Could we have some non-public, pre-vote way to give ourselves a better overview? For example, on proposals with 50+ questions we could use this to better distribute those few real votes currently given.

  • 3
    I totally agree that something better is needed. I'm following the photography proposal which currently has 98 questions. The process of filtering all of those to figure out where to place my 5 votes would take up far too much time, so it remains un-voted by me. Jun 7 '10 at 15:53
  • see also meta.stackexchange.com/questions/54988/… Jul 3 '10 at 14:36

You can always undo your votes. I've been doing that liberally, so my current votes always represent the best of what I've seen so far.

Open two pages, one of which is sorted by "my votes". Directly compare any question you're considering with one of your current votes, you can then switch it immediately if you like it better. Refresh the "my votes" tab and go back to reading questions.

  • so do I, but it's a bit much to ask for someone joining in at a stage where maybe 200 questions are available. even with 50 questions assuming a 40-40-20 on/off/meh distribution this means a worst case of un-clicking 30 votes which is rather tiring. especially if you follow more than one proposal Jun 7 '10 at 15:43
  • @Tobias: I agree that too many questions is a bad thing, but for a proposal with 100 followers (which isn't unreasonable for some), 200 questions is inevitable. I like the idea of 2d voting (on/off + up/down) suggested elsewhere.
    – Gnome
    Jun 7 '10 at 15:49
  • @cat I can't find that suggestion, but basically mine is the same, with the small difference of keeping the up/down-vote secret. I'm not sure which one would be better, but 2d voting in general would help in the definition-phase Jun 7 '10 at 15:55
  • 1
    ok, found it: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/52501/… Jun 7 '10 at 15:56
  • There are five proposals currently over 100 followers, none of which have as many as 200 questions. There is an outlier, Astronomy, which has over 200 questions, although it has only 49 followers. The median ration, I guess, is about 1.5 qns per follower. Jun 7 '10 at 18:44
  • @Charles: If posting example questions is the usual way to get rep on Area 51 (which it still appears to be, maybe that will change once some of them move past the definition phase), then a large number of examples appears to be inevitable. Even 100 questions is unwieldy to consider all at once, and several have that many, I just picked 200 as preposterous.
    – Gnome
    Jun 7 '10 at 19:22
  • @TC: I agree with the point, I just thought it would be good to get the figures a little more in line with what now is happening. In the long run, your estimate might well turn out to be right. Jun 8 '10 at 7:30
  • 1
    That sounds nice but it is insulting and ridiculous to assume people have all this free time to waste redistributing a "scarce resource" like an area 51 vote. I have better things to do with my time. The whole point of SO was to let the community bubble up good content to the top.
    – tim
    Jun 8 '10 at 19:02
  • @tim: If you have the time to view the example questions, then it takes barely more to vote on them (at least that's what I've found); viewing your current votes alongside new examples is especially expedient. As always, don't spend more time than you want to.
    – Gnome
    Jun 8 '10 at 19:10
  • @The Cat - so you agree that the workload should be on the user rather than on the software and the owners of the site? I say let SO's engine do what it was meant to do - bubble up the good content.
    – tim
    Jun 8 '10 at 19:47

You must log in to answer this question.

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