Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Welcome to Codidact Meta!

Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.

Comments on Hobbling of users who consistently post low-quality content

Post

Hobbling of users who consistently post low-quality content

+17
−3

There are, unfortunately, a few users on Codidact who relatively consistently make low-quality contributions. These posts often come in bursts and tend to be downvoted fairly quickly, but that doesn't slow them down.

I propose that Codidact should implement some manner in which to slow down such users. They shouldn't be prevented entirely from posting, but there should be limits in place to ensure that their posts don't drown out other content.

I am posting a self-answer with a suggestion for how this can be done, but alternative suggestions (or arguments why this is a bad idea) are certainly welcome!

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

4 comment threads

It's not possible to meaningfully hobble bad users. You can only hobble new users. (1 comment)
Like the idea. Added some extra steps to your basic proposal to allow for "strictness configuration";... (2 comments)
Perfect is the enemy of good (3 comments)
Downvote!!! it's not because my answers/questions are poorly written (2 comments)
Downvote!!! it's not because my answers/questions are poorly written
deleted user wrote about 3 years ago · edited about 3 years ago

I have downvoted after thinking about the question for few moments..

I usually write questions and answers but I know what represents them poor and good. I had downvoted cause it doesn't look good to me.. I will write an answer whenever I get time... I am drafting now whenever I get time I will post... I completely don't disagree with the idea but I care about your knowledge. The downvote is to show your knowledge.

I thought so I couldn't write the whole answer... I will re-edit my draft later...

Canina‭ wrote about 3 years ago · edited about 3 years ago

deleted user Especially if implemented as I suggested in my self-answer, a single downvote won't matter much even for a brand new user account. Single votes will only actually make a significant difference for a user who is already right at a threshold, in which case there's probably something that can be done to some of their posts to bring them clearly past the threshold. The specific scheme I suggest would only actually have a significant impact on users who are, in a sense, "repeat offenders" of posting very low quality content, and the interim post count cap is specifically there so that even such users will be able to post occasionally. Also, I am not singling out particular users here, but let's face it, it doesn't take much time browsing around the various Codidact sites to see that there are users who relatively consistently make poorly-received contributions, and that downvotes alone don't seem to deter them. At that point, IMO some form of technical hobbling makes sense.