Problems? Is your data what you think it is? | |
PerlMonks |
comment on |
( [id://3333]=superdoc: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
Actually, my idea of an off-topic "section" would be one that has no section display page (so no approval process, no front-paging, no way to post new nodes directly to it). It would be a place to move off-topic threads but there would be no section page for browsing off-topic threads. The point of moving threads there would be to make them less visible in order to discourage the starting of off-topic threads and as an alternative to reaping. Probably Super Search would know how to search off-topic threads but wouldn't search them by default. The fact that it would be implemented as a section is somewhat irrelevant, being mostly just an implementation detail. The point would be having a way to consider a node as being off-topic and then enough votes for 'off-topic' w/o conflicting votes would trigger the thread being made off-topic and thus "move it out of the way". I feel a need for some way to address the "no Perl content" type of considerations that are often way too common for my tastes. But I'm not convinced even this idea would be an improvement, because in some ways it would encourage people to consider nodes as off-topic and experience shows that lots of people can read a node with a question about Perl and not realize that Perl is involved and will even then consider the node for reaping. I fear the only decent solution will be a way for people to give feed-back on considerations such that the community can designate a consideration abusive or inappropriate and the considerer and those who voted for it lose some moderation power. Such would be complex. It would also not address the "no value" considerations. For me, there is a huge distinction between 1) "I see no value in that node", 2) "I'm very sure noone would see any value in that node", and 3) "That node does damage of some sort". And I don't think you should reap a node unless it is beyond (3). For me, it is a matter of whether the amount of damage is enough to warrant reaping the node. So I'm frankly baffled when I see people considering nodes for (1). - tyeIn reply to Re: Off topic section? (sort of)
by tye
|
|