Timeline for Staging Ground Reviewer Motivation
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 28 at 4:48 | comment | added | dan1st | I am not asking for a better example. But you mentioned this as an example of the "aim"/expected quality level (at least I interpreted it that way) but examples (especially in cases like that) for approved posts would be examples for the actual quality level of approved posts, not what's expected from reviewers. | |
| Aug 26 at 18:26 | comment | added | VLAZ | I checked and picked the first one that I found. Which happened to be the first one. If you want me to go through the published items, verify which is from a "bad reviewer" or not, then give an example from a "good reviewer" - I'm not going to do that. | |
| Aug 26 at 18:14 | comment | added | dan1st | I am not saying there are no problems. In fact, I agree that many approved questions have a lot of problems. However, I think questions reviewed by people who just approve questions without looking into them much aren't a good indication of the expected quality level. | |
| Aug 26 at 18:12 | comment | added | VLAZ | "Like if a user approves 23 questions within 15min, I don't think that's a good example for a typical Staging Ground reviewer or expected quality." sorry, I'm not going to comb through all the items to find you examples that you would agree with. The fact that it happens and, you should also acknowledge, more than once is enough for me. I've checked out SG published items multiple times after launch. I've found problems often enough. But if we're going the route of "your example is real but doesn't count", then it'd be a waste of my time to get involved. | |
| Aug 26 at 18:09 | comment | added | VLAZ | "If a question on the main site doesn't have good tagging/a good title, I don't think that's that big of an issue." and I disagree with that. I spend at least one hour a day fixing tags. And whenever I actually SO as a knowledge base by searching it, I end up essentially having to read tea leaves. Because when you search (on-site or off-site) the main information about a question you get is the title. When the title is not helpful, then I have to review each entry that even sounds adjacent to what I want. What if I want to do something with Wordpress and top bars? | |
| Aug 26 at 17:56 | comment | added | dan1st | Like if a user approves 23 questions within 15min, I don't think that's a good example for a typical Staging Ground reviewer or expected quality. | |
| Aug 26 at 17:49 | comment | added | dan1st | Regarding titles/edits: This may be a controversial opinion but I think the body and the question having a minimal reproducer/actually asking a proper question is significantly more important. If a question on the main site doesn't have good tagging/a good title, I don't think that's that big of an issue. But I agree that I should probably care more about these two things than I currently do. However, I am not sure whether non-SMEs could really recognize and write good titles and know how relevant a topic actually is. | |
| Aug 26 at 17:48 | comment | added | dan1st | Given that the user in question approving the question you linked only approved and skipped questions in the Staging Ground (at least I can see many approval and skips and no other review actions), I think there are other problems in that case. | |
| Aug 26 at 17:25 | comment | added | VLAZ | @dan1st Although, I guess that question has other problems - it was marked as requiring major changes and indeed doesn't have a reproducable example. Yet, it was published. I did not search long to find that example - it was the most recent published question (although seems I had some tags in the filter. I just now noticed). | |
| Aug 26 at 17:25 | comment | added | VLAZ | @dan1st Here is an example Top dynamic bar in wordpress site. The only two words from the title that have any relevance to the question are "top" and "bar". Even then, the question is not about a top bar but about timing of some events (that is reflected on that bar but could easily be anywhere else). Wordpess does not come into play. It's at useless or even misleading in the title and in the tags. | |
| Aug 26 at 17:25 | comment | added | VLAZ | @dan1st That's not my overall impression from SG. "barely adequate" is. Questions with wrong tags or titles are regularly published when I've checked. And I don't expect perfect tagging, like, adding the exact tag that some topic needs. I expect users to look at the tags currently on the question and amend or remove unnecessary ones. Same with titles - a lot of questions are still published with "mystery titles" - ones that you cannot even guess what the question is about without reading it. | |
| Aug 26 at 17:15 | comment | added | dan1st | Regarding 2.: I'd say the aim is "questions that seem good to a non-SME" because it's not feasible to expect subject-matter experts to review each question. For 3.: Yes and I think this should ideally be handled by a system that results in these users losing (or at least not significantly gaining) reputation in the long term (at least if they just publish any questions they see). | |
| Aug 26 at 17:12 | history | answered | VLAZ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |