Stack Overflow is an amazing search tool for answering and asking important programming questions on all languages. Sometimes questions may get over looked after making important changes to the errors they had made which may have gotten them down-votes or closed. Questions that are closed have a chance to be reevaluated by the website’s bots and monitors.

Should there be a website bot system to recognize questions that have undergone major changes, or might there be a better way to Incentivize those who correct their mistakes?

closed as off-topic by Sonic the Anonymous Hedgehog, Nicol Bolas, Werner, Nathan Tuggy, michaelb958 Oct 18 '18 at 5:16

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

  • "This question does not appear to seek input and discussion from the community. If you have encountered a problem on one of our sites, please describe it in detail. See also: What is "meta"? How does it work?" – Sonic the Anonymous Hedgehog, Nicol Bolas, Nathan Tuggy, michaelb958
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 9
    I downvoted this because it seems like a rant and I don't fully understand what kind of "redemption" you're expecting. Also, this should be on Stack Overflow meta if you aren't concerned about how relevant this is for the rest of the network. I didn't want to have to characterize this as a rant, but I guess if you asked me to explain my downvote I might as well speak up. – user392547 Oct 18 '18 at 4:32
  • @Chair that's fair, i definitively show my thoughts on it in the wording, but my point is people that down-vote posts never return when a post is changed and posts with -# don't get a chance for redemption. – john smith Oct 18 '18 at 4:35
  • 1
    The issue of people downvoting without commenting and never returning to undo their votes after the question has been edited has received plenty of discussion (and linked posts). – user392547 Oct 18 '18 at 4:40
  • 5
    "Might it be more reasonable to hold Super users(users with thousands of point) to a higher standard then most users?" It's always easier to foist the work off on someone else than to take it on yourself. Ask bad questions? It's not your responsibility to ask good questions; it's the responsibility of others to tell you why they're bad and help you fix them. – Nicol Bolas Oct 18 '18 at 4:50
  • 4
    @johnsmith: "i also think we can agree that super users should (not have to) help fixing questions to make the website better" No, we don't agree. I believe that each user has a responsibility to contribute positively to the site. That means asking good questions. Or downvoting bad questions. There is no moral imperative to make someone else's question better. That doesn't preclude someone from doing so, but it also doesn't mean they are wrong if they have better things to do with their time. – Nicol Bolas Oct 18 '18 at 5:06
  • Do you have an example case of where users had no room for redemption? I'm asking because the amount of users who a) post bad quality or off-topic questions, b) never react to comments asking for clarification or providing help in getting the question better or c) resorting to rants when their post is downvoted is staggering. Users have all the time in the world to work on their post (including reading help center, doing research and some basic debugging), and feedback is usually given very fast. They can improve questions when they are postend and even when they are put on hold. – Modus Tollens Oct 18 '18 at 5:20
  • 2
    So I am not sure why you believe the resonsibility of redeeming questions could lie anywhere else than with the original poster. – Modus Tollens Oct 18 '18 at 5:23
  • I see where you're coming from, but i just don't see the ability for new users to be able to fix their mistakes and re earn any points – john smith Oct 18 '18 at 5:26
  • instead of a penalty for your votes what about a notification for changes on posts that weren't received well the first time? – john smith Oct 18 '18 at 5:27
  • not where the users has to deal with it all the time but somewhere which if a user wants to use it they could. – john smith Oct 18 '18 at 5:28
  • 2
    @johnsmith I see the ability for new users to be able to fix their problems and re-earn lost points. I usually stick around questions for a bit and see it a poster reacts to comments. Helped quite some users who did cooperate and walked away with improved questions. But I'll walk away without coming back when there is no reaction, as I can't keep track of every bad post I voted upon. The responsibility is on them. – Modus Tollens Oct 18 '18 at 5:32
  • 1
    @johnsmith Nooo... Imagine you're doing all that is expected of good user moderatos, and get constantly pinged as a result! That would be horrible. The point is, a person downvoting is not the only one to see it. If a question is improved, other users will see it, too, and vote on it. Those who want to keep track can do so by saving bookmarks in their browser. – Modus Tollens Oct 18 '18 at 5:41
  • 6
    I've casted over ten thousand down votes. Do you really expect me to keep track of all those posts and/or be notified when such post is edited? I rather stay sane. – rene Oct 18 '18 at 5:45
  • 1
    'fallen from it’s original goal to provide help to anyone on programming questions from knowledgeable programmers' no. SO is not pay-per-view. Anyone can search it. – Martin James Oct 18 '18 at 9:37
  • 5
    No, we can't; that's not what edits are for. Edits are only meant to clarify, and fix spelling and grammar. Changing intent is entirely outside the purview. Beyond that, it may behoove you to learn what SE is all about, as it seems like you have an incorrect understanding, which is leading to the disconnected expectations you're experiencing. – fbueckert Oct 18 '18 at 13:13

Voting exists to sort through content. It is a quick way of saying whether some content is good or bad. As such, voting based on the way the question currently exists is perfectly fine. Users can't know what will happen in the future, so they judge it based on what they see.

You can change the question, and maybe users will change their votes based on that. But maybe not. Users are not obligated to frequently check in with bad questions to see if they became good.

Then again, you also could have posted the question well the first time, and then your question wouldn't have attracted downvotes to begin with. After all, you had all the time in the world to post that question.

Remember: you are the one who did the wrong thing by posting poor quality content.

  • i'm not really looking for obligation from down-voters, but shouldn't there be a responsibility from super users with thousands of points to make the site better by revisiting questions – john smith Oct 18 '18 at 4:41
  • 10
    @johnsmith: Shouldn't there be a responsibility from users asking questions to ask good questions? Why should "super users with thousands of points" have to expend effort on questions that weren't asked well at first, when they could be expending effort on questions that were well-asked the first time? Don't those people deserve to get good answers? People's time is finite. – Nicol Bolas Oct 18 '18 at 4:47
  • I guess you could looking at it either way. Should Super users privileges not come with responsibilities? – john smith Oct 18 '18 at 4:52
  • 9
    @johnsmith: That only makes sense if those "super users" asked for those privileges. Most of us got them simply for providing good content. Reputation is gratitude for contributing useful content. It would be a very perverse system if "gratitude" came with obligations. Especially if those obligations prevent you from continuing to contribute useful content. – Nicol Bolas Oct 18 '18 at 4:55
  • think of this question you would fall into the "super user" category and you could have down-voted the question and left but you didn't, you debate me about it and the result was the question got better – john smith Oct 18 '18 at 5:01
  • 6
    @johnsmith: No, the question did not get better. Nor is this question of value to people other than yourself. – Nicol Bolas Oct 18 '18 at 5:02
  • you're welcome to edit it if you think that it's a bad question. – john smith Oct 18 '18 at 6:14
  • That wasn't meant to be any type of "trap" it was an actual invitation. – john smith Oct 18 '18 at 9:37
  • 2
    @johnsmith - The invitation to improve this question still exists for you. I can tell you that your question reads like, the responsibility to improve everyone's contributions, should be on the users who already submit quality contributions. Except that is already true in many cases, if you could see the work people with access to the review queue do every single day, you would understand what is already done to improve existing good questions and mold them into gems. – Ramhound Oct 18 '18 at 22:04

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