5 ms·
I think its harder than that. Some anwers are just timeless. Others should decay.
by rc_kas 8y ago
I think its harder than that. Some anwers are just timeless. Others should decay.
- tobr 8y agoIf they’re timeless they should continue to get votes, no? Even if everyone stops voting in a thread all the votes would decay at the same rate, so the timeless answer would stay at top.
- Piskvorrr 8y agoI can confirm this: I'm getting votes from stuff I have written in the Permian, Triasic and Jurassic periods, respectively.
- manigandham 8y agoDecay will apply to all answers so it'll still stay at the top of the rankings unless a better answer comes along. Tons of options but better than the static scores we have now.
- bryanrasmussen 8y agoIf a better answer comes along in a question with 20 answers already it probably won't get up to the top anytime soon. If a better answer comes along in a question that is then marked as a repeat of a question that has a worse answer, forget it. At any rate if a better answer comes along it should rise to the top in the matter of <24hrs.
- manigandham 8y agoYes, that's how it is today. That's why I want proper merging and decay, so that fresh answers actually have a shot of getting to the top while people see a single relevant thread.
- mark-r 8y agoMaybe a good answer won't rise to the top, but it will go up over time. I answered a question 7 years after it was asked, and at this point my answer is #8 out of 59. I can't argue that the 7 above me aren't better.
- collyw 8y agoThere is also the problems of frameworks and languages evolving, with better ways of doing things in subsequent versions.