Timeline for What is the SE team's response to community feedback on the new Area 51 voting system?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 8, 2010 at 20:01 | comment | added | tim | @Robert I would expect that one metric you'd care about is activity and interest. Computers can measure numbers easily. I think they can do, like 1000 additions per second now or something! Limiting does nothing to help with analysis... It just makes the net numbers smaller. I guess what I am saying is that at best, the new system is equivalent to the old one (if you had not had the lack of randomness bug) | |
| Jun 8, 2010 at 19:57 | comment | added | Massimo | @Robert: I disagree; see my other answer for details. Even the most carefully crafted site proposal will need its followers to clearly define site boundaries, and that's what on-topic/off-topic votes really are about. | |
| Jun 8, 2010 at 19:53 | comment | added | Robert Cartaino | @tim - You are right in one respect: It is tedious... but only because you are working on cherry-picked proposals that are, frankly, predestined to become sites no matter what happens here. They are great ideas, so why bother with all this claptrap? Because it helps us work out the process of judging whether the 99.5% of sites that come hereafter are workable. We're just not qualified to judge them all the way your post is implying we should. | |
| Jun 8, 2010 at 19:44 | comment | added | tim | @David, That's fine, but those same questions would have been there under the old rules as well. | |
| Jun 8, 2010 at 19:28 | comment | added | David Fullerton | I know I've definitely looked at some proposals thinking "Ehh, I don't know..." and then seen some sample questions that got me really interested | |
| Jun 8, 2010 at 19:26 | comment | added | Massimo | Astrology... now that's a interesting proposal... | |
| Jun 8, 2010 at 19:19 | history | answered | tim | CC BY-SA 2.5 |