Timeline for answer to Gamification rules have to be changed. Aiming quality, not quantity by Vesper
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
Post Revisions
17 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 20, 2017 at 9:14 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.stackoverflow.com/ with https://meta.stackoverflow.com/
|
|
| Jun 2, 2014 at 7:37 | comment | added | jwg | I don't agree @Dukeling. First of all many questions 'how do I do this very specific thing SHOW ME THE CODES' hardly get seen by anyone once they have been answered. Millions of questions like this have a top answer with one upvote + acceptance, all other answers 0. Secondly old questions which are useful to other people, by definition will get at least a small trickle of traffic and upvotes, if an answer is good so will it. On the other hand if a question is old, the user is often inactive or no longer interested in the answer - even good answers often go unaccepted. | |
| May 31, 2014 at 0:35 | comment | added | Bernhard Barker | @jwg People upvote "answers that make the asker happy but are [of] no use to anyone else" to infinitely already. The only purpose I imagine lowering the reputation reward for acceptance would serve is to discourage people from answering old (often decent) questions because often a large part of the reward is getting the answer accepted, or perhaps giving general answers in the spirit of having it be widely-applicable, but it just ends up being overly vague and not helpful to anyone. | |
| May 30, 2014 at 19:08 | comment | added | Duncan Jones | @jwg Good point. Actually, very good point. I think I get what Vesper is saying now. | |
| May 30, 2014 at 16:34 | comment | added | jwg | @Duncan Reputation for acceptance doesn't encourage good answers. Upvotes already serve that purpose. Reputation on acceptance encourages people to answer crap questions, with answers that make the asker happy but are no use to anyone else. | |
| May 30, 2014 at 14:21 | comment | added | SvenT23 | @Vesper It goes as far as just asking how to display some text in a textview ... Which is what the standard "Hello World" application you get when you create a new project with a blank activity already does. I don't care that people make mistakes while trying to learn, everybody does and I've made seriously dumb syntax mistakes myself. But when people just refuse to look up a tutorial or something and instead run to strangers to ask them to write some code examples for them ... that just baffles me. | |
| May 30, 2014 at 14:05 | comment | added | Bernhard Barker | I don't want to be punished more for trying to improve site quality by downvoting answers (although I do think the -2 to -3 for OP is a good change, we could even make it more), and I'd rather not get a whole lot less upvotes for my answers I've put a lot of work into. | |
| May 30, 2014 at 14:05 | comment | added | Vesper | @SvenT23 I'm also one of those "hellbent" people, I've even considered Java as a base to write my game, but shifted to AS3 for the better. It's one of the IT tendencies, with visual programming at its dawn even a child can try and get something working and obeying his will, this encourages people to advance but hinders their progress as they move from bright GUI programming to the classic code editor (with helpers, but still), they hit a wall and go yell "HELP ME" without ever reading any manuals. Syntax errors galore, lack of logic galore, etc. I can imagine. Ow. | |
| May 30, 2014 at 14:00 | comment | added | Vesper | @Joe Good point, I've edited the suggestion to say "answers only". | |
| May 30, 2014 at 13:58 | comment | added | SvenT23 | @Vesper I know you said that, I was just explaining why I would think this would be bad :) also, if you have any experience in java I really recommend spending a day in the Android tag. The new features (especially instant close for gold tag-badge owners) have helped quite a bit, but you won't believe the amount of really, really basic/retarded questions coming through. There are so many people with little to no programming experience who are hell-bent on writing their own app. | |
| May 30, 2014 at 13:49 | history | edited | Vesper | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
altered upvote penalty suggestion
|
| May 30, 2014 at 13:48 | comment | added | Vesper | @SvenT23 That's why I've said "weighed against possible impact". I'm not a visitor of any tag that has 100k+ questions except SQL, and yes, I too tend to play "fastest gun" from time to time, but this "crapload" behavior is unknown to me so far. | |
| May 30, 2014 at 13:48 | comment | added | Joe | Removing rep for upvoting will just make people stop upvoting all together. There's a reason downvotes on questions don't change rep. | |
| May 30, 2014 at 13:46 | comment | added | Vesper | @Duncan "Good" and "accepted by asker" are not always one and the same thing. This can be good for a tag with high activity including those who upvote just for the quality, but for say as3, where there's no one except me and a couple more people to upvote, the majority of the rep is gained from acceptance, not from upvotes. | |
| May 30, 2014 at 13:45 | comment | added | SvenT23 | This would basically drive the Android part of this site into the ground. It's hard enough as it is to motivate people to contribute because your answers will not receive a lot of upvotes or attention and the constant flood of crap always continues. Way too many people get away with low-quality "fastest gun in the West"-answers because no one will punish them for it. If you're going to raise the bar to downvote and upvote these answers you're going to make it so much worse. | |
| May 30, 2014 at 13:41 | comment | added | Duncan Jones | Surely the +15 acceptance reward encourages good answers? I don't understand why you want to lower that. | |
| May 30, 2014 at 13:35 | history | answered | Vesper | CC BY-SA 3.0 |