-8
$\begingroup$

Many old users amassed their reps through answering questions which usually went EOQS (evidence: see the bans of many users post EOQS). And since the hard implementation of EOQS, it is becoming more and more difficult to amass reputation as there are effectively fewer questions to answer, and also, questions to ask.

So, suppose a new user (post EOQS) wants to actively participate for the maintenance of the site after browsing for long, then they may not be able to because there are no longer the avenues which existed previously for gaining rep.

I see the solution to this to reduce the rep requirements for gaining privileges. So, could this be done?


The issue which sticks out most for me as it stands is that the people with highest amount of privilege at the moment gained that by doing things very much against the new EOQs policy pre EOQs. And, after exploiting the system wish to keep their position as some reputation oligarchs.

For the sake of fair game, the reputation threshhold for privileges should be reduced since as said before, it's much more difficult for a person to gain a considerable amount of reputation now than before.

In the short term, the issues I have raised can be written off but with progression of time, the concentration of 'power' among these old users will make it very difficult for the site to evolve further, and hence, lead to stagnation.


To be clear, I'm not asking to take rep away from high rep users, or, give rep for free to newer users.

All I am asking is the policy should be changed that newer users are allowed to get more of a say on the site so there are newer ideas on meta, and hence, on the direction of site to prevent an echochamber situation.

$\endgroup$
27
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ The rep thresholds for privileges are pretty standard across most SE sites. $\endgroup$
    – amWhy
    Feb 22 at 16:36
  • 8
    $\begingroup$ You blame policy shifts; I blame saturation. It is easier to earn upvotes on a smaller, less active site because every post you write will remain on the front page longer. The number of upvotes is highly correlated to the number of views, and more questions per unit time correlates to fewer views. $\endgroup$
    – Xander Henderson Mod
    Feb 22 at 17:10
  • 10
    $\begingroup$ It is also worth repeating, for the umpteenth time, that EoQS is not a change in policy. EoQS is about enforcing policy which has existed for years. People flouted that policy because there was no consequence for doing so. $\endgroup$
    – Xander Henderson Mod
    Feb 22 at 17:11
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Technically speaking, make an uncommonly enforced policy into a commonly enforced policy is by definition a policy shift if I am not wrong $\endgroup$ Feb 22 at 17:14
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ Again, the policy has existed for years. Prior to EoQS, it was felt that the best way to enforce that policy was by closing and deleting poor questions. The problem is that this method of enforcement did nothing to stop people from asking terrible questions, because most askers just want an answer, and don't care about the overall health of the site or local policy---they are not invested in the community. The goal of EoQS is to put some of the burden of enforcement on the users who enable low-quality questions. The policy is the same. The procedure is different. $\endgroup$
    – Xander Henderson Mod
    Feb 22 at 17:22
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ Also, again, you haven't addressed my original point: I don't think that EoQS is the problem. People were complaining about how hard it was for newbie users to gain XP when I was a newbie user four and a half years ago. The problem is not EoQS. It is saturation. $\endgroup$
    – Xander Henderson Mod
    Feb 22 at 17:23
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ You can also earn reputation by asking good Questions (and the points for an upvote on Questions are now at parity with the points on Answers). $\endgroup$
    – hardmath
    Feb 22 at 17:41
  • 8
    $\begingroup$ I would like to see data that would support – or, debunk – the assertion that it's harder for today's new users to gain privileges than it was for their predecessors. Like, how many users first reached, say, 3,000 points in 2021 versus in, say, 2015. That sort of thing. $\endgroup$ Feb 22 at 21:31
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ If your primary focus is review queues then reputation is no big deal. Just use CURED chatroom and a lot of users will help to review the questions you refer. I remember a case where a CURED user posted links to delete questions on regular basis. And they didn't have the privilege to cast delete votes. If one is serious and sincere in doing any productive activity here, then low rep is not a hindrance at all. $\endgroup$
    – Paramanand Singh Mod
    Feb 23 at 1:51
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ Let me back up what @Xander is saying. In the first couple of years of this site's operation I used to read each and every single question and I was a strong supporter of the Pete L. Clark doctrine of "Vote early, vote often". The problems that led to the EoQS became apparent later and forced a rethinking of the site, since what works for a small site does not necessarily work for a large one. In fact, it often doesn't. $\endgroup$
    – Asaf Karagila Mod
    Feb 23 at 5:01
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ I, at 678 rep can easily edit questions, answer questions, answer questions, add comments, flag questions, chat in chatrooms etc. I don't need 1k rep. You have to realise that there will be people like me who don't care about reputation nor about reaching any thresholds. $\endgroup$
    – bumblebee
    Feb 23 at 10:13
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Take this user for example. Having joined only 2 months ago, they have amassed more than 3k rep. $\endgroup$
    – bumblebee
    Feb 23 at 10:17
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I can name countless other users who have been on the site for years but are only within the hundreds in terms of reputation. This is due to low quality questions asked and very few answers provided. It is not easy to ask good questions, but it is even easier to ask a string of bad questions. By bad I mean: A lack of context, poor formatting, rude language, the question itself has multiple duplicates etc. $\endgroup$
    – bumblebee
    Feb 23 at 10:23
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Unfortunately, it seems that many users try to improve the quality of this community, while being unaware of how it really operates; they presume that since it is a community of math people, rational (logical) actions must be taken, but this is absolutely wrong. Here people act according to their ability, not to established norms; for example, this is how many people vote here, ... $\endgroup$
    – Later
    Feb 23 at 15:04
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ ... or this meta post was closed as off-topic while it is obviously on-topic. So, caring about such things (gaining rep, voting, closing, deleting, ...) is just a waste of time and anergy; such things are just a game for some people. By the way, MSE, and more generally SE, will not become an oligarchy because it already is. $\endgroup$
    – Later
    Feb 23 at 15:05

1 Answer 1

-2
$\begingroup$

So, suppose a new user (post EOQS) wants to actively participate for the maintenance of the site after browsing for long, then they may not be able to because there are no longer the avenues which existed previously for gaining rep.

In my initial posting, I was criticized that this statement I posted was without evidence. A simple evidence I found is to sort the MSE questions by votes, and see what kind of posts they are and also the time. I feel they are self explanatory.

Posts:

  1. How long will it take Marie to saw another board into 3 pieces?

  2. Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain

  3. What are imaginary numbers?

  4. Different methods to compute $\sum\limits_{k=1}^\infty \frac{1}{k^2}$ (Basel problem)

  5. V.I. Arnold says Russian students can't solve this problem, but American students can -- why?

More:

Here is the search query for sorting questions by votes.

$\endgroup$
2

You must log in to answer this question.

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