Timeline for Negative vote & comments
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
20 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/
|
|
| Nov 25, 2015 at 17:51 | answer | added | Kara Marfia | timeline score: 3 | |
| Nov 25, 2015 at 17:27 | comment | added | Froggiz | Should i close this post, or wait to get more than 10 downvotes !? ^_^ | |
| Nov 25, 2015 at 17:13 | comment | added | Andrew B | The association bonus isn't a reward for being a new SE user. It means that you've earned 200 points on at least one SE site, and therefore have enough experience to not require the same restrictions that completely new users are subject to. | |
| Nov 25, 2015 at 17:05 | comment | added | Froggiz | If you don't consider thoose who get 100 pts as reward new SE user, ok. Anyway that s the way it is, and i will do with it ! | |
| Nov 25, 2015 at 7:48 | comment | added | user9517 | None of the example people you show are new users to the SE ecosystem. They all have sufficient reputation elsewhere to have gained the account association bonus. As such they are considered experienced. The truly new people have their fist posts passed through the relevant review mine. People who work in those mines are encouraged to be helpful to them. | |
| Nov 24, 2015 at 15:37 | comment | added | Andrew B | Honestly this is a question for the Stack Exchange meta. Extra coding for downvotes is not something that can be solved with the input of ServerFault users; you're just going to get our thoughts on why it isn't going to solve much. | |
| Nov 24, 2015 at 14:33 | history | edited | Froggiz | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 311 characters in body
|
| Nov 24, 2015 at 14:30 | comment | added | Froggiz | Maybe something stupid like : If the time between page is displayed and validation is lower than 15 sec, pop a message to warn the user about it ? (and restart the cool down to prevent click right after the warn) | |
| Nov 24, 2015 at 14:26 | comment | added | MadHatter | Work out how to get them to read it before posting, and that will be a highly desirable improvement. | |
| Nov 24, 2015 at 14:25 | comment | added | Froggiz | Should i not try to find improvement for this site ? Around 95% of people who click "read confirmation" didn't made it. | |
| Nov 24, 2015 at 14:23 | history | edited | Froggiz | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added the goal
|
| Nov 24, 2015 at 14:08 | comment | added | MadHatter | How far backwards are we supposed to bend over to accomodate people who can't be bothered to do any research before posting, or even read the page they've just confirmed they read? | |
| Nov 24, 2015 at 10:55 | history | edited | Froggiz | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 109 characters in body
|
| Nov 24, 2015 at 10:36 | answer | added | HBruijnMod | timeline score: 9 | |
| Nov 24, 2015 at 10:22 | comment | added | Froggiz | Maybe this will help them to read more about it ? | |
| Nov 24, 2015 at 9:58 | comment | added | Michael Hampton Mod | New users are presented this page before they ask their first question. I see many, many posts from such users who apparently failed to read any of it, and as a result got a well-deserved downvote for their low quality question. The problem, as I see it, is not providing feedback, it's getting them to read it in the first place. | |
| Nov 24, 2015 at 9:51 | history | edited | Froggiz | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 226 characters in body
|
| Nov 24, 2015 at 9:31 | answer | added | SvenMod | timeline score: 10 | |
| Nov 24, 2015 at 9:26 | history | asked | Froggiz | CC BY-SA 3.0 |