Skip to main content
Meta Stack Exchange

Return to Answer

Post Timeline

typo
Source Link
bobble
bobble
  • 19.9k
  • 5
  • 45
  • 117

What does the public need from us?

LetsLet's start by rehabilitating our image. StackExchange has a image of overzealous "mods". The reason this happens is because people keep landing on closed questions. That shouldn't happen. The solution to that is technical, because there's no way a casual reader would have the interest to understand the nuance of a closed question. So, if a question isn't edited to be reopened in a expedited manner, it should just be deleted. A decay algorithm could be implemented, but it should be a ticking bomb.

Same with duplicates. For some reason the public keeps landing on them. That implies a problem: either the target has crappy keywords, or the target doesn't solve the problem being searched. There's a mechanism to feed these to the reopen queue, the problem is that nobody votes on them to reopen them, despite there being reasons to do so. The Community user should just reopen them and cast a duplicate closure suggestion in the other way. That means that the current system that suggest to reopen popular question, instead is used to close as duplicate unpopular ones.

That would help towards at least not reinforcing the view that we close questions willy nilly. Our closing rate is pretty consistent in the long run, but as years passes, the number of closed questions still visible will continue to raise, so we better start steaming the flow by being more aggressive in pruning these questions.

What does the public need from us?

Lets start by rehabilitating our image. StackExchange has a image of overzealous "mods". The reason this happens is because people keep landing on closed questions. That shouldn't happen. The solution to that is technical, because there's no way a casual reader would have the interest to understand the nuance of a closed question. So, if a question isn't edited to be reopened in a expedited manner, it should just be deleted. A decay algorithm could be implemented, but it should be a ticking bomb.

Same with duplicates. For some reason the public keeps landing on them. That implies a problem: either the target has crappy keywords, or the target doesn't solve the problem being searched. There's a mechanism to feed these to the reopen queue, the problem is that nobody votes on them to reopen them, despite there being reasons to do so. The Community user should just reopen them and cast a duplicate closure suggestion in the other way. That means that the current system that suggest to reopen popular question, instead is used to close as duplicate unpopular ones.

That would help towards at least not reinforcing the view that we close questions willy nilly. Our closing rate is pretty consistent in the long run, but as years passes, the number of closed questions still visible will continue to raise, so we better start steaming the flow by being more aggressive in pruning these questions.

What does the public need from us?

Let's start by rehabilitating our image. StackExchange has a image of overzealous "mods". The reason this happens is because people keep landing on closed questions. That shouldn't happen. The solution to that is technical, because there's no way a casual reader would have the interest to understand the nuance of a closed question. So, if a question isn't edited to be reopened in a expedited manner, it should just be deleted. A decay algorithm could be implemented, but it should be a ticking bomb.

Same with duplicates. For some reason the public keeps landing on them. That implies a problem: either the target has crappy keywords, or the target doesn't solve the problem being searched. There's a mechanism to feed these to the reopen queue, the problem is that nobody votes on them to reopen them, despite there being reasons to do so. The Community user should just reopen them and cast a duplicate closure suggestion in the other way. That means that the current system that suggest to reopen popular question, instead is used to close as duplicate unpopular ones.

That would help towards at least not reinforcing the view that we close questions willy nilly. Our closing rate is pretty consistent in the long run, but as years passes, the number of closed questions still visible will continue to raise, so we better start steaming the flow by being more aggressive in pruning these questions.

Source Link
Braiam
Braiam
  • 15.7k
  • 4
  • 37
  • 96

What does the public need from us?

Lets start by rehabilitating our image. StackExchange has a image of overzealous "mods". The reason this happens is because people keep landing on closed questions. That shouldn't happen. The solution to that is technical, because there's no way a casual reader would have the interest to understand the nuance of a closed question. So, if a question isn't edited to be reopened in a expedited manner, it should just be deleted. A decay algorithm could be implemented, but it should be a ticking bomb.

Same with duplicates. For some reason the public keeps landing on them. That implies a problem: either the target has crappy keywords, or the target doesn't solve the problem being searched. There's a mechanism to feed these to the reopen queue, the problem is that nobody votes on them to reopen them, despite there being reasons to do so. The Community user should just reopen them and cast a duplicate closure suggestion in the other way. That means that the current system that suggest to reopen popular question, instead is used to close as duplicate unpopular ones.

That would help towards at least not reinforcing the view that we close questions willy nilly. Our closing rate is pretty consistent in the long run, but as years passes, the number of closed questions still visible will continue to raise, so we better start steaming the flow by being more aggressive in pruning these questions.