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.

There are certain question on SO that appear over and over. Sometimes its difficult to find the real good answers to these questions (that DO exist on SO) by search alone.

One example in the iOS/iPhone category would be orientation / landscape questions. This answer helps a lot, but it's quite hard to find by search alone. What do you think about "voting" certain answers up or just pressing a button "this answer matched my query" to improve the search result or highlight certain exemplary answers?

Edit: Well I slept at night over it and "subsorting" the relevance tab by favorited / votes should do the trick. The Votes tab is pretty much useless in it current state.

share|improve this question
    
That's a great idea! Should this be tagged feature-request? –  U2744 SNOWFLAKE Jul 10 '11 at 1:18
    
This is why it's important to close questions as duplicates. It's great to love dupes and all, but it's absolutely pointless to repeat the same content over and over. Especially because it splits up the good answers into many different places, making it harder to find when you need it. –  Cody Gray Jul 10 '11 at 7:11

1 Answer 1

While this feature sounds cool, it essentially sounds like Google's [+1], as proposed I think it would confuse the idea of what voting is enough that I doubt the mods will go for it.

Personally I think it would be beneficial to add this sort of a system to help find duplicates in cases like this.

What if instead of using the word vote, you say star the correct search responses -- much like the responses in chat can be starred. Then a specific searches, by default, could be ordered by stars and the term would be less easily confused with votes.

share|improve this answer
    
Of course, we also already use stars to denote "favo(u)rite" questions. So if you think voting that serves a dual purpose is confusing, this would be as well. –  Cody Gray Jul 10 '11 at 2:04
    
Yep. I was just thinking that too when I voted up the question and saw the star... I think the real challenge is that search ranking algorithms tend to be very complicated and user specific. To get more than an order of magnitude improvement would probably require a large investment by stack exchange <-- one of those cool looking custom server boxen –  M. Tibbits Jul 10 '11 at 2:18
    
Not sure why we need to buy our own little GoogleBox. Google already provides that service for free: search google.com using site:stackoverflow.com –  Cody Gray Jul 10 '11 at 7:10
    
True - I just figured if you wanted to augment the search with an in-house up-vote-star thingee you'd need in-house hardware. Perhaps not? –  M. Tibbits Jul 10 '11 at 7:11
    
Oh, I have no idea. I'm not really sure why you need this. It seems like unnecessary extra complexity added to the site. And if anyone follows my Meta posts, they know I'm pretty much against that. Closing as duplicates seems like a far better option. –  Cody Gray Jul 10 '11 at 7:12
1  
Works for me - just wanted to toss in my $0.02. I figured that this would add too much complexity. –  M. Tibbits Jul 10 '11 at 7:15

You must log in to answer this question.

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