What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 134 Stack Exchange communities.

Is SO turning into something where only the easy questions get answered(and viewed more often)? Or am I just asking too specific stuff? I have asked some questions in SO(even earned the tumbleweed badge for that) because I google first and exhausted possibilities before asking(as opposed to just asking)

But the trend I see so far(well at least for the "interesting" questions I get from SO is that easy ones are upvoted(and gets much more views) than the "good" questions where you'll actually have to stop and think of an answer.

While I know this is an expected behavior(since of course, difficult questions need time to be answered) I am wondering why a lot of people don't actually VIEW them(thus tumbleweed badges galore). I do think some of my questions can be answered by the gurus if they took time to read it.

Is it "regular" SO behavior to try to get reps as much as possible and thus just answer easy questions as fast as you can? Is there a way where we can balance this kind of behavior?

share|improve this question

2 Answers 2

up vote 1 down vote accepted

The more specific/narrow a question is, the fewer people to whom it's interesting. When you have a question that thousands of people on SO can answer, it's going to get tons of views, votes, and answers. When you have a question that 5 people on SO can answer, it's going to get very few views, probably no votes, and maybe an answer.

I personally almost never bother to look at a question that I don't think I'm qualified to answer and aren't interesting. Assuming that others follow this behavior, the questions that aren't of broad interest or easy to answer just don't have the audience to give them votes/views/answers.

share|improve this answer

Straight answer:

One option already there is to add a bounty to the question. That alone boosts the views immediately.

For further discussion:

On the other hand, it could be feasible to implement a method to increase the rep to upvoted/accepted answers on questions with more than a week unanswered (a week or any other period that seems acceptable). I don't know if that has been discussed previously and what would be the cons of that, but it is a possibility.

share|improve this answer
    
but you'll have to wait a couple of days for bounties, right? –  corroded Apr 6 '11 at 5:30
    
do you suggest to reduce/eliminate that requirement? Or finding other solution altogether? What do you think about increasing the rep for answers to idle questions? –  Aleadam Apr 6 '11 at 5:43
    
well we can't reduce the bounty requirement as it has been discussed before: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3330/…, but what do you mean increase rep for answers to idle questions? the answerer gets more points? –  corroded Apr 6 '11 at 6:03

You must log in to answer this question.

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