What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 131 Stack Exchange communities.

A simple idea. How about a Stack Exchange site to serve as a buffer for questions that don't meet expectations in terms of quality ? A post could be temporarily migrated with a tag representing the originating site, the owner could be invited to improve their question along with some help and this could lead to overall improvement of the content on all SE sites.

share|improve this question
    
Similar to meta.stackexchange.com/questions/122629/site-for-migrating, seen a dupe somewhere –  Manishearth Jul 10 '12 at 12:08
3  
How would this differ, really, from the OP editing their closed question on the original site? –  Aaron Bertrand Jul 10 '12 at 12:17
10  
I can't think why anyone would want to sit on that buffer-site and vet questions. If OP's can't be bothered to read the formatting help and apply basic formatting, I can't be bothered to help them. –  Matt Jul 10 '12 at 12:18
    
@AaronBertrand If a question does not meet the quality standard a user would have the possibility of transferring their post to demonstrate their intent. An improved post could come back as a new question while the older one is discarded. What is currently happening is that some questions are being downvoted before there is a chance of improvement thereby resulting in a certain number of useless questions. –  James Poulson Jul 10 '12 at 12:25
    
Everyone thinks they are giving best quality posts. \review is there for improving quality of posts. –  Somnath Muluk Jul 10 '12 at 12:25
    
@Matt Are you absolutely certain that a 100% of OPs can't be bothered ? –  James Poulson Jul 10 '12 at 12:27
    
@SomnathMuluk Where is this /review ? –  James Poulson Jul 10 '12 at 12:29
    
@JamesPoulson: I think there's enough exemplar questions and answers across the site, and enough guidance given to new users that explains how to use the formatting tools, that yes; authors of low quality posts are lost causes and wont change their ways. –  Matt Jul 10 '12 at 12:34
2  
@JamesPoulson: stackoverflow.com/review/… –  Somnath Muluk Jul 10 '12 at 12:44
1  
Why stop at one? I suggest we also have a buffer for the buffer so that only questions of a minimum quality get into the buffer for Stack Overflow. And then a buffer for that... –  Lorem Ipsum Jul 10 '12 at 14:59
    
@yoda As much as the tower of turtles metaphor would make one smile this would be unnecessary for a given second chance. Besides this I'm satisfied to see so many reactions. There's a lot of "kneejerking" going on here and it'd be interesting to find out why. –  James Poulson Jul 10 '12 at 22:28

1 Answer 1

We already have a feature for that. It's called "closing"

When a post is closed, it is meant to be edited and improved if possible. Once that is done, it can get reopened. (You can flag it for reopening if you want)

When a post seems salvageable via edits, usually a community member will keep that in a comment. (This doesn't always happen on SO, I guess that ought to be fixed somehow)

share|improve this answer
1  
I think if down-voting questions went back to costing rep, the frequency of crappy questions being down-voted into oblivion and no longer being salvageable would decrease. As it stands, there is a lot of drive-by down-voting of questions. It happens on answers too, but since it costs rep, it seems to be less frequent. –  Aaron Bertrand Jul 10 '12 at 12:27
    
To add to @AaronBertrand's comment the driveby downvoting as he calls it results in a lot of clutter. Imo, there should be a "grace" period during which downvotes are counted but not definitive and comments can be used to offer suggestions of improvement to the OP. –  James Poulson Jul 10 '12 at 12:28
1  
@AaronBertrand: Hmm, yeah--that is an issue, but I don't know how to solve it. This featurereq cold address it, but you may want to read meta.stackexchange.com/a/68709/178438 first. –  Manishearth Jul 10 '12 at 12:32
    
@Manish yeah I wasn't suggesting that a magic switch fixes all the problems and wouldn't cause others. Just suggesting why this specific policy change has yielded far more questions being squashed into cardiac arrest. –  Aaron Bertrand Jul 10 '12 at 12:59
    
I've submitted another question with a possible solution: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/139239/grace-period-for-voting –  James Poulson Jul 10 '12 at 13:03
    
"When a post is closed, it is meant to be edited and improved if possible. Once that is done, it can get reopened. (You can flag it for reopening if you want)" In practise this doesn't happen. Most closed questions remain closed. –  James Poulson Mar 21 '13 at 2:03
    
@JamesPoulson: It's the OPs fault if they don't fix it (and the community's fault for not commenting). There are some changes that shall happen to the closing feature soon that shall fix this, though. –  Manishearth Mar 21 '13 at 4:22

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .