be sent to the OP if you report the question accordingly, platinum member or not.
"the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011)
"It is the celestial scrotum of good luck!" - Nagy Vilmos (2011)
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
