July 15, 2009 at 6:23 am
RBarryYoung (6/17/2009)
As long as I'm making lists, What, IMHO, did/does Not work:A) "Accepted" or "Answer" flags: It seems like such a good and obvious thing: flag which one is the right answer. The problem is, the OP's aren't qualified to decide this. Actually, niether are the top point-getters at many site. What's even more suprising, is that I've seen many MVP's and Moderators at msdn (who are also mostly MVPs) flag the wrong answer. I have even seen Microsoft employees at msdn flag an incorrect reply as the "Answer". It turns out that NO ONE person is actually qualified to make this call, only time and robust discussions can do that.
B) Searching for Unasnwered questions: This was one of the big suprises that I didn't mention before. The biggest problem with flagging replies as answered, isn't that they may be incorrect (though that is big), it's that this inevitably leads to "Search For Unanswered Threads". And that is what really kills discussions, any kind of peer-review, and any chance that some other high-poster will notice and call out an incorrect answer.
C) The Big Points Bonus: Sites that flag "The Answer" also invariably offer a "Big Point" bonus or award for it. This has the effect of devaluing participation and cooperation in favor of competiton and one-upping and one-plussing each other. If there was any kind of community before, this will inevitably destroy it. It also has the effect of taking everything that is already wrong with flagging "The answer" and magnifying it 5 or 10 fold. As far as I am concerned, the only big points should be for participation. If there are points awarded for anything else, they should be for less, not more.
D) Closing or Deleting Questions: This should never be a social (community) function at a professional site. It should only ever be handled by the site's professional staff and maybe a small number of trusted members, selected only by the professional staff. That way, it's never personal, it's not about being unpopular or getting black-balled. It is always only about the site's administrative policy.
I think that all of what Barry said above is absolutely spot on so I'll add a strong "Hear Here!" and a resounding "I'll second that!".
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 15, 2009 at 9:09 am
That's one of the things I've been concerned about, as I agree with Jeff on Barry's posts.
I wouldn't mind seeing some "voting" to help people decide what is good, but I hate having debate or commentary squashed.
July 15, 2009 at 10:17 am
I think that the primary value is in the discussion, so I am only interested in sites where there is open discussion. Let people post their opinions, disagree, say stupid things, and maybe sometimes even be a little “harsh”. I think the only reason for moderators to intervene is for clearly inappropriate things, like spamming, profane insults, etc.
I think voting on the posts has little value; I know I wouldn’t pay any attention to it. Tell me your reasoning, test results, appropriate links, and anything else that will convince me, but leave out the appeal to authority, popularity, and other non-logical arguments. And if you say something wrong or stupid, be prepared to hear about it, and learn to accept that you are not always right. And if you say something that you know is correct, be prepared to back it up, defend it against all comers, and maybe even hurt someone’s feelings, no matter how much you respect them.
July 15, 2009 at 11:55 am
Steve Jones - Editor (7/15/2009)
That's one of the things I've been concerned about, as I agree with Jeff on Barry's posts.I wouldn't mind seeing some "voting" to help people decide what is good, but I hate having debate or commentary squashed.
I think that most folks would simply vote for the post that solved their problem the quickest even if it were terribly shortsighted... after all, how would they know any differently until the discussion that Michael speaks of occurs? I think you'd end up with an awful lot of false positives.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
July 15, 2009 at 1:18 pm
RBarryYoung (6/13/2009)
Hmm, before I jump into this any deeper let me ask: what would we be trying to accomplish by this? What shortcoming of SSC would we be fixing? Or what new desirable feature would we be adding?
Exactly what I was wondering.
I certainly don't think SSC is broken. Far from it. So, why fix it?
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
July 15, 2009 at 1:24 pm
It's not broken, but I think it could be enhanced. Clean the look and feel, add tags, etc.
July 15, 2009 at 1:33 pm
Steve Jones - Editor (7/15/2009)
It's not broken, but I think it could be enhanced. Clean the look and feel, add tags, etc.
That's a list I can agree with. But the discussion at the time was about points and votes and such.
Presentation, performance, that kind of thing, can always be improved. But I think any fundamental change in the way users interact with each other will almost certainly degrade the main purpose of the site.
A few minor improvements to the code window still need to be done. (Tab indentation would be nice, and the fact that it loses blank lines definitely needs to be fixed.)
Improved search would definitely be good.
There are some features I would like to see on the subscription management page. I don't use e-mail notifications (since I don't use my work e-mail for the site sign-in, and can't get to my personal e-mail from work), so I use that page to monitor the threads I've been involved in. Nothing major, just a few enhancements that I've already requested in the correct forum, and nothing that I consider any serious priority.
But votes for solutions and posts is a major change in how we interract with each other. I just don't like it.
No voting system can really handle, "yes, but ...". That requires a post.
I seriously don't want to be part of "SQL Idol", nor "SQL's Got Talent". That's all I mean.
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
July 16, 2009 at 6:26 am
SQLBill (6/16/2009)
In addition to SQL Server Central, I use Tek-Tips (www.tek-tips.com). It's an excellent (in my opinion) all around site for IT Professionals.-SQLBill
I agree.
However I should mention that it is also where I met my husband, so caveat emptor and all that...
At Tek-tips they have a "star" system to mark posts as helpful. Anyone (apart from the owner of the post, obviously) can give a star to a post, not only the OP. It works reasonably well, IMO
July 17, 2009 at 12:11 am
RBarryYoung (6/7/2009)
Heh, thanks for the assist, Gail. 🙂As you can see, the very structured nature of the "threads" as StackOverflow (SO) make it very hard to carry on any kind of clarifying discussion or conversation. Worse, there is no concept of a subscription to a thread: you get no notice when it is updated. If someone adds a comment specifically to one of your posts, then you get a fleeting little flash at the top of your screen. And if you post a comment (as opposed to a real post), you can't edit it or correct it later.
Anyone who is also on StackOverflow (Gail?, Florian?) I could use a couple of UpVotes on this one. This ones expires in the next day or so and the current two leading answers are both incorrect (the leader isn't even an answer).
[font="Times New Roman"]-- RBarryYoung[/font], [font="Times New Roman"] (302)375-0451[/font] blog: MovingSQL.com, Twitter: @RBarryYoung[font="Arial Black"]
Proactive Performance Solutions, Inc. [/font][font="Verdana"] "Performance is our middle name."[/font]
Viewing 9 posts - 46 through 53 (of 53 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply