Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 157 Stack Exchange communities.

What is meta?
Here's how it works:
  1. Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
  2. The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
  3. Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates

I'd like to create some bounties for this community wiki post, and award them the user(s) that contributes the most useful content.

But because it's a community wiki for a proposed Meta-FAQ section, most contributors are likely to be editors, and you can't award bounties to an editor.

Would it be acceptable to create a post that has a sole purpose of drawing attention to a community wiki post, and for placing/awarding bounties to contributing users of the CW post?

The 2nd side post would basically say something like this, although with more detail:

I am looking for contributors to consolidate all the MSO posts on topic X into this FAQ-Proposed post. If you help out with this task, post an answer here saying you contributed, and I will be reviewing the posts/edits done to the CW post and awarding bounties for them here.

Once the CW post is fully answered, I would flag my 2nd post for deletion.

Bart has pointed out that deleting the bounty post would get rid of the bounty rep awarded on it, so I would not delete the post afterwards. Or at least, I would wait 60 days before deleting it, providing I can confirm the bounty rep won't disappear after that the way vote rep does not disappear if the post is older than 60 days.

share|improve this question
Sooo... you want to create a question where users can post the exact same answer they placed in the wiki just so they can get a bounty bonus? Isn't that duplicating the work? What if people just post in your question, and not the community wiki post? – LittleBobbyTables Apr 19 '13 at 13:08
@BlahBlahGrabblesnackers I want them to post in the CW post, and just leave an answer on the 2nd post (don't care what it says) to receive their bounty – Rachel Apr 19 '13 at 13:20
No, come on. I appreciate the difficulty of the situation, but let's not create what is essentially crap just to draw attention to another question. – Bart Apr 19 '13 at 13:26
@Bart I'm looking for writers to consolidate all the information from various MSO posts into a FAQ-Proposed post for Reviewers about the different Review Queues. Since such a task is very tedious and time-consuming, I would like to encourage and award the users who take the time to do that with a bounty. The 2nd post would be used for a limited time, then deleted once the FAQ-Proposed question has been completed. – Rachel Apr 19 '13 at 13:30
@Rachel Then think towards a new feature that would allow a situation like that. That I might support. Allowing a non-question/traffic-sign to exist just to point at another question is not something we should do. – Bart Apr 19 '13 at 13:31
I'm not sure I understand. Would the bounties be placed on the original post, or on the 2nd post directing traffic to the original one? – Bill the Lizard Apr 19 '13 at 13:35
@BilltheLizard It would be placed on the 2nd side post directing traffic to the CW post. The 2nd post would instruct users what needs to be done to the CW post, and would be placing/awarding bounties. Users would place any answer on the 2nd post once they've contributed to the CW post to be eligible for and receive bounties. I've made another update to the question to try and clarify :) – Rachel Apr 19 '13 at 13:41
@Rachel Deleting that bounty question would see the users lose their bounty, wouldn't it? – Bart Apr 19 '13 at 13:43
Ok, I follow you now. The bounties would disappear if that traffic-sign question were deleted, so I'm not sure how effective this would be. I'm voting "no" on this, but I'll gladly donate some bounty reputation directly on the review guidelines question if you'd like. – Bill the Lizard Apr 19 '13 at 13:43
@Bart Hrrmmm I didn't realize that, that would be a big problem :) I don't suppose we could have one big "MSO Community Wiki Bounty Board" post like the MSO Test question we have floating around? :) – Rachel Apr 19 '13 at 13:46
@Rachel I'm guessing you don't need my answer to that one. ;) – Bart Apr 19 '13 at 13:46
This is only slightly related, but I can't help thinking that the guidelines for 4 of the 6 review queues are going to be 1. Go to 2. Hit F5. 3. Repeat. ;) – Bill the Lizard Apr 19 '13 at 13:47
@BilltheLizard I wanted it to be more than that - a tutorial for reviewers on not only how to use the review queues, but also what sort of things they should look for when reviewing posts, and what sort of actions they should take in specific situations. I wanted to start with the Edit Queue since there is a lot of questions on here about what type of edits should or shouldn't be approved, but there's already the start of a CW post for the Edit Queue, so I'd only be awarding the bounty to the user who started it, and not necessarily the one that contributes the most – Rachel Apr 19 '13 at 13:49

But because it's a community wiki, most contributors are likely to be editors, and you can't award bounties to an editor.

Don't you think placing a bounty would change that, at least temporarily while the bounty runs? I'd recommend just placing a bounty directly on the question itself, and use the custom message to ask people to add new answers instead of just editing.

share|improve this answer
But I don't want a lot of new posts on the CW, I'd like a few really good posts. If you check out the linked CW post, it's for Reviewers about the Review queues, and we would want at most 1 answer per review queue – Rachel Apr 19 '13 at 13:22
@Rachel Then let them come with new answers. Afterwards you can then take the most valuable content and edit that into the main answer. – Bart Apr 19 '13 at 13:30
@Rachel I appreciate that it's sort of an edge case, but creating a side-question would produce either 1) duplicate content or 2) a bunch of non-answers just to collect the bounty. I think it would be better to just let people post several different answers on the original, then merge some of them into the best (bounty awarded) answer for each category. – Bill the Lizard Apr 19 '13 at 13:30
@BilltheLizard See the final line I've added to my question - I would be deleting the 2nd post once the CW post has been answered adequately and the bounties awarded to contributing users. But I understand not wanting a post with a bunch of junk answers like "I added a bunch of stuff to the Edit Queue post", and if that's the case I won't post such a question. The reason for this meta post is to determine if such a post would be acceptable or not :) – Rachel Apr 19 '13 at 13:33

You must log in to answer this question.

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