Return to Answer

The review system puts so much emphasis on coddling old, already-dealt-with questions that it's suffocating us

Your premise is entirely wrong, so at first I didn't touch it, thinking, that it isn't worth my time, but here goes:

It doesn't, at all. In fact, the review system gives priority to newer posts at certain points of the day, rather than the older ones and always gives priority to the ones that has more reviews, is a pseudo-random way. The fact that you see old crap in the review system is because the lack of reviewers which I addressed in another post how to improve it.

I think some people struggle to understand the scale of the issue. At the moment we are failing to answer or close 3000-5000 questions a month. That's our priority here.

Remember that the system is optimized for pearls. But right now, in this very same moment, we are not even getting sand to produce pearls, which is really a problem. Anyone naive enough to not recognize it, is hurting the site.

So, how do you think we fix the problem? Well, users find that removing old cruft, bad quality content, which is vague, inaccurate, is a good way to solve the problem at hand, why are moderators against it? I find it completely counter productive "skimming through a lot of duplicates (questions) finding helpful information nuggets" that vague questions provide. Again, optimize for pearls, not for sand!

Everyone knows I'm the first to ask for a question that was incorrectly closed to be reopened and even answer them, but all the cases presented so far are sand, paired with more sand. Low quality content that should not exist in the first place, and will hopefully be deleted in the posterity, so I expect less posts of this kind in the future.

Now, generally speaking, someone defending this kind of content (old, low quality crap) is doing a disservice for Ask Ubuntu. Old questions or not, looks like crap, we don't want it on the site. Doing a house cleaning starting from the top to the bottom is a sane behavior, nobody needs to stop it.

Ah, BTW, I don't recommend anyone to watch only the "new questions" feed, I don't do that at all. I get depressed and stop answering questions. Instead I find old questions that needs love, it's even more rewarding. Maybe we should get implemented the "Recommended" tab, but that is another bundle of problems due the general state of our tags.

The review system puts so much emphasis on coddling old, already-dealt-with questions that it's suffocating us

Your premise is entirely wrong, so at first I didn't touch it, thinking, that it isn't worth my time, but here goes:

It doesn't, at all. In fact, the review system gives priority to newer posts at certain points of the day, rather than the older ones and always gives priority to the ones that has more reviews, is a pseudo-random way. The fact that you see old crap in the review system is because the lack of reviewers which I addressed in another post how to improve it.

I think some people struggle to understand the scale of the issue. At the moment we are failing to answer or close 3000-5000 questions a month. That's our priority here.

Remember that the system is optimized for pearls. But right now, in this very same moment, we are not even getting sand to produce pearls, which is really a problem. Anyone naive enough to not recognize it, is hurting the site.

So, how do you think we fix the problem? Well, users find that removing old cruft, bad quality content, which is vague, inaccurate, is a good way to solve the problem at hand, why are moderators against it? I find it completely counter productive "skimming through a lot of duplicates (questions) finding helpful information nuggets" that vague questions provide. Again, optimize for pearls, not for sand!

Everyone knows I'm the first to ask for a question that was incorrectly closed to be reopened and even answer them, but all the cases presented so far are sand, paired with more sand. Low quality content that should not exist in the first place, and will hopefully be deleted in the posterity, so I expect less posts of this kind in the future.

Now, generally speaking, someone defending this kind of content (old, low quality crap) is doing a disservice for Ask Ubuntu. Old questions or not, looks like crap, we don't want it on the site. Doing a house cleaning starting from the top to the bottom is a sane behavior, nobody needs to stop it.

Ah, BTW, I don't recommend anyone to watch only the "new questions" feed, I don't do that at all. I get depressed and stop answering questions. Instead I find old questions that needs love, it's even more rewarding. Maybe we should get implemented the "Recommended" tab, but that is another bundle of problems due the general state of our tags.

The review system puts so much emphasis on coddling old, already-dealt-with questions that it's suffocating us

Your premise is entirely wrong, so at first I didn't touch it, thinking, that it isn't worth my time, but here goes:

It doesn't, at all. In fact, the review system gives priority to newer posts at certain points of the day, rather than the older ones and always gives priority to the ones that has more reviews, is a pseudo-random way. The fact that you see old crap in the review system is because the lack of reviewers which I addressed in another post how to improve it.

I think some people struggle to understand the scale of the issue. At the moment we are failing to answer or close 3000-5000 questions a month. That's our priority here.

Remember that the system is optimized for pearls. But right now, in this very same moment, we are not even getting sand to produce pearls, which is really a problem. Anyone naive enough to not recognize it, is hurting the site.

So, how do you think we fix the problem? Well, users find that removing old cruft, bad quality content, which is vague, inaccurate, is a good way to solve the problem at hand, why are moderators against it? I find it completely counter productive "skimming through a lot of duplicates (questions) finding helpful information nuggets" that vague questions provide. Again, optimize for pearls, not for sand!

Everyone knows I'm the first to ask for a question that was incorrectly closed to be reopened and even answer them, but all the cases presented so far are sand, paired with more sand. Low quality content that should not exist in the first place, and will hopefully be deleted in the posterity, so I expect less posts of this kind in the future.

Now, generally speaking, someone defending this kind of content (old, low quality crap) is doing a disservice for Ask Ubuntu. Old questions or not, looks like crap, we don't want it on the site. Doing a house cleaning starting from the top to the bottom is a sane behavior, nobody needs to stop it.

Ah, BTW, I don't recommend anyone to watch only the "new questions" feed, I don't do that at all. I get depressed and stop answering questions. Instead I find old questions that needs love, it's even more rewarding. Maybe we should get implemented the "Recommended" tab, but that is another bundle of problems due the general state of our tags.

The review system puts so much emphasis on coddling old, already-dealt-with questions that it's suffocating us

Your premise is entirely wrong, so at first I didn't touch it, thinking, that it isn't worth my time, but here goes:

It doesn't, at all. In fact, the review system gives priority to newer posts at certain points of the day, rather than the older ones and always gives priority to the ones that has more reviews, is a pseudo-random way. The fact that you see old crap in the review system is because the lack of reviewers which I addressed in another post how to improve it.

I think some people struggle to understand the scale of the issue. At the moment we are failing to answer or close 3000-5000 questions a month. That's our priority here.

Remember that the system is optimized for pearls. But right now, in this very same moment, we are not even getting sand to produce pearls, which is really a problem. Anyone naive enough to not recognize it, is hurting the site.

So, how do you think we fix the problem? Well, users find that removing old cruft, bad quality content, which is vague, inaccurate, is a good way to solve the problem at hand, why are moderators against it? I find it completely counter productive "skimming through a lot of duplicates (questions) finding helpful information nuggets" that vague questions provide. Again, optimize for pearls, not for sand!

Everyone knows I'm the first to ask for a question that was incorrectly closed to be reopened and even answer them, but all the cases presented so far are sand, paired with more sand. Low quality content that should not exist in the first place, and will hopefully be deleted in the posterity, so I expect less posts of this kind in the future.

Now, generally speaking, someone defending this kind of content (old, low quality crap) is doing a disservice for Ask Ubuntu. Old questions or not, looks like crap, we don't want it on the site. Doing a house cleaning starting from the top to the bottom is a sane behavior, nobody needs to stop it.

Ah, BTW, I don't recommend anyone to watch only the "new questions" feed, I don't do that at all. I get depressed and stop answering questions. Instead I find old questions that needs love, it's even more rewarding. Maybe we should get implemented the "Recommended" tab, but that is another bundle of problems due the general state of our tags.

The review system puts so much emphasis on coddling old, already-dealt-with questions that it's suffocating us

Your premise is entirely wrong, so at first I didn't touch it, thinking, that it isn't worth my time, but here goes:

It doesn't, at all. In fact, the review system gives priority to newer posts at certain points of the day, rather than the older ones and always gives priority to the ones that has more reviews, is a pseudo-random way. The fact that you see old crap in the review system is because the lack of reviewers which I addressed in another post how to improve it.

I think some people struggle to understand the scale of the issue. At the moment we are failing to answer or close 3000-5000 questions a month. That's our priority here.

Remember that the system is optimized for pearls. But right now, in this very same moment, we are not even getting sand to produce pearls, which is really a problem. Anyone naive enough to not recognize it, is hurting the site.

So, how do you think we fix the problem? Well, users find that removing old cruft, bad quality content, which is vague, inaccurate, is a good way to solve the problem at hand, why are moderators against it? I find it completely counter productive "skimming through a lot of duplicates (questions) finding helpful information nuggets" that vague questions provide. Again, optimize for pearls, not for sand!

Everyone knows I'm the first to ask for a question that was incorrectly closed to be reopened and even answer them, but all the cases presented so far are sand, paired with more sand. Low quality content that should not exist in the first place, and will hopefully be deleted in the posterity, so I expect less posts of this kind in the future.

Now, generally speaking, someone defending this kind of content (old, low quality crap) is doing a disservice for Ask Ubuntu. Old questions or not, looks like crap, we don't want it on the site. Doing a house cleaning starting from the top to the bottom is a sane behavior, nobody needs to stop it.

Ah, BTW, I don't recommend anyone to watch only the "new questions" feed, I don't do that at all. I get depressed and stop answering questions. Instead I find old questions that needs love, it's even more rewarding. Maybe we should get implemented the "Recommended" tab, but that is another bundle of problems due the general state of our tags.

The review system puts so much emphasis on coddling old, already-dealt-with questions that it's suffocating us

Your premise is entirely wrong, so at first I didn't touch it, thinking, that it isn't worth my time, but here goes:

It doesn't, at all. In fact, the review system gives priority to newer posts at certain points of the day, rather than the older ones and always gives priority to the ones that has more reviews, is a pseudo-random way. The fact that you see old crap in the review system is because the lack of reviewers which I addressed in another post how to improve it.

I think some people struggle to understand the scale of the issue. At the moment we are failing to answer or close 3000-5000 questions a month. That's our priority here.

Remember that the system is optimized for pearls. But right now, in this very same moment, we are not even getting sand to produce pearls, which is really a problem. Anyone naive enough to not recognize it, is hurting the site.

So, how do you think we fix the problem? Well, users find that removing old cruft, bad quality content, which is vague, inaccurate, is a good way to solve the problem at hand, why are moderators against it? I find it completely counter productive "skimming through a lot of duplicates (questions) finding helpful information nuggets" that vague questions provide. Again, optimize for pearls, not for sand!

Everyone knows I'm the first to ask for a question that was incorrectly closed to be reopened and even answer them, but all the cases presented so far are sand, paired with more sand. Low quality content that should not exist in the first place, and will hopefully be deleted in the posterity, so I expect less posts of this kind in the future.

Now, generally speaking, someone defending this kind of content (old, low quality crap) is doing a disservice for Ask Ubuntu. Old questions or not, looks like crap, we don't want it on the site. Doing a house cleaning starting from the top to the bottom is a sane behavior, nobody needs to stop it.

Ah, BTW, I don't recommend anyone to watch only the "new questions" feed, I don't do that at all. I get depressed and stop answering questions. Instead I find old questions that needs love, it's even more rewarding. Maybe we should get implemented the "Recommended" tab, but that is another bundle of problems due the general state of our tags.