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

I was unhappy with the removal of the accept rateI was unhappy with the removal of the accept rate.

IMO responsible SO citizens used it responsibly; I know I tried very hard to, particularly after participating for awhile. I left my share of "accept rate" comments; eventually I changed them to be (a) more explanatory, and (b) deliberately shifting the blame on to answerers, not askers.

I don't know how "citizenry" would be calculated. I think I'm a mostly-good citizen, although I tend to be a douchebag sometimes, especially in a few known situations. That should count against me, but evaluating douche-baggery is pretty fuzzy.

I'd like to see something that takes in to account how a user interacts with SO overall.

I don't know how it could be implemented. IMO the accept rate is actually reasonable, but the use of the accept rate is where things tended to fall over. Flagging of "just" accept-rate comments took care of a lot of that (IMO).

I was unhappy with the removal of the accept rate.

IMO responsible SO citizens used it responsibly; I know I tried very hard to, particularly after participating for awhile. I left my share of "accept rate" comments; eventually I changed them to be (a) more explanatory, and (b) deliberately shifting the blame on to answerers, not askers.

I don't know how "citizenry" would be calculated. I think I'm a mostly-good citizen, although I tend to be a douchebag sometimes, especially in a few known situations. That should count against me, but evaluating douche-baggery is pretty fuzzy.

I'd like to see something that takes in to account how a user interacts with SO overall.

I don't know how it could be implemented. IMO the accept rate is actually reasonable, but the use of the accept rate is where things tended to fall over. Flagging of "just" accept-rate comments took care of a lot of that (IMO).

I was unhappy with the removal of the accept rate.

IMO responsible SO citizens used it responsibly; I know I tried very hard to, particularly after participating for awhile. I left my share of "accept rate" comments; eventually I changed them to be (a) more explanatory, and (b) deliberately shifting the blame on to answerers, not askers.

I don't know how "citizenry" would be calculated. I think I'm a mostly-good citizen, although I tend to be a douchebag sometimes, especially in a few known situations. That should count against me, but evaluating douche-baggery is pretty fuzzy.

I'd like to see something that takes in to account how a user interacts with SO overall.

I don't know how it could be implemented. IMO the accept rate is actually reasonable, but the use of the accept rate is where things tended to fall over. Flagging of "just" accept-rate comments took care of a lot of that (IMO).

2 Migration of MSO links to MSE links
source | link

I was unhappy with the removal of the accept rateI was unhappy with the removal of the accept rate.

IMO responsible SO citizens used it responsibly; I know I tried very hard to, particularly after participating for awhile. I left my share of "accept rate" comments; eventually I changed them to be (a) more explanatory, and (b) deliberately shifting the blame on to answerers, not askers.

I don't know how "citizenry" would be calculated. I think I'm a mostly-good citizen, although I tend to be a douchebag sometimes, especially in a few known situations. That should count against me, but evaluating douche-baggery is pretty fuzzy.

I'd like to see something that takes in to account how a user interacts with SO overall.

I don't know how it could be implemented. IMO the accept rate is actually reasonable, but the use of the accept rate is where things tended to fall over. Flagging of "just" accept-rate comments took care of a lot of that (IMO).

I was unhappy with the removal of the accept rate.

IMO responsible SO citizens used it responsibly; I know I tried very hard to, particularly after participating for awhile. I left my share of "accept rate" comments; eventually I changed them to be (a) more explanatory, and (b) deliberately shifting the blame on to answerers, not askers.

I don't know how "citizenry" would be calculated. I think I'm a mostly-good citizen, although I tend to be a douchebag sometimes, especially in a few known situations. That should count against me, but evaluating douche-baggery is pretty fuzzy.

I'd like to see something that takes in to account how a user interacts with SO overall.

I don't know how it could be implemented. IMO the accept rate is actually reasonable, but the use of the accept rate is where things tended to fall over. Flagging of "just" accept-rate comments took care of a lot of that (IMO).

I was unhappy with the removal of the accept rate.

IMO responsible SO citizens used it responsibly; I know I tried very hard to, particularly after participating for awhile. I left my share of "accept rate" comments; eventually I changed them to be (a) more explanatory, and (b) deliberately shifting the blame on to answerers, not askers.

I don't know how "citizenry" would be calculated. I think I'm a mostly-good citizen, although I tend to be a douchebag sometimes, especially in a few known situations. That should count against me, but evaluating douche-baggery is pretty fuzzy.

I'd like to see something that takes in to account how a user interacts with SO overall.

I don't know how it could be implemented. IMO the accept rate is actually reasonable, but the use of the accept rate is where things tended to fall over. Flagging of "just" accept-rate comments took care of a lot of that (IMO).

1
source | link

I was unhappy with the removal of the accept rate.

IMO responsible SO citizens used it responsibly; I know I tried very hard to, particularly after participating for awhile. I left my share of "accept rate" comments; eventually I changed them to be (a) more explanatory, and (b) deliberately shifting the blame on to answerers, not askers.

I don't know how "citizenry" would be calculated. I think I'm a mostly-good citizen, although I tend to be a douchebag sometimes, especially in a few known situations. That should count against me, but evaluating douche-baggery is pretty fuzzy.

I'd like to see something that takes in to account how a user interacts with SO overall.

I don't know how it could be implemented. IMO the accept rate is actually reasonable, but the use of the accept rate is where things tended to fall over. Flagging of "just" accept-rate comments took care of a lot of that (IMO).