Timeline for How could we improve our planned post notice improvements?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
19 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 29, 2019 at 14:48 | comment | added | Journeyman Geek Mod | Well, from the user's point of view, salvaging the salvageable is a better choice. A new question might be 'less work' for all, but it isn't going to help if its the exact same question with no improvements. In a longer term view new questions also help contribute to a question ban potentially. | |
| Aug 22, 2019 at 3:16 | comment | added | Meta Andrew T. | @GeorgeStocker sorry George, but your concern seems off-topic for this discussion. This is only about the UI/UX of the post banner. While the feedback on here might help improving the UX, this question doesn't touch behavioural change (e.g. voting to delete "on-hold" questions with current restriction). Your concern seems affecting a much bigger changes/policies than this current topic, maybe consider opening a separate post to discuss this, either on MSE or MSO? | |
| Aug 21, 2019 at 22:21 | comment | added | gnat | @GeorgeStocker now you seem to be blaming trusted users (many of which probably don't have any deleted posts at all) in not knowing about UX difficulties in using features provided for new users (whose experience is also far in the past for trusted users) - do I understand that correctly? Wonder if you would prefer to block the trusted users from their moderation privileges until the UX is made totally perfect for new users (that is, potentially indefinitely) | |
| Aug 21, 2019 at 22:11 | comment | added | George Stocker | @gnat credit or blame where it’s due. UX can always be better but the humans deleting things that shouldn’t be deleted is a problem, yes. | |
| Aug 21, 2019 at 22:00 | comment | added | gnat | well. I am confused. From what you say now it looks like the system UX is in the need to change to better guide inexperienced users about features that are there to help them improve. But instead you seem to be blaming trusted users for casting delete votes, why? @GeorgeStocker | |
| Aug 21, 2019 at 21:24 | comment | added | George Stocker | Not to mention the experience of having your question put on hold and then deleted within hours of posting it. | |
| Aug 21, 2019 at 21:19 | comment | added | George Stocker | @gnat somehow I feel like there’s a big difference between an experienced used navigating the system to find their deleted material and a new user. | |
| Aug 21, 2019 at 19:35 | comment | added | gnat | ^^^^ I mention this because I have a bunch of various deleted posts at sites where I am under 10K rep and per my experience a question that has been deleted by 20k users looked like most comfortable for the case if I wanted to edit and undelete it - I didn't notice any obstacles at all (as opposed to posts deleted by myself, moderators and roomba scripts which all had some annoying quirks) | |
| Aug 21, 2019 at 18:06 | comment | added | gnat | @GeorgeStocker you seem to be omitting known system features that are currently used to control impact of immediate delete votes - such as requirements for a solid negative score of the question and no less than 3 votes of 20K users and features allowing askers to easily discover, edit and flag their deleted questions etc. Wonder if you do this intentionally or because you think these measures are unimportant or maybe for some other reason | |
| Aug 21, 2019 at 16:42 | comment | added | tpg2114 | Was the "Closed." in the mock-up intended to signal that "On hold" was going away? Or would the real post say "On Hold." until it went through enough time and it moved to "Closed."? | |
| Aug 21, 2019 at 16:29 | comment | added | Journeyman Geek Mod | @GeorgeStocker that seems... like unintended behaviour. And that in some cases we ought to be able to salvage a post might be something worth communicating. | |
| Aug 21, 2019 at 16:28 | comment | added | George Stocker | @RobertCartaino my point is that while we say in 'name' that on-hold is different than closure; in practice it's treated the same by site users. | |
| Aug 21, 2019 at 16:26 | comment | added | Robert Cartaino | @GeorgeStocker Overzealous deletion feels outside the scope of this particular discussion. If anything, a less final closure notice would seem to at least guide users away from that. | |
| Aug 21, 2019 at 16:09 | comment | added | George Stocker | @RobertCartaino It being temporary is great; but we have users on Stack Overflow that will vote to delete an on-hold question immediately. If it's temporary, the question should stick around until it's actually closed. | |
| Aug 21, 2019 at 16:05 | history | edited | TylerH | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Split out confusing contraction
|
| Aug 21, 2019 at 15:48 | comment | added | Rob | I wrote a similar answer/complaint on the blog, it's waiting to be approved. | |
| Aug 21, 2019 at 15:39 | comment | added | Robert Cartaino | "On hold" is not only gentler, but also meant to convey that this is (hopefully) a temporary state that can be remedied (taken "off hold") if the prescribed action is taken. "Closed" had a much more final judgement to it. I hope we can restore that expression of helpfulness and optimism back into the closure process. | |
| Aug 21, 2019 at 15:09 | history | edited | Journeyman GeekMod | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 46 characters in body
|
| Aug 21, 2019 at 14:59 | history | answered | Journeyman GeekMod | CC BY-SA 4.0 |