Timeline for Stop sending things to SuperUser to die!!
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 29, 2010 at 19:33 | comment | added | tomjedrz | Do the SU folks have the capability to send the inappropriate questions back? If so, could there be some sort of penalty of forced arbitration for questions bouncing around? Or some rep penalty (or privilege suspension) for folks who pass the trash too frequently? | |
| Jul 27, 2010 at 21:22 | comment | added | Zoredache | I added this rep cost idea as a feature-request on MSO. | |
| Jul 27, 2010 at 14:30 | comment | added | Kara Marfia Mod | That's a great idea. Downvoting and voting to migrate seem like very similar activities - paying rep for migration votes makes perfect sense to me (especially given the problems it's gotta be causing SU) | |
| Jul 27, 2010 at 1:01 | comment | added | sysadmin1138 Mod | The rep-on-destination idea has some real merit to it. It kind of dove-tails nicely into Kara's idea about a purgatory-queue. If you're spiffy enough on both sites, you can vote to move directly. Alternately, having the purgatory-queue visible to 3K+ users should help show the garbage-in/garbage-out principle. May be educational! | |
| Jul 27, 2010 at 0:49 | comment | added | Zoredache | @sysadmin1138, updated answer with possible way to discourage excessively migrating questions. | |
| Jul 27, 2010 at 0:46 | history | edited | Zoredache | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 641 characters in body
|
| Jul 27, 2010 at 0:00 | comment | added | sysadmin1138 Mod | It's a lot faster to vote-to-move than it is to take the time to fix a post. It's a hard one to incentivise. | |
| Jul 26, 2010 at 23:29 | history | answered | Zoredache | CC BY-SA 2.5 |