March 19, 2010 at 10:28 am
I liked this question. But the answers are subjective. I answered; the person posing the question, the person answering the question, and I had hoped there was some form of review process.
I could not convince myself to hold Steve or Microsoft accountable for the accuracy of the answer of a question. First, this is a bonus to this site and has provided a lot of extra learning opportunity for me. But it is not why I come to this site. Second, I am sure Steve as an individual has many other priorities with running this site. Third, Microsoft had nothing to do with designing the questions and answers. While the BOL is usually my first stop to try to answer these questions, the questions are not always obvious in their language and may require me to interpret what I am reading and how it applies to the question.
I think it would be great to have a voluntary peer review of questions and answers. Not only to validate the question and answer, but to ensure clear wording as to the intent and the value of the question.
Regardless, I do like the whole question of the day concept.
March 19, 2010 at 10:40 am
Paul White NZ (3/19/2010)
CirquedeSQLeil (3/19/2010)
I actually disagree with the correct answer.Me too, but it's not terribly important. There could have been another option..."it depends".
For the record, I ticked Steve, the question writer, and Microsoft.
I think it depends would have been a good choice.
I chose just the Question Writer (see previous post about tick boxes - they don't always require multiple answers).
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
March 19, 2010 at 10:45 am
I'd have thought some thought of verification would make sense.
March 19, 2010 at 10:51 am
CirquedeSQLeil (3/19/2010)
Paul White NZ (3/19/2010)
CirquedeSQLeil (3/19/2010)
I actually disagree with the correct answer.Me too, but it's not terribly important. There could have been another option..."it depends".
For the record, I ticked Steve, the question writer, and Microsoft.
I think it depends would have been a good choice.
I chose just the Question Writer (see previous post about tick boxes - they don't always require multiple answers).
not for MS maybe but on SSC not so sure
---------------------------------------------------------------------
March 19, 2010 at 10:55 am
dcawvive (3/19/2010)
The submitter is responsible. It is NOT MY RESPONSIBILITY to review their work. How lazy and weasely is that. Try telling your users it's their job to make sure your code is correct.
Actually, I think users are ultimately responsible for ensuring the code is correct. We write it, but they must verify that what we wrote does WHAT THEY need. Not what we think they need.
This is an interesting point, and when we started this QOD thing (it was Brian's idea), I would have agreed with you. However the frame of reference and perspective can vary widely. The way the author (or I) look at a question often isn't what others see.
The idea of of the QOD is a learning tool, not a testing or reference tool. So I tend to agree with John that the people answering bear a little responsibility for reviewing the question/answers and pointing out potential or possible flaws.
March 19, 2010 at 10:57 am
Jan Sorenson (3/19/2010)
...however I did not realize that the correct answer needed to be two choices, actually one could make a case on each choice being correct. ...
Great point. I forgot to add in the "select all that apply" to this. My fault, but based on your post, it's corrected.
March 19, 2010 at 11:02 am
A great discussion, and I'll weigh in here on this question and topic. First, I disagree with John in that I think I bear some responsibility for the questions and answers. I do try to check them for accuracy, and sometimes I fail. There are times that I look at code instead of running it, and if it appears to be OK, I have let it go. I am trying to be better about verifying the code shown.
Second, this is an interesting discussion. I responded to a comment earlier that I do see the people taking the question as part of those responsible for the accuracy. We view things from a different point of view, and if something seems wrong, I'd hope that you spend a few seconds dropping a note about why you think it's wrong. Not a complaint in that "this is horrible", but a comment that "I think that if I did x, the answer y would be right (or wrong)."
This is a learning tool, and I could see that Microsoft bears some blame here since we try to use BOL as a reference. To that extent, I might place some responsibility on them, especially when we use BOL for questions and it's wrong.
I hope you enjoy the QOD, and use it for learning and fun, not as a test, or for a reference. We do try to correct things over time, and award back points for bad questions. I'll also sometimes put "right answer", "wrong answer" in place for bad questions.
I'll award back points later for everyone on this one since it's not really a fair question, but thanks for all the comments.
March 19, 2010 at 11:06 am
It's an interesting question, to be sure, but the discussion is always the best part. That's where I learn the most.
March 19, 2010 at 11:13 am
Steve Jones - Editor (3/19/2010)
This is a learning tool, and I could see that Microsoft bears some blame here since we try to use BOL as a reference. To that extent, I might place some responsibility on them, especially when we use BOL for questions and it's wrong.
I agree with this statement to the end that MS should provide accurate information.
I hope you enjoy the QOD, and use it for learning and fun, not as a test, or for a reference. We do try to correct things over time, and award back points for bad questions. I'll also sometimes put "right answer", "wrong answer" in place for bad questions.
I enjoy the QOD (unless I errantly click). I do find it to be a useful learning tool. I also appreciate the effort you put in to making it a good exercise for us.
I'll award back points later for everyone on this one since it's not really a fair question, but thanks for all the comments.
That would be nice and all - not sure it is necessary.
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
March 19, 2010 at 11:18 am
The responsibility of QOD submitter is OK and it should be like that. But why readers? Readers should be responsible for a healthy discussion and not for answers in QOD.
May be I am thinking too hard or absolutely not.
May be Steve is not 100% responsible, but some one from SSC should get some responsibility to put a wrong answer.
SQL DBA.
March 19, 2010 at 11:22 am
Steve Jones - Editor (3/19/2010)
I hope you enjoy the QOD, and use it for learning and fun, not as a test, or for a reference.
Yes we do and very much appreciate the time you put into it. The discussions are informative and usually entertaining. Some of us take it much too seriously. Thanks.
March 19, 2010 at 12:27 pm
Steve Jones - Editor (3/19/2010)
A great discussion, and I'll weigh in here on this question and topic. First, I disagree with John in that I think I bear some responsibility for the questions and answers. I do try to check them for accuracy, and sometimes I fail. There are times that I look at code instead of running it, and if it appears to be OK, I have let it go. I am trying to be better about verifying the code shown.......
......
I'll award back points later for everyone on this one since it's not really a fair question, but thanks for all the comments.
First, I will admit that this morning I'd either changed my mind since submitting the question, or forgotten the reasons for designating certain answers as "correct", and so included "Steve Jones" as one of three check marks (the other two, of course, being the submitter and the SSC community who participate).
I don't know that I should be embarrassed by having "missed" my own question, though. The point of it was to point out the primary reason for SSC having this feature and the primary use that people should make of it. It's a learning tool. It's a starting point for discussions that share knowledge and insights on topics that may not arise in the forums where nearly all threads center on a particular difficulty that the originator has experienced. And a secondary goal of this QOD has certainly been acheived; it triggered a lot of discussion about shared responsibilty.
Finally, I'll accept that although I personally don't seek QOD points for the "bragging rights" touted in the SSC daily newsletter, there are some folks who value their scores, whether for a personal sense of accomplishment or as a public indication of their breadth of expertise. But even if one does value those points, I would hope that they hold them secondary to the primary goal of increased knowledge and understanding.
March 19, 2010 at 12:33 pm
john.arnott (3/19/2010)
I don't know that I should be embarrassed by having "missed" my own question, though.
Now I don't feel so bad:cool:
The point of it was to point out the primary reason for SSC having this feature and the primary use that people should make of it. It's a learning tool. It's a starting point for discussions that share knowledge and insights on topics that may not arise in the forums where nearly all threads center on a particular difficulty that the originator has experienced. And a secondary goal of this QOD has certainly been acheived; it triggered a lot of discussion about shared responsibilty.
Well put.
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
March 19, 2010 at 1:07 pm
Kingston Dhasian (3/18/2010)
I doubt if anybody is going to get this right. 20 attempts so far and nobody has got it till now. ...
That's ironic. Although in this case, I think the low correct answer rate it not due to a bad question or answer per se, but rather that there is some subjectivity in deciding the complete set of who should be responsible. Most people, for example, probably picked "submitter of the question" as a choice, but got the other ones wrong. And so on.
- webrunner
-------------------
A SQL query walks into a bar and sees two tables. He walks up to them and asks, "Can I join you?"
Ref.: http://tkyte.blogspot.com/2009/02/sql-joke.html
March 19, 2010 at 1:08 pm
Steve Jones - Editor (3/19/2010)
Actually, I think users are ultimately responsible for ensuring the code is correct. We write it, but they must verify that what we wrote does WHAT THEY need. Not what we think they need.This is an interesting point, and when we started this QOD thing (it was Brian's idea), I would have agreed with you. However the frame of reference and perspective can vary widely. The way the author (or I) look at a question often isn't what others see.
The idea of of the QOD is a learning tool, not a testing or reference tool. So I tend to agree with John that the people answering bear a little responsibility for reviewing the question/answers and pointing out potential or possible flaws.
I too believe that we consumers are ultimately responsible for the correctness of the QotD. Based on that, Those of us who included Steve Jones as part of today's answer should be awarded a point, because MOST of us think that you too have some responsibility. Doesn't that make it correct.:-)
I wasn't going to include the Steve Jones checkbox, but remembered several times when you have taken responsibility for not having checked it closer.
I look forward to the QotD. Nice work, and many thanks to you, and all contributors.
Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 80 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply