12

The following inaccurate/outdated text is still presented on the /help/privileges/vote-up pages (on the Stack Exchange sites that have unpinned accepted answers).

1Except for the accepted answer, which appears first unless it was written by the asker.

Example sites:

Please remove this obsolete exception where appropriate to do so.

...unless you are waiting to update the help pages after you are finished tooling the new sorting algorithm that factors in time spent hovering over an answer, age of an answer, recency of votes, and the number of times content has been copied from the answer.

16
  • 2
    The exception is not entirely obsolete: not all sites on the network decided to unpin the accepted answer from the top: meta.stackexchange.com/a/369914/786798. Code Review, for example, decided in favor of keeping the pin. Thus, the guidance needs to be updated selectively, not in bulk (definitely on SO, though) Commented Jan 23, 2022 at 12:03
  • 1
    @Oleg ah yes, that rings a bell. Thanks for clearing that up. Commented Jan 23, 2022 at 12:04
  • 1
    NP - btw, as you are a mod on Joomla, you might want to start the discussion about unpinning as I do not see the site in the list. AFAIK, the default for the undecided is to keep the pin Commented Jan 23, 2022 at 12:06
  • 1
    I did engage with the unpinning discussion on CR, but I assumed the default action (everwhere) was to unpin. I'm happy for the pinning to go away. Nobody for HQ ever asked me what I thought was best for my community. If I posted on my meta, there would be 1 page view on my question ...total ghost town. Commented Jan 23, 2022 at 12:09
  • 1
    They initially were to make the unpin the default behavior, yes, but after some sites expressed discontent, they went for keeping the pin by default: "we decided to move forward with the status quo and not to change the default behaviour on existing sites". So the feature is opt-in in the end. Methinks it won't hurt if you tried posting - this question might help gather at least some views/votes.. Commented Jan 23, 2022 at 12:24
  • 3
    Both this site and SU follow the old pin - so it might be worth re-scoping this to the sites that went to the new system? Commented Jan 23, 2022 at 12:33
  • 1
    It is unfortunate that I cannot use content highlighting on the help page. The specialized anchor syntax of #:~:text= is unconditionally converted to #:%7E:text=. Commented Jan 23, 2022 at 13:20
  • 3
    @mickmackusa Known bug. In the meantime, using HTML <a> links works around that. Commented Jan 23, 2022 at 22:02
  • 2
    @OlegValter: I don't know if privilege description pages can even have site-specific overrides of the text – but even if it were possible to do so, I don't think we'd want to do so in this case. As such, this text needs to be rewritten to be appropriately site-agnostic (i.e. so it's understandable/accurate regardless of what site you're on). Suggestions are welcome as answers to this question post.
    – V2Blast
    Commented Jan 24, 2022 at 20:04
  • 1
    @V2Blast animuson's comment on a related report suggests that the architecture will have to be modified. Commented Jan 24, 2022 at 20:15
  • @V2Blast I am not sure either - I suppose a site-agnostic version of the network will work just fine too. Might something along the lines of "This applies to only some sites of the Stack Exchange network. See [here](link to the answer with a list of per-site decisions) for an up-to-date list" work? Commented Jan 24, 2022 at 20:18
  • 5
    We're looking into adding a new variable so that we can have the text appear or not depending on if the site setting is set to pin or not pin. This means we don't have to customize each site as we change the site setting, the help center will just do it automatically. That said, we're not sure when this will get picked up but it is on our radar. Thanks for bringing it to our attention!
    – Catija
    Commented May 18, 2022 at 20:32
  • 1
    @Catija Is that architecture only going to get built specifically for this one case, or will it also be able to be generally applied to any case where text should be included/omitted (e.g. my above linked case about the pluralization issue on sites which only require a single vote to close questions)? Commented May 19, 2022 at 0:35
  • 1
    There's no architecture being built, @SonictheSaveUkraine-hog ... this already exists and is how most of the help pages and privilege pages work - for example, references to reputation required for privileges. We're merely creating a new one. I'm honestly not going to ask our devs to do this for the single site that has a pluralization issue... also, I don't know that what you're asking for is possible. The variable is only the number, not the entire phrase.
    – Catija
    Commented May 19, 2022 at 0:46
  • 1
    I assumed that it wasn't formed into an answer because once the solution is implemented, they could add an answer with the announcement. On the other hand, maybe they will have a staff member post a new question with the announcement. Commented May 19, 2022 at 7:05

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .