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 Regular deletion (roomba) of content unlikely to ever be useful
Parent
Regular deletion (roomba) of content unlikely to ever be useful
I noticed that questions exist on this network and are accessible that are unlikely to ever be very helpful, for example because they were marked as completely off-topic.
Examples
- Are international phone numbers available? in Power User
- For cleaning food and objects, power scrubber vs. Electric rotary toothbrush? in Physics
- What is the worst code you ever saw? in Software Development
The content license does not mean that there is an obligation to keep the content here and removing such content would increase the signal to noise ratio. I don't see much sense in keeping this content. We could therefore permanently remove it from the system.
But there are also questions that have a very low score (typically they are not very high quality with missing information) and often also no answers but aren't closed. With edits and answers they could potentially be converted to something useful, but that may not be very likely. The decision to keep or remove such content might be a bit more difficult.
However, cleaning up more regularly might also increase the appeal of the front pages of the individual sites (see recent discussion).
Should we regularly remove content we deem to be not useful at all?
If yes, what should be the criteria for that (close status, score, number of answers, life time)? Should it be done automatically (automatic cleaning robots) or rather manually (at least for now)? Where should the criteria for that be decided (for each community individually or network-wide)?
Searched for it on Meta but couldn't find anything for "automatic deletion".
I agree that automatic deletion1) would be a useful way to reduce clutter and manual moderation. I would propose impleme …
2y ago
Yes, we need to clean things up For a Q&A site to come across as useful, the chaff simply needs to be separated from …
7mo ago
I purpose auto removing bad questions, after a given grace period But, this requires a definition of a bad question. …
2y ago
I personally like the way you are contributing(not for voting, re-editing posts and some other stuffs).. You may have se …
2y ago
Post
I agree that automatic deletion1) would be a useful way to reduce clutter and manual moderation. I would propose implementing something along the lines of the draft below.
1) Deleted as in "not displayed on the site" - the technical definition on what gets archived and what gets deleted from the actual DB is a discussion for another post.
All posts get automatically deleted after 1 month since the last edit of any question/answer present, if they fulfil any of the following:
- Closed posts without answers.
- Closed posts where both the question and all answers have negative score.
- Questions with a negative score of -3 or more that have no answers, or where all answers also have a negative score of at least -3.
All the details can obviously get fine-tuned and more rules can be added as we come up with them.
3 comment threads
0 comment threads