Timeline for Should Stack Exchange in general be awarding "A"s for Effort?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
17 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 23, 2017 at 12:36 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://stackoverflow.com/ with https://stackoverflow.com/
|
|
| Oct 27, 2015 at 16:15 | history | edited | user217110 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited body
|
| Dec 11, 2013 at 9:33 | history | edited | user217110 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 4 characters in body
|
| Dec 11, 2013 at 9:27 | history | edited | user217110 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 490 characters in body
|
| Dec 10, 2013 at 21:26 | comment | added | Wayne Werner | gorrammit! Your answer has made me rethink my (SO) world view. | |
| Dec 10, 2013 at 15:55 | comment | added | Mark Amery | @PeterMortensen It's also clearly written and short. Chances are it's better quality than any dupes that came before it. The previous incarnations of the question should probably be closed as duplicates instead. | |
| Dec 10, 2013 at 12:43 | comment | added | This_is_NOT_a_forum | That question should be closed as there must be a duplicate somewhere for such a simple question. It was asked almost two years after Stack Overflow launched. However, it can be a non-trivial problem to find such duplicates, even for the very simple questions. | |
| Dec 10, 2013 at 10:56 | comment | added | Denis de Bernardy | I think you're missing my own point: the site is so polluted with junk that even a tiny amount of effort ought to lead an OP to a preexisting SO question. In that light, I'd argue that "convert int to string in C#" becomes a valid question (with research!) if OP found no dups using Google. I can see the flip side of this, of course: we end up with idiotic questions in our effort to compile a practical version of the docs. The issue here is we're well beyond that point already… there's so much crap lying around on SO that it lures new users into dumping their own crap into the cesspool. | |
| Dec 10, 2013 at 10:45 | comment | added | user217110 | @Denis Yes, yes. Your missing my point. If it's a duplicate it should be closed. This thread isn't about duplicates though. It's about the closing of questions for no research effort. My point above is, this question shows no research effort (at all) yet it is a very valuable question to a new user looking for just such an answer. So in this instance it showing no research effort and closing as such is a bad idea and only makes the community less useful. | |
| Dec 10, 2013 at 10:27 | comment | added | Denis de Bernardy | @Liam: That particular one, no. But every single duplicate of it, yes. Here's a criteria: if entering the question in Google leads to a nearly identical question on SO, it should get closed on the spot. | |
| Dec 10, 2013 at 10:26 | comment | added | user217110 | @Sumurai8, But if C# was a brand new technology and I asked this question today, I think, it would be closed very quickly as not showing any research effort, thus denying the community a potentially valuable resource for the future. | |
| Dec 10, 2013 at 10:23 | comment | added | Sumurai8 | It's a very simple question with a very simple answer. If someone knows anything about C#, they can answer that question in a few minutes. That, and the fact that it was asked 3 years ago, makes it that the question isn't closed. The question doesn't show much effort, but it is clear. The answer doesn't take more effort than the question. | |
| Dec 10, 2013 at 10:12 | comment | added | Gilles 'SO- stop being evil' | Yes, that. Very good summary of my rant. | |
| Dec 10, 2013 at 9:44 | comment | added | Stijn | I honestly don't know. Before this whole discussion I probably would have voted to close, but I think I'm one of the people guilty of using "minimal understanding" as a reason to close questions with no visible effort. (So I have not voted to close now) | |
| Dec 10, 2013 at 9:43 | comment | added | user217110 | So it should be voted to be closed? If we did that to every question like this, it would in one swoop eradicate all the basic programming knowledge accumulated on SO over the years. | |
| Dec 10, 2013 at 9:41 | comment | added | Stijn | No doubt it is useful, but does it belong on SO? Should SO replace Programming 101 books? | |
| Dec 10, 2013 at 9:37 | history | answered | user217110 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |