Timeline for Let's Plan the Second Iteration of the Stack Exchange Quality Project!
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 20, 2017 at 10:30 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.stackexchange.com/ with https://meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Oct 27, 2016 at 20:16 | comment | added | Raphael | @ChrisPratt Actually, this is a search I would make when I have some time to kill to discover unanswered questions that may be worth answering. In particular in beta, there is some incentive to keeping the percentage of answered questions high. I agree that rep farming can be a motive, but it's certainly not the only one. (And rep farming is only bad if you get upvotes on crap.) | |
| Oct 27, 2016 at 18:47 | comment | added | Chris Pratt | @Raphael: That kind of query actually worries me. That's what I would call a drive-by. It's meant to sus out the questions that are most likely to give you rep, not necessarily the ones that need an answer. The ability to filter that way would make we worry that many users' questions may never get good exposure if enough potential answerers utilized it. | |
| Oct 18, 2016 at 14:56 | comment | added | Raphael |
I just discovered that some searches have their own RSS feeds (queries with only tags work) but others don't. Giving every search query it's own feed (essentially, that would mean providing a search API) might be interesting. For instance, I may be interested in [favorite-tag] answers:0 score:1 closed:no for discovering questions I may want to answer.
|
|
| Oct 17, 2016 at 18:22 | comment | added | Thomas Owens | @TimPost Thanks. Admittedly, I don't know how easy it is to implement various feeds. I think that ease of implementation vs what people can do if they choose to use them would probably be better. I've got some ideas of what I would do with IFTTT (automatic posting of questions and answers on various site to Twitter/LinkedIn, for example) as well as building applications around discovery and RSS feeds across the network. | |
| Oct 17, 2016 at 18:16 | comment | added | user50049 | Good point, re: usage. I'm going to look into it. | |
| Oct 17, 2016 at 18:06 | history | edited | gnat | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
minor typo corrected
|
| Oct 17, 2016 at 17:49 | comment | added | Thomas Owens | @TimPost I don't use feeds now, and there are two reasons. First, it's hard to find the feeds that do exist. Second, as far as I'm aware, the feeds I want don't exist. I would be hesitant to base a decision only on the usage numbers. If people don't know that the current feeds exist or the right feeds don't exist, of course the usage will be low. | |
| Oct 17, 2016 at 17:48 | comment | added | user50049 | Going to dig up numbers on how often feeds are used. I know they plummeted when Google killed reader, but if it's steady and not tiny, it's definitely worth looking at this, even perhaps expanding it. | |
| Oct 17, 2016 at 17:27 | history | edited | Thomas Owens | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 783 characters in body
|
| Oct 17, 2016 at 17:20 | history | answered | Thomas Owens | CC BY-SA 3.0 |