5

Currently, the Stack Overflow election page is a bit long, and the elections are sorted from oldest to newest. It takes a bit of scrolling to the most recent result - would be nice to have them sorted from newest to oldest by default.

Improve this question
3
  • 4
    Frankly speaking, this could be sorted (pun intended) by adding sorting options like on the main site. I know it is a matter of preference usually, but I personally prefer to read event logs where the most recent event is at the top rather than at the bottom. Unfortunately, since dev time is involved, it would land the FR in a 6-8 territory
    – 0Valt
    Commented Nov 4, 2021 at 12:45
  • 2
    @OlegValter Pardon me, what does "6-8 territory" mean?
    – Wenfang Du
    Commented Nov 4, 2021 at 13:22
  • 2
    Ah, that :) An old meme about SE the company being extremely slow on fulfilling feature requests / bug fixes - I am on mobile right now so can't easily link, but you can look up the "many memes of meta" here
    – 0Valt
    Commented Nov 4, 2021 at 13:47

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
9

I noticed this yesterday looking for the latest results of an election and it felt annoying having to scroll to the bottom.

I guess the optimal solution can be measured:

  1. Do most visits to the election page happen in the month after an election?
  2. Do most visits happen in the remaining year?

I'm usually in favor of having an historical perspective that has you scroll through past results, but in this case I already know who the older mods are. I also think the sorting isn't intuitive because the rest of Q&A is usually sorted from recent to older results.

Improve this answer
1

A good reason to sort things in descending date order is when the most recent thing (email, Stack Exchange question) is likely to be most relevant. In this case, I can't see why the 2021 election is more relevant than the 2011 one. I'm in favour of keeping them in the current chronological order, which is the default for events.

(In case there is an election going on, it's certainly more relevant than the others, but in that case the /election page automatically redirects you to the active election.)

Improve this answer
4
  • 3
    why the 2021 election is more relevant than the 2011 one — such as, because it lists the two newest-elected moderators, whereas no one elected in the first 2011 election serves as a moderator any longer? (Tim Post has a diamond, but he’s staff now.)
    – Emil Jeřábek
    Commented Nov 4, 2021 at 14:27
  • @EmilJeřábek a full list of current moderators can be found here: stackoverflow.com/users?tab=moderators. A typical article on Wikipedia is also written in chronological order; Jeff Atwood is mentioned earlier than Prashanth Chandrasekar here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stack_Overflow#History
    – Glorfindel Mod
    Commented Nov 4, 2021 at 14:28
  • 2
    @EmilJeřábek Tim Post is not staff now. He no longer works for the company, and has been reinstated into his elected moderator position. That's why he's shown on the page as an elected moderator.
    – Cody Gray
    Commented Nov 4, 2021 at 18:06
  • 3
    @CodyGray Sorry, you're right, I forgot about that. But anyway, my point is the general trend that the further back in the history of the elections you look, the more likely it is that the given moderators have resigned (or became inactive) in the meantime. Thus, more recent elections are more relevant.
    – Emil Jeřábek
    Commented Nov 4, 2021 at 19:16

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .