Thoughts on removing Accepted Answer functionality
-
I think we agree on this subject!
Chris Maunder wrote:
The main discussion point, however, is that 1. Members do not hit "Accept Answer" consistently enough for it to be of reliable value 2. A better answer may be posted after the accepted answer 3. We need a way to identify questions that need some loving. 4. No system is perfect. Let's aim for the 95% of cases.
I think I covered 1 to 3 in my message? 1. I see no need for "Accepted"; it does not work, and even if everyone would use it correctly, it would still offer dubious value. 2. Indeed (marking it accepted only makes it less likely to happen). 3. So that is what a sorting criterion like my "answeredness" could do: offer a way to sort questions, at the reader's discretion, by "lack of good answers", "attention deficit", or whatever you want to call it. :)
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
I only read formatted code with indentation, so please use PRE tags for code snippets.
I'm not participating in frackin' Q&A, so if you want my opinion, ask away in a real forum (or on my profile page).
It shall be done. Thank you, Luc. [Edit] Hang on - I just need to clarify something: 1. We still want to mark a question as having been addressed. We are currently rely on two indicators: An answer (any answer) and the "Accepted" (annointed) answer. We want to simplify this into a single "Acceptable Answer", hence Thiru's original question. Your proposal gives us a good way of sorting anwers. However, we still want a threshold above which a question is to be deemed to have an acceptable answer, regardless of whether the original poster agrees. Peers who understand the topic and vote accordingly have just as much, if not more, ability to regard an answer as "correct" as the person who asked the question (and who, by implication, doesn't know the answer, and can only treat answers as suggestions) So what is "acceptable"? A Gold or above voting 4? 3 Silvers voting 5?
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
-
I don't see how someone else can deduce that an answer is viable or acceptable to someone else's question when they can't possibly know the basis for the question or the context in which it was asked. If the OP doesn't want to mark any of the answers as "accepted", so what? I am not in favor of the new scheme. If it's not already done, award the OP 2 (or even 3) points if he accepts an answer, and let it go at that. While I'm on the topic, why don't we get a rep point for leaving a comment?
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001The "so what" is that those looking to provide answers to questions in need of answers will not have any way of easily filtering out those questions that have no lovin' We're trying to reduce the time someone needs to spend to find things they may be able to help with.
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
-
It shall be done. Thank you, Luc. [Edit] Hang on - I just need to clarify something: 1. We still want to mark a question as having been addressed. We are currently rely on two indicators: An answer (any answer) and the "Accepted" (annointed) answer. We want to simplify this into a single "Acceptable Answer", hence Thiru's original question. Your proposal gives us a good way of sorting anwers. However, we still want a threshold above which a question is to be deemed to have an acceptable answer, regardless of whether the original poster agrees. Peers who understand the topic and vote accordingly have just as much, if not more, ability to regard an answer as "correct" as the person who asked the question (and who, by implication, doesn't know the answer, and can only treat answers as suggestions) So what is "acceptable"? A Gold or above voting 4? 3 Silvers voting 5?
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
Chris Maunder wrote:
It shall be done.
:jig:
Chris Maunder wrote:
We still want to mark a question as having been addressed.
If you insist on having that, I would use the same calculation used for sorting, and apply a threshold value, or better yet two thresholds. Anything below the first is "not answered". Anything above the second is "experts agree", and everything in between is "answers are still being gathered". A color code could represent such state; that makes readers aware of it not being black-and-white. For "experts agree" I would recommend the value that corresponds to: a platinum five plus a platinum four plus two bronze ones. So two experts don't have to agree on a five, and a couple of morons are allowed to down-vote without a net effect. And this might be one of the few formula you keep secret (and of course change when you feel a need to). Now whatever absolute value you impose becomes a risk. Some day all platinum people will be on holiday, and you'll need a lot of silver & gold to jump in. I'm really not convinced we need it. And you will get new questions, such as: how many questions (in %) are not answered? fully answered? how does that compare to other sites? etc etc. There will be no end to it. :)
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
I only read formatted code with indentation, so please use PRE tags for code snippets.
I'm not participating in frackin' Q&A, so if you want my opinion, ask away in a real forum (or on my profile page).
-
Chris Maunder wrote:
It shall be done.
:jig:
Chris Maunder wrote:
We still want to mark a question as having been addressed.
If you insist on having that, I would use the same calculation used for sorting, and apply a threshold value, or better yet two thresholds. Anything below the first is "not answered". Anything above the second is "experts agree", and everything in between is "answers are still being gathered". A color code could represent such state; that makes readers aware of it not being black-and-white. For "experts agree" I would recommend the value that corresponds to: a platinum five plus a platinum four plus two bronze ones. So two experts don't have to agree on a five, and a couple of morons are allowed to down-vote without a net effect. And this might be one of the few formula you keep secret (and of course change when you feel a need to). Now whatever absolute value you impose becomes a risk. Some day all platinum people will be on holiday, and you'll need a lot of silver & gold to jump in. I'm really not convinced we need it. And you will get new questions, such as: how many questions (in %) are not answered? fully answered? how does that compare to other sites? etc etc. There will be no end to it. :)
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
I only read formatted code with indentation, so please use PRE tags for code snippets.
I'm not participating in frackin' Q&A, so if you want my opinion, ask away in a real forum (or on my profile page).
Baby steps first. Let's work on a "acceptable answer" (lower limit) then we can add a "Experts recommend" limit (upper). But yes, I do like that idea.
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
-
The "so what" is that those looking to provide answers to questions in need of answers will not have any way of easily filtering out those questions that have no lovin' We're trying to reduce the time someone needs to spend to find things they may be able to help with.
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
I think it should be left up to the OP to mark it as accepted. How about this for an alternative to letting other people mark an answer as accepted: Have a "Worked For Me" button that anybody can click. This would start a comment so they can optionally leave a remark at the same time. When marked as "Worked For Me", the answer would have a blue check mark indicating that someone other than the original poster found the answer of value. The question itself would have a blue rectangle (in the list of questions) indicating that one of the answers "worked for me" for at least one user that was NOT the OP.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001 -
I'm for it. On the flip side, I've seen authors mark an answer as accepted and them leave a comment saying that they couldn't get that answer to work. Most people have no clue how to deal with this correctly or are just too self-concerned that they don't care to let anyone else know they had their question answered.
You got it.
-
I don't see how someone else can deduce that an answer is viable or acceptable to someone else's question when they can't possibly know the basis for the question or the context in which it was asked. If the OP doesn't want to mark any of the answers as "accepted", so what? I am not in favor of the new scheme. If it's not already done, award the OP 2 (or even 3) points if he accepts an answer, and let it go at that. While I'm on the topic, why don't we get a rep point for leaving a comment?
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001We do have a task to implement reputation for comments.
