Under the principle that a question should stand on its own I am of the opinion that this question should be closed as unclear or off-topic for lack of information for diagnosis so cv-plsstackoverflow.com/questions/23001464/…
@Doorknob Your B's are just as freaky! That is not Helvetica; or if it is, it's been beaten by its angry husband a few times too many and needs to get out of that relationship. Your kerning is a nightmare, too... oh god... I can't look...
^ This question shows up in searches for "non-static static context [java]", "non static static context [java]", but not for "nonstatic static context [java]". Granted the last form is sloppy, but it's still potentially useful. I want to edit that question to allow it to show up for "nonstatic", but I'm not sure how. It also sometimes prevents the question from showing up in "related" links or automatically appearing in the "new questions" window. Any thoughts?
I could just e.g. add "Search keyword: nonstatic" at the bottom, although that seems sloppy.
QtRuby only supports Qt 4 for the time being. Hopefully, it will change soon, but this seems to be the reality at the time of writing this.
another downvote without explanation, yay!
I wonder if someone is doing all this with socks that it does not get revealed by the underlying algorithm. Someone must have some "smart" ways to trick the sanity system around.
Actually, I think making the commenting for downvotes mandatory is not such a bad idea. It does not take much effort, and I do not see any drawback either if it is restricted to reason or comment upvote. Poor comments for getting around the system could cause issues for the authors of those.
lol you have just proven your untrustworthiness by denying it. i'm the one who reported you a few months ago when your voting behavior was unfair to others, and i took a screenshot of your SO profile during its suspension showing the notice by SO that your account was suspended. but you can lie about it if you wish. — Johnson46 mins ago
writing comments like that, and even getting it upvoted, which is completely personal, and not on topic.
three downvotes altogether and all of them are distributed yesterday and today; too much coincidence, I would say.
got all the necessary reputaion in one week, and no more contribution afterwards... and that was obtained right after the creation...
@IPADDRESS No, you don't. Furthermore, it'll probably never happen, because we've got quite enough of a problem with people just mindlessly reviewing already.
@LaszloPapp you do know there is a big chance you will be downvoted to oblivion? Any suggestion regarding mandatory comments to downvotes got it, and there were many in many variations. Just saying, you can try if you want. :)
@IPADDRESS Mainly the warm fuzzy feeling of contributing to the quality of the site. (If you don't get that, you might not be the kind of person reviwing was designed for.)
@IPADDRESS Not really. In fact, the only things that let you gain rep are asking, answering, and editing, which are all 1-rep privileges. After that it's all moderation abilities.
@LaszloPapp So a crap question is posted by a proven help vampire (who is really irked by this point). It really deserves downvotes. Nobody wants to leave the first downvote, because they'll have to be linked to it via that comment, and will subsequently be revenged.
In fact, that makes me realise that the whole idea runs counter to the central principle of "votes are anonymous". Good luck getting the staff on board.
it does not make any sense to me what you are writing.
if you are afraid of helping people to improve posts, Stack Overflow might not be for you.
the whole point of Stack Overflow is to build a quality Q/A site, which inherently implies good posts.
but let us consider that for a bit you are right, and see the alternative consequence:-
* shitload of unreasonable downvotes from pretty much anyone who wants to destroy.
* lots of begging comments for reason
* a lot of motivation to do the same
* lots of comments made discussing it
* lots of moderation actions taking place
* chat discussions, etc.
* frustrated people
* useful members of the community stepping away.
* lots of suspensions (handling the issue - when it is caught at all - rather than preventing)
most of those would be solved by my proposal... I considered -2 for downvote, too, but that would not still be significantly better.
(another unexplained downvote as we speak, it is getting above 20 within 2-3 days)
who is downvoting proposals like that to oblivion, is supporting those consequences.
The only drawback of my proposal - AFAICT -, is crappy downvote reason provided, but since downvotes could be bound to downvote reasons, the crappy downvotes could be reversed, too. I cannot possibly imagine a better solution without being too intrusive at the current moment. If you do not want to take even a click for upvoting a downvote reason comment to improve posts, you are not a useful part of the community IMHO.
Note, this is not the same proposal as making the comment mandatory for every single downvote, and that makes a huge difference. And really, I could not find such a proposal just yet. I think people have too much prejudice such as "yikes, it includes giving at least one downvote reason, what a bad idea to improve posts to get a better site and community".
putting effort into reasonable things rather than unreasonable is better, and I do consider the sad consequences of the current system unreasonable, and giving at least one valid downvote reason for a group reasonable and constructive.
@michaelb958: also, a crap question will be closed with reasons provided. You cannot really avoid giving a reason for closure. However, currently, you can do that for downvoting answers. That is the gap in the system currently which could be consistently improved.
this is the discussion for the "Encuraging comments"
@Shog9 - thanks for the link. I feel that this time I may actually get what you folks mean. But the problem is that in the list of reason the link provides some reason should not exist. Do you want someone to discard a solution because of the magnificent number 7? "7.Answer is by someone I don't like." could go on a mmorpg forum, not a tech question answer site. Someone a day will make a wrong decision in a project because you didn't like the avatar? Shouldn't we discourage this? Again, I'm not for forcing people, but I believe we have a way of thinking that should change. — SPArchaeologistMar 20 '13 at 15:57
I know, but I am not proposing encouragement comments.
(btw, yes, I am frustrated, and that leads to searching a solution for the issue; there is no need to interpret this frustration negatively when looking for a solution constructively - likely that the majority of the participants would be frustrated with 15-20 unexplained downvotes within 2-3 days, too).
I am not sure if this comment about a suggestion on stackoverflow should be written here, but I do think so.
I would recommend, if this is possible, when downvoting a question, to be mandatory for the downvoter, to write the reason why he/she downvoted. I think this should be much more helpful ...
Possible Duplicate:
Encouraging people to explain down-votes
As a new user, I'm still learning the "dos and donts" of posting on here. I've seen many questions from new users get downvoted with no clear explanation as to why.
I think it would be very useful if it was mandatory for a ...
Possible Duplicate:
Encouraging people to explain down-votes
Whould it be nice to add a comment as mandatory option when one downvotes an answer?
First if the answer is downvoted it's considered to be a wrong so that a comment could clarify that. Second it will help detect people who m...
@SPArchaeologist: they are significantly different.
@SPArchaeologist: I do not agree with those proposals either, myself because they have one huge drawback: +1 to downvote mess which leads to an unwieldy wall.
@LaszloPapp no problem at all. Go ahead and post it if you want. You will even get my full support. But I was warning you that I personally have already fought against that windmill and lost miserably.
Every time the question is raised again the answer is that an user should never be constrained to do what he doesn't want to. Not commenting is seen as something they should be entitled to do
@Bart As I said he will have all my support if he goes proposing that
@Bart @LaszloPapp I have already discussed this precise problem in the past. Working with SharePoint i fell that the problem of uncommented downvotes is even greater on our board.
@SPArchaeologist: thanks; homework for the weekend ...
@SPArchaeologist: too much freedom means you are free to do as much "nonsense" as you want... but yeah, I got that you support this proposal which I am happy about!
@SPArchaeologist: one way to make it more lightweight is to demand it after 2-3 downvotes or so. The exact number could be negotiable.
I do not mind 1-2 unexplained, but well, crowd is non-constructive then.
@LaszloPapp as you said - if I see a -1 on an answer I may even not be capable of determine if the answer is wrong or if the user avatar wasn't beautiful enough.
When you work on sharepoint you can find some procedures that SEEM to work but actually have some really intricate errors. For example, use the document set programmatic creation approach suggested by many blogs on the web and your set will then magically be corrupted and be detected as a folder... but only when the planet are aligned....
@LaszloPapp there is the risk that you discover the problem after months of production usage. If someone post that way of creating a set on SharePoint SO and someone downvotes it because he knows the issue there are, I would expect that he explains.
@LaszloPapp Otherwise all we get is a -1. Now suppose that you are searching how to create a set, you see an answer at 0 (actually +1/-1 because remember, split votes are a privilege. Again WHY??????). The code SEEMS to work right... but someone did know.
When connecting on SO this morning, I was informed that one of my old answers got a downvote.
What happened was that the original question was incorrectly edited and the tag c++ was removed from the question, changing the author's original intent and making my answer suddenly off-topic. Then, I...
@rene well, the amount of times I've seen patches or commits that just sucked ... I can't be bothered to comment on them any more. ... then again, I'm the only dev, so I'd be talking to myself anyway.
@LaszloPapp Take my advice: you are passionate about our profession. Keep in mind though that out in the real world 5% of the people you work with are only there to disrupt. Keep trying to make those 5% as passionate as you are but never, ever let those morons influence your passion or effort to educate those 5%
@rene: yeah, I agree. I would not continue being part of SO if this continues, so I am trying to fix it before quiting, which is probably more helpful than just deleting my account as H2CO3 did.
@Louis: not yet, because I have to do some home work before that (also paid work).
@rene: my local music group has no such issues, luckily, so that is always a good fallback to spend my leisure time with. :) That being said, I like programming, so I will do my best before changing.
1) downvote reason mandatory after 2-3 downvotes, but you can fall back to reason upvote in comment. 2) Increase the daily comment upvote limit to the download numbers, but I have not done much research about this latter. The use case is valid for me though, as ideally, I just downvote a poor answer with upvoting the correspoing comment.
you can have 200 flags to moderate posts, but you have much fewer comment upvote options.
bringing it only up to the downvote numbers is just a compromise.
@JasonC: may I ask you please not to reply to personal posts, just flag them for moderation? I flagged all your posts guys now. There is no need to continue a personal comment with another personal.
although the simple sanity check might be less distracting a workflow. This has to be answered by a UX guy, not me, but the feature is still valid IMHO.
@AlulaErrorpone Such proposals have been made repeatedly on Meta and have been repeatedly voted down into oblivion. If the reasons are anonymous, then people will put in fake reasons. If the reasons are not anonymous, then this breaks voting anonymity. I've yet to see a proposal that manages to preserve anonymity and won't lead to meaningless comments.
@LaszloPapp One sure way to destroy the site is to have someone in authority have the ability to annul votes at a fine grained level. (This is different from the voting fraud algorithms which apply mathematical rules in the aggregate.) The day I feel that someone can come in and decide that my vote was not warranted, for whatever reason they may imagine is the day I'm out of SO.
@Louis: I am not sure I follow. An algorithm can reverse fraud downvote crowd, too.
@Louis: downvotes would be bound to a reason and if that is considered negative and destructive, all the downvotes can go away by an algorithm without mods knowing about the actual downvoters, so the anonymous stuff is preserved, then, right?
nope, @AlulaErrorpone. He is arguing that the difference is on the target grain level. If you reverse an hundred you are targeting a group of votes, probably because they have a common problem. Sockpupet, serial voting etc, there is a misusage reason behind the deletion.
If you target a single vote, the focus moves from removing an unwanted behavior to oppose someone else point of view
@LaszloPapp But there again is the behavior that you debate, not the content. If you close a question is because the question doesn't meet some standard or has some other problem. If you delete a vote is because you say "You was wrong. I decide this is right". Totally different concepts.
yes, I agree, the system is already in place, albeit downvotes are easier to abuse than closure because it is an individual decision that happens right away.
releasing a downvote type would need several people to agree to avoid the ping-pong though, I think.
maybe same as for reopen, like 5 and it would be tight to reputation. I do not know...
Does anyone know if SO has gathered somewhere the usual arguments and the usual responses to such proposals? Like a FAQ item. Or a long FAQ page that goes over that stuff? It would be useful to link to when someone comes up with such proposal.
As you can see the problem gives me some guidelines that I MUST follow to get it right. First is the initialization. What must I put in there?
Should I put it as x = (str(num))[0]?
What should I write for the while statement?
I'm trying to find a way to add up all the digits in the num, but t...
@devnull I can but not now (needs another 48 hours-ish)
Andrew Barber cleaned up some comments
@Bart I recall you were active in the unity3d tag. If you have some time left can you take a look at this ... I already pointed out one issue but that didn't solve it...
A couple of simple hard questions that force you to stop externalizing your woes and take responsibility for your own feelings about down votes and you slam the door. Unfortunately, evidence suggests your requests for explained down votes will go nowhere. @LaszloPapp @SPArchaeologist
@LaszloPapp The best way to improve this site isn't to require explanation on down votes. It's for you to take your holier-than-thou attitude, tantrums, and bad answers elsewhere, like you said you would when you said you were leaving. SO would be a better place without your noise.
@LaszloPapp By the way, twice now you've referred to "all your comments being deleted". You realize the only comment that's actually been removed was when I told that guy Johnson "Please be civil" when I stuck up for you last night after he launched a series of attacks against you on your answer?
I flagged his comments, they were removed, then mine was removed as it should have been as it was no longer relevant. So I'm not sure what you keep talking about when you talk about "flagging my comments" and such but that's never actually happened. Nothing I said on that virtual functions question was removed at all. Nor should it have been.
and that is what happened, the OP came and he also wrote a personal post.
I flagged them all for removal, and the mods removed it, so there is no problem to solve on that front. I was just telling my personal opinion how to handle such offensive posts.
@LaszloPapp I flagged it and asked him to keep it down too. I do that sometimes. I actually would have removed my comment eventually anyways after his were removed.
QtRuby only supports Qt 4 for the time being. Hopefully, it will change soon, but this seems to be the reality at the time of writing this.
Possible Duplicate:
Encouraging people to explain down-votes
Whould it be nice to add a comment as mandatory option when one downvotes an answer?
First if the answer is downvoted it's considered to be a wrong so that a comment could clarify that. Second it will help detect people who m...
I know you can do Windows + Left to put a window in the left half of the screen. Is there a feature that will do top bottom?
As you can see the problem gives me some guidelines that I MUST follow to get it right. First is the initialization. What must I put in there?
Should I put it as x = (str(num))[0]?
What should I write for the while statement?
I'm trying to find a way to add up all the digits in the num, but t...
