Timeline for Concern about lesser attention towards relatively advanced questions
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
19 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:22 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://math.stackexchange.com/ with https://math.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Dec 9, 2013 at 20:19 | comment | added | Ellie K | @JyrkiLahtonen That's awful but this may be even worse. OP answered his own question. Maybe you should have migrated it over to StackOverflow when there was still time.... | |
| Dec 8, 2013 at 20:38 | comment | added | azimut | @JyrkiLahtonen: Ouch! | |
| Dec 8, 2013 at 20:21 | comment | added | Jyrki Lahtonen | As opposed to making it to the hot list frequented by bored SOers?. Don't click if you want to hang on to the illusion that this site fairly values sage and useful answers. | |
| Dec 8, 2013 at 16:16 | comment | added | azimut | @JyrkiLahtonen: So this is again evidence of: Early and pregnant answer to an easy question, a bit advertising on meta -> quick reputation :-) | |
| Dec 8, 2013 at 14:56 | comment | added | Jyrki Lahtonen | Now that answer has seven (LOL). The length of the answer plays a huge role. Anything longer than three lines apparently triggers some people's TL;DR; gland. | |
| Dec 8, 2013 at 14:08 | comment | added | azimut | @JyrkiLahtonen: Many thanks for your comments! Your comment on "blockbuster" questions is certainly true, but I think the problem already starts on lower levels of upvotes (in each single case to a lesser extend, but much more frequently) I've added a few lines to my answer to explain how I came to that opinion. | |
| Dec 8, 2013 at 14:03 | comment | added | azimut | @BrianM.Scott: That's certainly true. But it doesn't contradict my impression that the expected reptuation for for answering cheap questions is much higher. I've added a few lines to my answer on this. | |
| Dec 8, 2013 at 13:31 | history | edited | azimut | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 188 characters in body
|
| Dec 8, 2013 at 13:17 | history | edited | azimut | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1394 characters in body
|
| Dec 8, 2013 at 8:28 | comment | added | Jyrki Lahtonen | The thing is that the blockbuster questions where answers gain dozens if not hundreds of upvotes occur only at the level of calculus/elementaryNT and below. And the vote counts on those make me shake my head in disbelief. But those are rare, and it is easy to overestimate their significance due to their high visibility. Somebody suggested that those upvotes come from bored SO-users, who click the "hot list". Bored SO-users cannot appreciate the finer points of math, but seem to be able to appreciate somebody cranking out a tough integral or calculate the remainder of a 6000 digit integer. | |
| Dec 8, 2013 at 8:16 | comment | added | Jyrki Lahtonen | Azimut, you have valid points. I used to think a lot more like you, but then I did some digging. Largely because I felt that calculus is the worst offending tag in this respect. But, if you take a look at @Brian's profile (as an example), you will see that he has 800 zero score answers (many of them accepted though). He earns an average of 3 upvotes per calculus or topology answer, less than that in combinatorics. I know, I know. For Brian anything less than 300 points is a bad day, and for me anything above 80 is a great day. But the difference comes from somewhere else :-) | |
| Dec 7, 2013 at 20:35 | history | edited | azimut | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 9 characters in body
|
| Dec 7, 2013 at 19:51 | history | edited | azimut | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 97 characters in body
|
| Dec 7, 2013 at 19:41 | comment | added | Brian M. Scott | The actual reputation gain from ‘cheap’ questions is often $15$, because the OP hasn’t enough reputation to upvote, or even $0$, because the OP doesn’t know about accepting. | |
| Dec 7, 2013 at 19:35 | history | edited | azimut | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 79 characters in body
|
| Dec 7, 2013 at 14:00 | comment | added | user90041 | I have to agree that you have very valid points, and that the factor you mention may be playing a major role (in addition to the factor that 'advanced questions are buried in a large pool'). What you suggest could be implemented by attaching weights to tags and calculate the reputation for answering on a question taking into account the weights associated to the tags of the question ? I have not thought much about it though.And would having guidelines about 'Which questions/answers should be voted up' help ? | |
| Dec 7, 2013 at 13:00 | history | edited | azimut | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited body
|
| Dec 7, 2013 at 11:32 | history | answered | azimut | CC BY-SA 3.0 |