your communities

and maybe additionally joining a new proposal should either cost some rep or be limited (per week or in total)

share|improve this question
3  
Or just ban Welbog and company, for the same ultimate effect. –  delete Jun 9 '10 at 8:38
    
@kinopiko +1, but there'll always be one of those. or rather five if you count their potential sock puppets... –  Tobias Kienzler Jun 9 '10 at 8:47
add comment

3 Answers

up vote 1 down vote accepted

Agreed on voting and posting questions only on followed proposals.

But I'm totally against limiting how many of them you can follow.

share|improve this answer
    
that's why I said maybe. The limit should be generous if any, e.g. 5 new proposals per week - after beta and a first rush I mean, because then there should definitely no longer be more 5 proposals per week one is interested in –  Tobias Kienzler Jun 9 '10 at 8:07
    
@Tobias, why "there should definitely no longer be more 5 proposals per week one is interested in"? Don't you think this is quite a bit of radical statement? –  Massimo Jun 9 '10 at 8:30
    
no matter how much you're interested in, at some point all success-promising proposals might have been done. otherwise this would result in 5x52 = 260 new SE-sites you'd "want" to visit regularly after just one year. but that is just an estimate, and probably indeed radical –  Tobias Kienzler Jun 9 '10 at 8:46
add comment

I think anyone should be able to post a example question, but I can see a good case for only letting people that follower a proposal vote on its questions.

By following I am saying I will take part in the site often, the fact I will only make use of a site 1 or 2 times a year does not stop me posting good questions, however it means I should not follow it (and imply I will commit), or help define it.

share|improve this answer
add comment

When you create a proposal, you automatically follow it. Do you mean that you should have to wait until someone else follows it prior to creating sample questions?

Those first few questions help you to clarify what you had in mind (as far as what should be on / off topic) when you created the proposal.

I'd also be against a limitation of how many proposals I could follow. Of the (I think 10) I'm following now, I'm committed to only two. As it stands, I don't think I'll be committing to anything else that I follow, but I like to keep up with the proposals anyway .. I may change my mind.

In short, just following something isn't going to get it into beta. I think the fact that we can only commit to a few proposals will naturally keep 'questionable' stuff out of beta.

Now - reading between the lines -

It's been made abundantly clear that no matter the intentions, creating a 'fun place' is not in the scope of Stack Exchange 2.0. Likewise with a deliberately nonsensical site. If I start a proposal today on .. let's say ... "How to be a pimp" - even if it got 200 followers, you can be sure that it would not live past the first 24 hours. Keep in mind that early on, nobody but diamond moderators could vote to close a proposal. That has since changed.

share|improve this answer
    
"When you create a question" Do you mean proposal instead of question? But no, I meant generally that the direction of a proposal should be steered by those who are also willing to commit, so that a basically good idea does not end up without experts because the top5 questions are actually not what the proposing person intended the proposal to go... but I think now that 20 on-/off-topic votes are required this problem may be obsolete –  Tobias Kienzler Jun 25 '10 at 11:06
    
@Tobias - Thanks , edited. –  Tim Post Jun 25 '10 at 11:16
add comment

You must log in to answer this question.

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