Timeline for Ablity to cross section users
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 5, 2010 at 0:29 | comment | added | John Rudy | @Shog9: True, but I see where @James is coming from here. While recent activity is most likely to accurately represent the nominees' current tendencies, one very quickly loses history of comments and editing -- and there is no public, easily-traced history of closure activity. These three things are probably most important to the elections, way moreso than question/answer activity, IMHO. And a cross-section gives the voters more information which is easier for them to parse by being immediately relevant to them. | |
| Feb 4, 2010 at 19:22 | comment | added | Shog9 | @James: just look at what they've done lately. That'll give you a better impression of how they're likely to act anyway, especially compared to (say) reading questions they posted during the SO beta! | |
| Feb 4, 2010 at 19:13 | comment | added | James McMahon | Think of it not as a social tool, but a search tool. | |
| Feb 4, 2010 at 19:09 | comment | added | James McMahon | <strike>Some</strike> All of the candidates have long and expansive histories that can be extremely difficult to parse. | |
| Feb 4, 2010 at 19:07 | history | answered | user27414 | CC BY-SA 2.5 |