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.

Post History

83%
+8 −0
Q&A Giving question feedback in private - a moderating system to reduce conflicts

I'd like to propose a different way of thinking about the problem (and I agree there are problems here). Some premises: New users don't know how things work, so we need to keep it simple. ...

posted 3y ago by Monica Cellio‭

Answer
#1: Initial revision by user avatar Monica Cellio‭ · 2021-04-29T17:39:05Z (almost 3 years ago)
I'd like to propose a different way of thinking about the problem (and I agree there are problems here).

Some premises:

- New users don't know how things work, so we need to **keep it simple**.

- Many non-veteran users are deterred by bad "people" experiences -- if your question is off-topic then ok no harm, but if people leave comments, especially public ones, that you read as criticizing *you*, that feels bad.  **Prevention is better than cleanup**, because first impressions matter.

- Many engaged community members want to lend a helping hand, but don't want to do redundant work or be part of a pile-on.  Posters also don't want to be on the receiving end of an unintended pile-on ("this is the 27th person who's privately told me that").  **If feedback is private, some sort of status information still needs to be public**, like "3 users have given private feedback in the last 24 hours".

- Not all users want to receive private feedback; some would prefer everything be public.  (This has already been demonstrated in a comment.)  **People shouldn't be required to engage in private discussions.**

- People giving private feedback benefit by being able to work together.  We've seen enough "joint debugging" in comment threads to know this.  **Private does not mean 1:1.**

I envision a system where, by default, a new post gets a "private-ish feedback" thread (after we have threaded comments).  A poster can turn it off, by post or as a user preference.  For a post that has this thread, people with some ability to be determined (to keep out drive-by trolls) can see the thread and participate.  Other people can see that the thread exists -- something conveying that private discussion is happening already.  

For questions, the asker should be able to directly put the question on hold while addressing feedback.  (If the owner alone put it on hold, then the owner alone can reopen it -- otherwise people won't do it.)

The question isn't hidden or relocated; that'd be more confusing than helpful, I think.  I'd like to think that the combination of it being on hold and the visible presence of private feedback would be enough to signal to other community members "we're working on this; be back later".  "Regular" comments wouldn't be affected; this is about adding one special thread, not removing anything else.

There are a lot of details to work out were we to take this approach, but I want to get feedback on the high-level idea before tackling them.  Thoughts?