Timeline for Perception of purpose
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:14 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://serverfault.com/ with https://serverfault.com/
|
|
| Jul 26, 2010 at 21:09 | comment | added | Kyle Brandt | @sysadmin1138: Yes I think maybe we can ask ourselves: "Can this be salvaged?". I think the one Ward just linked to is "No, not in my mind". I understand you don't want to destroy the intent of a question which was what I used to be thinking. But now I think "If the question is mostly junk and is going to get closed anyways, what is the harm?". The person can always edit it back if they feel it has lost the intent. They might even just edit it back partly and in the end we get good questions people want to answer.. I am going to start a new "thread" on this I think. | |
| Jul 26, 2010 at 19:07 | comment | added | Ward - Trying Codidact Mod | I've also been reluctant to drastically edit questions, but it might be worth a try to see how much time it takes and if they get answers. OTOH, I'm not sure exactly how to make this a reasonable question: serverfault.com/questions/164199/… | |
| Jul 26, 2010 at 17:57 | comment | added | sysadmin1138 Mod | @kyle I'm leery of rewriting questions markedly away from the original intent of the asker. Copy-editing? I do that all the time. I just have a hard time using my awesome editorial powers to redo someone's question. But you're right, some questions would be made less wince-worthy by some judicious editing for concept. | |
| Jul 25, 2010 at 18:37 | comment | added | John Gardeniers | @Kyle, your idea has merit, in the case of the 80/8080 question, of the several possible interpretations of the question I don't know which one the OP might have been intending, so an edit might not have the results you are looking for. @Warner, I tend to be harsh on poor questions even more so than poor answers, as the questions sets the framework. I believe that a downvote should be given as readily as an upvote if it is deserved. That's my view and I'm not asking anyone else to agree with it. On the plus side, I don't think I've ever used more than 5 or 6 votes in total on a single day. | |
| Jul 24, 2010 at 17:43 | comment | added | Warner | While I disagree with your trigger finger on the down-votes, I often agree with your behavior on SF. =) I agree with everything you say here. The weekend is especially bad as well as outside of business hours, where these batches of questions seem to come in mass. If we do not keep the moderation to point, I seriously believe that the noise will outweigh the signal more quickly on this site than others. The perceptions of end-users and even developers regarding IT professionals are not well aligned with what we do, which is exampled well in migrations and postings. | |
| Jul 24, 2010 at 14:05 | comment | added | Andrew | "There's a whole Internet full of more appropriate sites." - like the Wikipedia reference desk! en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk | |
| Jul 24, 2010 at 13:14 | comment | added | Kyle Brandt | Regarding the 80 vs 8080 question ... what editing the question to be something like "What are the common use cases of using port 8080 instead of 80?". I have been thinking the editing of bad questions to something better that would still likely have the answer the person wants might vastly help this problem. What you all think of trying this out for a while? (those of us with enough rep and patience/time :-) ) | |
| Jul 24, 2010 at 4:27 | history | answered | John Gardeniers | CC BY-SA 2.5 |