9 replaced http://meta.stackexchange.com/ with https://meta.stackexchange.com/
source | link

From time to time I like to spend a few minutes in Stack Overflow's review tab, cleaning up answers that are not, or editing questions of dubious quality into something that is worth answering. Die low quality post, DIE! MUWhahaha...ahem. Three tabs are of value to me there: "first answers", "first questions" and "late answers".

With the "low quality posts" tab however, most of the posts that appear there are of the SQL query/regular expression/etc. -type which, although short, are often perfectly valid*. What's more, a significant amount of them come from high-rep users.

I have seen an earlier questionan earlier question addressing the possibility of filtering out high-rep users under the assumption that they must know what they're doing. And there has been discussionhas been discussion on the visual appearance and visibility of posts.

My question however is whether or not we should re-evaluate what makes a post "low quality". Perhaps ignoring the correctness of an answer, is this tab (and are the posts it shows) useful to anyone here when it comes to reviewing them? And do you correct/flag/comment on them?

In summary (and I limit myself to SO here, since I don't have personal experience with other SEs):

  • Is the "low quality post" tab of significant value to anyone reviewing posts?
  • Are single-line SQL-query/regexp answers perhaps, even if they answer the question, still low quality answers and should they be addressed? (And does the user's reputation matter in this decision)
  • Should we perhaps re-evaluate what constitutes a "low quality post" to make this particular review tab more useful?

*I would readily accept that those users with far more experience in the subjects that appear there than I have can make good use of it. I personally however don't.

From time to time I like to spend a few minutes in Stack Overflow's review tab, cleaning up answers that are not, or editing questions of dubious quality into something that is worth answering. Die low quality post, DIE! MUWhahaha...ahem. Three tabs are of value to me there: "first answers", "first questions" and "late answers".

With the "low quality posts" tab however, most of the posts that appear there are of the SQL query/regular expression/etc. -type which, although short, are often perfectly valid*. What's more, a significant amount of them come from high-rep users.

I have seen an earlier question addressing the possibility of filtering out high-rep users under the assumption that they must know what they're doing. And there has been discussion on the visual appearance and visibility of posts.

My question however is whether or not we should re-evaluate what makes a post "low quality". Perhaps ignoring the correctness of an answer, is this tab (and are the posts it shows) useful to anyone here when it comes to reviewing them? And do you correct/flag/comment on them?

In summary (and I limit myself to SO here, since I don't have personal experience with other SEs):

  • Is the "low quality post" tab of significant value to anyone reviewing posts?
  • Are single-line SQL-query/regexp answers perhaps, even if they answer the question, still low quality answers and should they be addressed? (And does the user's reputation matter in this decision)
  • Should we perhaps re-evaluate what constitutes a "low quality post" to make this particular review tab more useful?

*I would readily accept that those users with far more experience in the subjects that appear there than I have can make good use of it. I personally however don't.

From time to time I like to spend a few minutes in Stack Overflow's review tab, cleaning up answers that are not, or editing questions of dubious quality into something that is worth answering. Die low quality post, DIE! MUWhahaha...ahem. Three tabs are of value to me there: "first answers", "first questions" and "late answers".

With the "low quality posts" tab however, most of the posts that appear there are of the SQL query/regular expression/etc. -type which, although short, are often perfectly valid*. What's more, a significant amount of them come from high-rep users.

I have seen an earlier question addressing the possibility of filtering out high-rep users under the assumption that they must know what they're doing. And there has been discussion on the visual appearance and visibility of posts.

My question however is whether or not we should re-evaluate what makes a post "low quality". Perhaps ignoring the correctness of an answer, is this tab (and are the posts it shows) useful to anyone here when it comes to reviewing them? And do you correct/flag/comment on them?

In summary (and I limit myself to SO here, since I don't have personal experience with other SEs):

  • Is the "low quality post" tab of significant value to anyone reviewing posts?
  • Are single-line SQL-query/regexp answers perhaps, even if they answer the question, still low quality answers and should they be addressed? (And does the user's reputation matter in this decision)
  • Should we perhaps re-evaluate what constitutes a "low quality post" to make this particular review tab more useful?

*I would readily accept that those users with far more experience in the subjects that appear there than I have can make good use of it. I personally however don't.

8 Migration of MSO links to MSE links
source | link

From time to time I like to spend a few minutes in Stack Overflow's review tab, cleaning up answers that are not, or editing questions of dubious quality into something that is worth answering. Die low quality post, DIE! MUWhahaha...ahem. Three tabs are of value to me there: "first answers", "first questions" and "late answers".

With the "low quality posts" tab however, most of the posts that appear there are of the SQL query/regular expression/etc. -type which, although short, are often perfectly valid*. What's more, a significant amount of them come from high-rep users.

I have seen an earlier questionan earlier question addressing the possibility of filtering out high-rep users under the assumption that they must know what they're doing. And there has been discussionhas been discussion on the visual appearance and visibility of posts.

My question however is whether or not we should re-evaluate what makes a post "low quality". Perhaps ignoring the correctness of an answer, is this tab (and are the posts it shows) useful to anyone here when it comes to reviewing them? And do you correct/flag/comment on them?

In summary (and I limit myself to SO here, since I don't have personal experience with other SEs):

  • Is the "low quality post" tab of significant value to anyone reviewing posts?
  • Are single-line SQL-query/regexp answers perhaps, even if they answer the question, still low quality answers and should they be addressed? (And does the user's reputation matter in this decision)
  • Should we perhaps re-evaluate what constitutes a "low quality post" to make this particular review tab more useful?

*I would readily accept that those users with far more experience in the subjects that appear there than I have can make good use of it. I personally however don't.

From time to time I like to spend a few minutes in Stack Overflow's review tab, cleaning up answers that are not, or editing questions of dubious quality into something that is worth answering. Die low quality post, DIE! MUWhahaha...ahem. Three tabs are of value to me there: "first answers", "first questions" and "late answers".

With the "low quality posts" tab however, most of the posts that appear there are of the SQL query/regular expression/etc. -type which, although short, are often perfectly valid*. What's more, a significant amount of them come from high-rep users.

I have seen an earlier question addressing the possibility of filtering out high-rep users under the assumption that they must know what they're doing. And there has been discussion on the visual appearance and visibility of posts.

My question however is whether or not we should re-evaluate what makes a post "low quality". Perhaps ignoring the correctness of an answer, is this tab (and are the posts it shows) useful to anyone here when it comes to reviewing them? And do you correct/flag/comment on them?

In summary (and I limit myself to SO here, since I don't have personal experience with other SEs):

  • Is the "low quality post" tab of significant value to anyone reviewing posts?
  • Are single-line SQL-query/regexp answers perhaps, even if they answer the question, still low quality answers and should they be addressed? (And does the user's reputation matter in this decision)
  • Should we perhaps re-evaluate what constitutes a "low quality post" to make this particular review tab more useful?

*I would readily accept that those users with far more experience in the subjects that appear there than I have can make good use of it. I personally however don't.

From time to time I like to spend a few minutes in Stack Overflow's review tab, cleaning up answers that are not, or editing questions of dubious quality into something that is worth answering. Die low quality post, DIE! MUWhahaha...ahem. Three tabs are of value to me there: "first answers", "first questions" and "late answers".

With the "low quality posts" tab however, most of the posts that appear there are of the SQL query/regular expression/etc. -type which, although short, are often perfectly valid*. What's more, a significant amount of them come from high-rep users.

I have seen an earlier question addressing the possibility of filtering out high-rep users under the assumption that they must know what they're doing. And there has been discussion on the visual appearance and visibility of posts.

My question however is whether or not we should re-evaluate what makes a post "low quality". Perhaps ignoring the correctness of an answer, is this tab (and are the posts it shows) useful to anyone here when it comes to reviewing them? And do you correct/flag/comment on them?

In summary (and I limit myself to SO here, since I don't have personal experience with other SEs):

  • Is the "low quality post" tab of significant value to anyone reviewing posts?
  • Are single-line SQL-query/regexp answers perhaps, even if they answer the question, still low quality answers and should they be addressed? (And does the user's reputation matter in this decision)
  • Should we perhaps re-evaluate what constitutes a "low quality post" to make this particular review tab more useful?

*I would readily accept that those users with far more experience in the subjects that appear there than I have can make good use of it. I personally however don't.

7 added 146 characters in body
source | link

From time to time I like to spend a few minutes in Stack Overflow's review tab, cleaning up answers that are not, or editing questions of dubious quality into something that is worth answering. Die low quality post, DIE! MUWhahaha...ahem. Three tabs are of value to me there: "first answers", "first questions" and "late answers".

With the "low quality posts" tab however, most of the posts that appear there are of the SQL query/regular expression/etc. -type which, although short, are often perfectly valid*. What's more, a significant amount of them come from high-rep users.

I have seen an earlier question addressing the possibility of filtering out high-rep users under the assumption that they must know what they're doing. And there has been discussion on the visual appearance and visibility of posts.

My question however is whether or not we should re-evaluate what makes a post "low quality". IsPerhaps ignoring the correctness of an answer, is this tab (and are the posts it shows) useful to anyone here when it comes to reviewing them? And do you correct/flag/comment on them?

In summary (and I limit myself to SO here, since I don't have personal experience with other SEs):

  • Is the "low quality post" tab of significant value to anyone reviewing posts?
  • Are single-line SQL-query/regexp answers perhaps, even if they answer the question, still low quality answers and should they be addressed? (And does the user's reputation matter in this decision)
  • Should we perhaps re-evaluate what constitutes a "low quality post" to make this particular review tab more useful?

*I would readily accept that those users with far more experience in the subjects that appear there than I have can make good use of it. I personally however don't.

From time to time I like to spend a few minutes in Stack Overflow's review tab, cleaning up answers that are not, or editing questions of dubious quality into something that is worth answering. Die low quality post, DIE! MUWhahaha...ahem. Three tabs are of value to me there: "first answers", "first questions" and "late answers".

With the "low quality posts" tab however, most of the posts that appear there are of the SQL query/regular expression/etc. -type which, although short, are often perfectly valid*. What's more, a significant amount of them come from high-rep users.

I have seen an earlier question addressing the possibility of filtering out high-rep users under the assumption that they must know what they're doing. And there has been discussion on the visual appearance and visibility of posts.

My question however is whether or not we should re-evaluate what makes a post "low quality". Is this tab (and are the posts it shows) useful to anyone here when it comes to reviewing them?

In summary (and I limit myself to SO here, since I don't have personal experience with other SEs):

  • Is the "low quality post" tab of significant value to anyone reviewing posts?
  • Are single-line SQL-query/regexp answers perhaps, even if they answer the question, still low quality answers and should they be addressed?
  • Should we perhaps re-evaluate what constitutes a "low quality post" to make this particular review tab more useful?

*I would readily accept that those users with far more experience in the subjects that appear there than I have can make good use of it. I personally however don't.

From time to time I like to spend a few minutes in Stack Overflow's review tab, cleaning up answers that are not, or editing questions of dubious quality into something that is worth answering. Die low quality post, DIE! MUWhahaha...ahem. Three tabs are of value to me there: "first answers", "first questions" and "late answers".

With the "low quality posts" tab however, most of the posts that appear there are of the SQL query/regular expression/etc. -type which, although short, are often perfectly valid*. What's more, a significant amount of them come from high-rep users.

I have seen an earlier question addressing the possibility of filtering out high-rep users under the assumption that they must know what they're doing. And there has been discussion on the visual appearance and visibility of posts.

My question however is whether or not we should re-evaluate what makes a post "low quality". Perhaps ignoring the correctness of an answer, is this tab (and are the posts it shows) useful to anyone here when it comes to reviewing them? And do you correct/flag/comment on them?

In summary (and I limit myself to SO here, since I don't have personal experience with other SEs):

  • Is the "low quality post" tab of significant value to anyone reviewing posts?
  • Are single-line SQL-query/regexp answers perhaps, even if they answer the question, still low quality answers and should they be addressed? (And does the user's reputation matter in this decision)
  • Should we perhaps re-evaluate what constitutes a "low quality post" to make this particular review tab more useful?

*I would readily accept that those users with far more experience in the subjects that appear there than I have can make good use of it. I personally however don't.

6 edited tags
| link
5 added 2 characters in body; edited title
source | link
4 added 41 characters in body
source | link
3 edited title
| link
2 deleted 1 characters in body
source | link
1
source | link