Timeline for answer to Next steps for open-ended questions by NoDataDumpNoContribution
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
Post Revisions
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 10 at 21:55 | comment | added | NoDataDumpNoContribution | @M-- You're right. We can do that. It's much better. But it will still be much work and what is left will be little. Asking good open-ended questions isn't that much easier than asking good ordinary questions. I hope people come up with them, and with clear guidelines or scopes. | |
| Jul 10 at 19:54 | comment | added | M-- | We can close them now including duping, can't we? Or edit them out of OEQ and make? I haven't looked close enough, I should say. | |
| Jul 10 at 19:39 | comment | added | NoDataDumpNoContribution | But a lot of other questions will simply be ordinary programming questions missing some details, where people think that labeling them open-ended will still give them answers but with less work. | |
| Jul 10 at 19:36 | comment | added | NoDataDumpNoContribution | @M-- I agree although I'm not sure how many that will be in the end. There was a Q&A where people could post positive and negative examples and there wasn't a single positive example. How many "what is the best way for a beginner to learn programming in 20XX?" questions can you ask before they become duplicates and need curation work? I don't want to say that everything is bad but we should have realistic expectations of how many pearls are there. Categories that I can think of that might be helpful would be best practices for specific tasks or approximate strategies for complex problems maybe | |
| Jul 10 at 17:04 | comment | added | M-- | To be fair, the horrendous format and lack of moderation was partly responsible for the uselessness. I am sure that we won't see a huge jump in the quality of those posts, but I think we'd see better posts here and there. | |
| Jul 10 at 6:51 | history | answered | NoDataDumpNoContribution | CC BY-SA 4.0 |