Timeline for Check in on Identification questions
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 4, 2018 at 14:19 | history | edited | MmmHmm | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 254 characters in body
|
| S Jan 4, 2018 at 13:02 | history | mod moved comments to chat | |||
| S Jan 4, 2018 at 13:02 | comment | added | Napoleon Wilson Mod | Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. | |
| Jan 4, 2018 at 12:47 | comment | added | MmmHmm | @NapoleonWilson Sorry, but you have not demonstrated in your answer above that the arguments for ignoring ID-This question and re: attracting new users are an illusion. You have simply begged the question. | |
| Jan 4, 2018 at 12:47 | comment | added | Napoleon Wilson Mod | It's not every single day, it's years of site development and an active discussion that went on for over a month. Want links, start here. | |
| Jan 4, 2018 at 12:44 | comment | added | MmmHmm | @NapoleonWilson there's no time like the present. Not everyone who contributes to the community is here every single day, nor participating on Meta, so please calm down. If you don't have a link demonstrating the arguments as illusion that is fine, however, without any reference, this statement is simply your opinion. | |
| Jan 4, 2018 at 12:42 | comment | added | Napoleon Wilson Mod | I did, in my answer and answers to the various questions linked from here, from throughout this site's history. The problem is, noone spoke up at all. No matter if you like those questions or not, you can't not have noticed that they're at least controversial at best. And noone took the effort of telling the concerned community that their conerns are ungrounded. | |
| Jan 4, 2018 at 12:40 | comment | added | MmmHmm | @NapoleonWilsonyou are contradicting yourself - either the policy has been eased up or it has not. Again - references would help you make your point. Thank you for demonstrating the ways in which these forums are used which are not helpful to the community: condescension and presenting opinion without reference. | |
| Jan 4, 2018 at 12:39 | comment | added | MmmHmm | If you have reference to a clear demonstration that the arguments re: attracting new users and ignoring them are "an illusion" I'd appreciate you posting it, otherwise, it seems to me that this is really only a problem for what the OP refers to as the "curmudgeons" on the site - a small and vocal minority. | |
| Jan 4, 2018 at 12:39 | comment | added | Napoleon Wilson Mod | Not sure if you noticed, but that's what we already did and it didn't work. As said, this isn't about closing your eyes from the problem or people ignoring questions they don't like. | |
| Jan 4, 2018 at 12:37 | comment | added | MmmHmm | @NapoleonWilson So why not ease up the policy, allow the ID-This questions, delete the useless ones and let the H8r's simply ignore them? | |
| Jan 4, 2018 at 12:35 | comment | added | Napoleon Wilson Mod | And that's pretty much how the majority of users' (or at least the ones who even dared coming back after dropping off their question) experiences turned out already. Just that now it's an official policy and the site tells them clearly that it's just not doing these things. The argument of attracting new users has already been adressed and is an illusion. As have the arguments of ignoring them. | |
| Jan 4, 2018 at 12:02 | history | edited | MmmHmm | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 136 characters in body
|
| Jan 4, 2018 at 11:57 | history | edited | MmmHmm | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 136 characters in body
|
| Jan 4, 2018 at 11:50 | history | answered | MmmHmm | CC BY-SA 3.0 |