Podcast #128: We chat with Kent C Dodds about why he loves React and discuss what life was like in the dark days before Git. Listen now.
19

My own view is that this question should not have been made CW. It is a legitimate question, which has more or less a definitive answer (namely that such an expression is indeterminate without more information/precision as to what is meant). Edit by J.M.: considering the number of upvotes on this post, can there be a final decision by the mods on whether ...


13

Some folks make posts through community wiki to deny reputation for the post. One example may be to post something that is too long for a comment, but not exactly an answer to the question. Another example might be when a question has been answered already in the comments, and someone reposts the comment as an answer to take the question off of the ...


13

As a frequent flagger for CW, I think it is my duty to respond here. The C/W mode on questions is something that for some reason the administrators of the SE networks somewhat try to push down. I am not sure why, but it is possible that SO is too big to have these things. On the other hand, math.SE as originally somewhat a derived site (a core base of ...


11

I wouldn't worry about the reputation earned this way. How many upvotes would "Yes, that's right" get anyway? And how many years of study did it take you to be able to say "Yes, that's right"? Besides, you're answering the question that was asked (which you have no control over). That being said, if the correct answer is simply "Yes, that's right", why ...


10

Personally, I do not see any reason to turn any question into CW. Why would we want to not recognize the effort put by a user in coming up with an answer?! The idea that CW applies when the question «does not have one answer» has always seemed incomprehensible to me. That a question may have many possible answers somehow makes each answer less valuable?


9

As I see it, the major difference is that one question was almost immediately flagged by some user to be made CW, and the other wasn't similarly flagged for 1 day, 11 hours, 14 minutes and 49 seconds (or thereabouts) after being posted. I will note that the time between the flag and conversion to CW isn't much different between the two questions. This is ...


9

This is a known issue, and a won't fix (or rather by-design) I believe. See here: Old usernames stick to Community Wiki posts Basically, they store the name which was, at that moment in time.


9

I am pretty certain that any edit to any question or answer (regardless of whether it is Community Wiki or not) will bump the associated question. The MSE bumping faq gives no indication that Community Wiki posts are treated any differently. (And because the requirements to edit (not just suggest edits to) Community Wiki posts is significantly lower than ...


9

How does Community Wiki mode affect bounties? Bounties are not affected by community wiki mode. When you award a bounty to an answer marked community wiki, the reputation bonus will be awarded to the user who posted the original revision of the answer. How does the bounty system work?


9

You were not "robbed" of any reputation. More than just that, reputation is not the main point of the site. If you only ask questions on the site so you can earn points, might as well not ask questions at all. Your question about how to pronounce 5/2 is ultimately subjective. Moreover, people are not going to vote one answer over the other because it's more ...


8

It appears that Qiaochu converted it to CW after a user flagged it with the following comment: I'd suggest CW ("Sometimes you have content which is valuable and on-topic, but is perhaps a bit too popular." — it's popular question, but does it show enough "research effort" to give +40 score? and the same question about most popular answer) The quoted ...


8

On MSE, it is recommended to accept answers (even your own), in order to mark questions as "solved" (and close them). When you accept your own answer, you don't get the usual 15 reputation points. You get up- or down-votes, though. Currently, your own answer is the one with the recent activity; if I choose to rank answers according to activity (it's a tab ...


7

I assume you mean this answer. Note that due to a significant number of edits, it was automatically made Community Wiki, and upvotes and accepts on Community Wiki answers confer no reputation.


7

The old auto-conversion to CW was replaced by an automatic flag. So the moderators are notified if a user misuses the edit ability in this way. I think individual actions by moderators are preferable to a dumb automatic mechanism. There are valid reasons to edit more than 10 times and those should not be punished.


7

Currently, there are only two ways an answer can become community wiki: the author can do this by checking the community wiki box that appears below the post-editor box. a moderator (or some other diamond-encrusted -entrusted user) can manually convert it to community wiki at any point. (This has been the case since all automatic CW-conversions were ...


7

The main idea behind a Community Wiki (CW) post is that it has many different contributors. As a consequence a CW post: has a lower point threshold for editing (100 versus 2000). does not give its owner reputation from votes. There are some other minor differences, for details you can see What are "Community Wiki" posts? The default is that ...


6

Ten, if you are the owner. See this post on the SO meta.


6

To understand the purpose of community wiki, think of posts in terms of ownership. When you post a question or an answer, you are the owner of that question or answer. After all, it came from your head, it was your idea, and it is knowledge that you felt that it would be useful to contribute to the site. That said, community wiki posts do not belong to one ...


6

Marking an answer as CW is mainly intended to lower the reputation barrier for others to edit that answer. I don't think that it is your intention that every newbee can change your "Yes, your solution is correct" to a "No, better luck next time". Nor do I think you expect others to greatly elaborate ("Yes, as the following introduction to foobar theory shows:...


6

Here's a post from Meta Stack Overflow that addresses it: Is there a way to remove community wiki status? Here's the relevant snippet from the answer to that question (by Jeff Atwood) Yes—community moderators, at their discretion, can now remove community wiki status from particular posts. (blurb explaining when posts are automatically made ...


6

Your question was made CW because it is a request for a list of sources and thus is not definitively answerable. Making a post CW is a judgement on the content and format of a question, not a disincentive to answer it. If people are interested in your question, they will answer it whether it is worth reputation or not.


5

There are several answers to this question, there is the original purpose of the community wiki feature, there is the common "misuse" for its reputation denial side effect, and the purpose and utility depend heavily on whether it is a question or an answer that is made CW. Community wiki was created when the feature of suggested edits did not exist yet. ...


5

The question itself was made community wiki. Read more about community wiki posts here. Status.... by design.


5

In the search box write wiki:1 for CW posts and wiki:0 for non-CW posts. Of course this can be in addition to other search parameters (tag, user, etc.)


5

No. But in this case you can flag for moderator attention. I've cleared the CW status on the post. See also this Meta question and this answer.


5

I think your CW approach is especially attractive in the second linked Question, "What is the determinant of infinity?", where you must explain to the OP that the problem is not sensible. The first Question, closed (on-hold) for lack of context, is sensible and can be answered well despite the OP's failure to show work or other evidence of thinking about ...


4

Sorry, I dropped the ball on that one. I dismissed the flag and had the CW dialog open and ready, but got distracted and completely forgot about that tab in my browser until now. The question is now CW'ified :)


4

(1) The rep issue, as Asaf has described in detail. In particular, I'd rather not award rep for posting meta-mathematical questions. (2) The converse of (1):I'd be much more willing to downvote bad advice that was given in good faith, ie. book or self-study recommendations that are not appropriate to the OP's stated background. For mathematical questions, I ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible