Timeline for It's time to reward the duplicate finders
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 15, 2020 at 11:53 | comment | added | user692942 | Blaming members of the community that are willing to the janitorial work that keeps the site current and useful to the community is exactly what is wrong. IMO it's attitudes like this that are the problem, not those trying to maintain the quality of the site content for the benefit of everyone, not just those asking a specific problem. Maintaining that content and quality is a thankless task there is no "reputation" to be earned, they do it because they believe in the original community ethos. | |
| May 15, 2020 at 10:02 | comment | added | David | I 100% agree with this answer. Indeed, there are many here that seek to close/edit questions as long as it SOMEHOW fits a category to be moderated. Example: There's someone named PolyGeo on GIS that edits hundreds of questions for ANY small mistake. (Don't call me a complainer - look at GIS right now or any time and I guarantee you will see them) No one does anything about it. I do not want to give more power to these types of people. Many duplicates are not even duplicates, it just doesn't fit the style of the elite moderator coder that thinks they are somehow better than everyone else. | |
| May 13, 2020 at 22:48 | history | edited | R.. GitHub STOP HELPING ICE | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 582 characters in body
|
| May 13, 2020 at 21:09 | comment | added | Peter Mortensen | @R.. GitHub STOP HELPING ICE: There is more than one user experience. We often forget that the main use case for Stack Overflow is opening hits from search engines. It is already difficult to find relevant answers in the 19 million questions. | |
| May 13, 2020 at 16:47 | comment | added | R.. GitHub STOP HELPING ICE | Then you have no problem with antisocial behavior. That's a legitimate opinion but one I strongly disagree with and oppose. Sites should do everything they can to discourage antisocial behavior by users because it makes the user experience miserable for everybody else. | |
| May 13, 2020 at 16:44 | comment | added | BDL | As long as the duplicates are correct, I see no problem with that. If your point is that incorrect dupes shouldn't be rewarded, then there is already a good answer by Dukeling about balancing accuracy/quantity. | |
| May 13, 2020 at 16:34 | comment | added | R.. GitHub STOP HELPING ICE | Closing questions with good cause, as part of using the site normally and attempting to answer questions, after making a good faith effort to assist the asker in improving the question or finding an existing answer to their problem, is not antisocial. Trawling through the question feed just to look for things to close is antisocial. | |
| May 13, 2020 at 16:12 | comment | added | BDL | Closing questions is not antisocial behaviour. If we wouldn't close questions, we would be the same unsearchable mess that hundreds of other sites are. | |
| May 13, 2020 at 16:08 | comment | added | wim | ... removing useful content and keeping the unworthy from getting help <-- that couldn't be further from the truth. They are pointing these users to the place(s) where the best answers can already be found, dupe closures are intended to be helpful to the OP (and questions closed as dupes don't get removed by roomba the same way as other closed/downvoted Q, so if you want content removed you don't close as dupe). If sometimes they want to close it promptly for certain types of questions, it's because they know there will be suboptimal or even totally broken answers coming within minutes. | |
| May 13, 2020 at 15:42 | history | answered | R.. GitHub STOP HELPING ICE | CC BY-SA 4.0 |