As you know, two different community-driven thumbs-down systems (negative reputation and "this post was not helpful") were tried separately here. Both ended up being abandoned.

Were you and Michael thinking of something else?

You bet!
But, alas.., when I *think* about solutions to a concrete problem, most of the time the technical feasibility, cost (in time or other) and potential pitfalls are not my first occupation. However, when compared to a flag “not helpful” or negative reputation, an accumulation of “thumbs ups” which is not transmitted or stored publicly is quite different. Only the “moderators” would see them and were completely free to derive whichever conclusion they deem appropriate. If they have to quarrel amongst themselves, at least it is not us.

Unsure of implementation, but having it on for only the first x posts is all I'm thinking. This is a great example:
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...am-4175596002/

8 posts so far, and this is the latest, along with the "which linux is best" and "top and best html editors for linux" posts. If a moderator had to approve those first posts, does anyone think it's likely we'd have seen them? And if the OP had then thought "I want to participate here...let me do as I've been told by the moderators, since they're obviously watching", they could become valuable, contributing posters, which is what is always hoped for.

But without such things, they're free to post whatever, however many times they want, aren't they?? How many long-time posters here (and I KNOW a name or three has just popped into everyone's head) have been here for years, and post things that indicate no effort? Simple...they do it because no one ever stops them. Doesn't matter that they frustrate people trying to help, litter the forum, and want others do to their work for them. There needs to be a stick, for when the carrot isn't enough.

To clarify, religious or political content is not permissible at LQ in any technical fora. If you see it, please report it and we'll take a look. That content is permitted in .sigs, which can be disabled by members and do not show to non-members.

--jeremy

To be clear, I think some interesting conversations do go on in General and regardless of the decision we make as a result of this thread, there is no plan to remove the forum permanently.

--jeremy

Very much this.

--jeremy

I'd be interested in hearing feedback on why this is myself.

--jeremy

It would be fairly difficult to formalize and monitor this, but if any members notice a pattern we're happy to manually address this rare occurrence as we have in the past.

--jeremy

We now have an easy to use canned response for this, along with a formal policy for handling members who do not adhere to it. This should be used more.

As I have said in the past, this is not in the spirit of LQ and is not something we plan to implement.

--jeremy

And yet the canned response and formal process which exists was not used once.

No, they're not. Which I've made clear based on feedback in previous threads.

--jeremy

Note that threads of the nature you're referring to are a *very* small percentage of new posts (not that I don't think those posts are an issue or an area we can improve on). What I don't understand is that they seem to really bother you and yet you seem to explicitly seek them out and post in them. Moving forward I'd recommend you either ignore them completely or use the canned response and existing reporting process if that doesn't improve the quality of the thread. We'll deal with each and every case from there.

--jeremy

Observations and analysis of my own behavior in the past may not be representative. But it happens and will happen, that a topic, as is introduced in the title of a discussion interests me. Reading on, I learn a few things which come unexpectedly, sometimes, and some discussions handle completely different things, than I had expected. Too late, now, to ignore.

Sorry, but I disagree. Case in point:
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...9/#post5645847

From today. There are lots more of these than you think.
Bother? Nope. Seek out? Nope. ANSWER, because they're on zero-reply? Yes. Report when needed? Certainly...but it's the reporting criteria that comes into play here, if I can explain.

1. Someone posting "I want links for xxx now..hurry up because I'm in a <expletive> hurry" = Almost CERTAINLY banned/post deleted/etc.
2. Someone posting "Check out my new blog at xxx.org!! Greatest ever for low interest loans!" = Immediate deletion/ban.
3. Someone posting dozens of "How do I find options for x?", "I need a script for Y", "Where are the instructions for X software?" = NOTHING, as far as the users here can see.

Perhaps the moderators DO say something to the user of #3...but we don't know that, and whatever happens, the user in question doesn't seem to stop. And if the threads ARE reported...what, exactly, would they be reported FOR? The "Question Guidelines" aren't 'rules', so they can't/aren't enforced. As long as there's no spam/foul language/etc., they're free to post whatever. They'd have to post the same question at least twice before anything can be said. I can think of five user ID's off the top of my head who have been posting such things here for YEARS, and don't stop. Those questions are tantamount to spam...they don't add to the forum value, or the Linux knowledgebase. Asking "where can I get information about the overpass API?" has one real answer: look at their documentation. Which brings us full-circle to:

• Respond to user "Read their documentation" = Not 'friendly'
• Respond to user "Their documentation is at <link to website, which we looked up>" = ok

When is the onus ever going to be put back to the poster? Why should anyone, on any forum, have to do Google searches for someone else? There's a difference between friendly and 'doormat'. Which is what the suggestion is: codify something into the LQ Rules about such posts being a reportable offense, so they CAN be reported, and such posters can then be put on notice.


There also seems to be some sort of disconnect with 'canned' responses, and when they are used. For example, if someone posts "Can someone tell me the options for the ls command", and someone replies "Read the man page (man ls)", they get chastised for telling this user to (essentially) RTFM, and not being 'friendly'...even though the answer is spot-on correct, and will get the OP EXACTLY what they're after. Telling someone "You've provided no details...read the 'Question Guidelines" link in my posting signature"...is ok? Isn't that also saying "RTFI" (Instructions)?

1 members found this post helpful.

Why would it be difficult? You can easily automate this by programming it into the forum software.

What do you guys think of the "kinder gentler snowpine"?

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...00-4175596088/

Did I do okay?