3 ms·

How could SO incentivize the community to clean that up? Given that SO's content is basically 100% volunteer/user generated and free to access, it seems like t

How could SO incentivize the community to clean that up? Given that SO's content is basically 100% volunteer/user generated and free to access, it seems like the first step would be to allow users to flag obsolete answers with a very visible and obvious UI element. Maybe second would be SO fielding a team of experts as "pruners" that would delete/update the flagged answers.

rozab 6y ago
Are you suggesting that SO actually pays people to create the content their site thrives on?
- nogabebop23 6y ago
  In fairness to SO it was envisioned and originally created as a peer helping network and all the content is licensed in very liberal ways. The fact that it turned into 99% of the questions asked by noobs / answered by a very small group of experts may have been inevitable but I don't think it was planned. It's one of the few socialized Q&A-style sites that I feel as primarily a question "asker" I have benefited while the predominately question-answerers have as well. Synergy!
eitland 6y ago
Or maybe we could just let content that doesn't receive upvotes sink towards the bottom: - a fresh upvote is 1 point - one year old upvote is 0.5 point - a two year old upvote is 0.25 points If nobody votes, answers relative positions stay the same. Old answers aren't worthless but it also isn't impossible to lift updated content to the tip later. A person might vote for the same answer again after half a year, but it really just refreshes the vote to 1 instead of adding more value to it. I'm not a fan of deletionism and in stack overflows case I'm fairly certain it has destroyed value for millions both in knowledge and reputation. (Why? For years around 2009 - 2015 or something whenever you found a good answer that solved your problem it would most probably be flagged for removal or something.)
- Avamander 6y ago
  This would not be implemented because you suggested something that makes high-point users lose points.
  - eitland 6y ago
    They will not do it. They will also not allow duplicates, allow low effort questions - even if others are lining up to answers those low quality questions. Whoever wants to improve the world as much as stackoverflow once did - and make a bunch of cash in the process could try some of thise ideas. Someone will probably counter with the assumed fact that if there had been money in it someone would have done to which I counter with the two economists who went down the street, saw some money on the ground and walked straight past it since "if the money was real someone would have taken it already".
    - wool_gather 6y ago
      There was an upheaval on the Stack network over the last 10-12 months; part of the fallout is a lot of users pulling together on a non-profit take on QA: https://codidact.org https://codidact.org Still in the early stages, but it's promising.
      - eitland 6y ago
        Thanks, looks promising. The actual instances were somewhat hidden as far as I could see.

rozab 6y ago

Are you suggesting that SO actually pays people to create the content their site thrives on?

nogabebop23 6y ago
In fairness to SO it was envisioned and originally created as a peer helping network and all the content is licensed in very liberal ways. The fact that it turned into 99% of the questions asked by noobs / answered by a very small group of experts may have been inevitable but I don't think it was planned. It's one of the few socialized Q&A-style sites that I feel as primarily a question "asker" I have benefited while the predominately question-answerers have as well. Synergy!

eitland 6y ago

Or maybe we could just let content that doesn't receive upvotes sink towards the bottom: - a fresh upvote is 1 point - one year old upvote is 0.5 point - a two year old upvote is 0.25 points If nobody votes, answers relative positions stay the same. Old answers aren't worthless but it also isn't impossible to lift updated content to the tip later. A person might vote for the same answer again after half a year, but it really just refreshes the vote to 1 instead of adding more value to it. I'm not a fan of deletionism and in stack overflows case I'm fairly certain it has destroyed value for millions both in knowledge and reputation. (Why? For years around 2009 - 2015 or something whenever you found a good answer that solved your problem it would most probably be flagged for removal or something.)

Avamander 6y ago
This would not be implemented because you suggested something that makes high-point users lose points.
- eitland 6y ago
  They will not do it. They will also not allow duplicates, allow low effort questions - even if others are lining up to answers those low quality questions. Whoever wants to improve the world as much as stackoverflow once did - and make a bunch of cash in the process could try some of thise ideas. Someone will probably counter with the assumed fact that if there had been money in it someone would have done to which I counter with the two economists who went down the street, saw some money on the ground and walked straight past it since "if the money was real someone would have taken it already".
  - wool_gather 6y ago
    There was an upheaval on the Stack network over the last 10-12 months; part of the fallout is a lot of users pulling together on a non-profit take on QA: https://codidact.org https://codidact.org Still in the early stages, but it's promising.
    - eitland 6y ago
      Thanks, looks promising. The actual instances were somewhat hidden as far as I could see.