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
A solution to one of the issues you mention is to ditch the annoying nanny-ware and not require a minimum number of characters in the first place. Sometimes the meaning can be quite clear in a wor...
Answer
#3: Post edited
by
Olin Lathrop
·
2023-07-10T12:17:15Z (over 1 year ago)
- A solution to one of the issues you mention is to ditch the annoying nanny-ware and not require a minimum number of characters in the first place. Sometimes the meaning can be quite clear in a word or two. Length doesn't guarantee quality, and likely hurts quality when forced to add padding.
- I actually ran into this, and didn't realize until now what happened. I don't remember the details, but I'm quite confident a moderator would have easily understood the point of the flag. At the time, I thought there was a software glitch. I thought to myself <i>"screw this"</i> and went on to other things. By the time I did the other things I probably forgot to post in meta about it.
- Keep in mind that moderators rate each flag as "helpful" or not, so there is already a feedback mechanism for quality.
- I'm a moderator on EE, and don't remember any flag where it was unclear what the flagger objected to. Usually it's obvious without any comment. There is no problem to solve here. Let's make the experience easy and welcoming for those trying to help keep the site clean, not make them jump thru petty hurdles that don't really result in a better outcome anyway.
- <hr>
There is now a meta discussion on removing the minimum character requirements. See https://meta.codidact.com/posts/288918
- A solution to one of the issues you mention is to ditch the annoying nanny-ware and not require a minimum number of characters in the first place. Sometimes the meaning can be quite clear in a word or two. Length doesn't guarantee quality, and likely hurts quality when forced to add padding.
- I actually ran into this, and didn't realize until now what happened. I don't remember the details, but I'm quite confident a moderator would have easily understood the point of the flag. At the time, I thought there was a software glitch. I thought to myself <i>"screw this"</i> and went on to other things. By the time I did the other things I probably forgot to post in meta about it.
- Keep in mind that moderators rate each flag as "helpful" or not, so there is already a feedback mechanism for quality.
- I'm a moderator on EE, and don't remember any flag where it was unclear what the flagger objected to. Usually it's obvious without any comment. There is no problem to solve here. Let's make the experience easy and welcoming for those trying to help keep the site clean, not make them jump thru petty hurdles that don't really result in a better outcome anyway.
- <hr>
- There is now (8 Jul 2023) a meta discussion on removing the minimum character requirements. See https://meta.codidact.com/posts/288918
#2: Post edited
by
Olin Lathrop
·
2023-07-10T12:16:14Z (over 1 year ago)
- A solution to one of the issues you mention is to ditch the annoying nanny-ware and not require a minimum number of characters in the first place. Sometimes the meaning can be quite clear in a word or two. Length doesn't guarantee quality, and likely hurts quality when forced to add padding.
- I actually ran into this, and didn't realize until now what happened. I don't remember the details, but I'm quite confident a moderator would have easily understood the point of the flag. At the time, I thought there was a software glitch. I thought to myself <i>"screw this"</i> and went on to other things. By the time I did the other things I probably forgot to post in meta about it.
- Keep in mind that moderators rate each flag as "helpful" or not, so there is already a feedback mechanism for quality.
- I'm a moderator on EE, and don't remember any flag where it was unclear what the flagger objected to. Usually it's obvious without any comment. There is no problem to solve here. Let's make the experience easy and welcoming for those trying to help keep the site clean, not make them jump thru petty hurdles that don't really result in a better outcome anyway.
- A solution to one of the issues you mention is to ditch the annoying nanny-ware and not require a minimum number of characters in the first place. Sometimes the meaning can be quite clear in a word or two. Length doesn't guarantee quality, and likely hurts quality when forced to add padding.
- I actually ran into this, and didn't realize until now what happened. I don't remember the details, but I'm quite confident a moderator would have easily understood the point of the flag. At the time, I thought there was a software glitch. I thought to myself <i>"screw this"</i> and went on to other things. By the time I did the other things I probably forgot to post in meta about it.
- Keep in mind that moderators rate each flag as "helpful" or not, so there is already a feedback mechanism for quality.
- I'm a moderator on EE, and don't remember any flag where it was unclear what the flagger objected to. Usually it's obvious without any comment. There is no problem to solve here. Let's make the experience easy and welcoming for those trying to help keep the site clean, not make them jump thru petty hurdles that don't really result in a better outcome anyway.
- <hr>
- There is now a meta discussion on removing the minimum character requirements. See https://meta.codidact.com/posts/288918
#1: Initial revision
by
Olin Lathrop
·
2023-02-01T13:18:51Z (almost 2 years ago)
A solution to one of the issues you mention is to ditch the annoying nanny-ware and not require a minimum number of characters in the first place. Sometimes the meaning can be quite clear in a word or two. Length doesn't guarantee quality, and likely hurts quality when forced to add padding. I actually ran into this, and didn't realize until now what happened. I don't remember the details, but I'm quite confident a moderator would have easily understood the point of the flag. At the time, I thought there was a software glitch. I thought to myself <i>"screw this"</i> and went on to other things. By the time I did the other things I probably forgot to post in meta about it. Keep in mind that moderators rate each flag as "helpful" or not, so there is already a feedback mechanism for quality. I'm a moderator on EE, and don't remember any flag where it was unclear what the flagger objected to. Usually it's obvious without any comment. There is no problem to solve here. Let's make the experience easy and welcoming for those trying to help keep the site clean, not make them jump thru petty hurdles that don't really result in a better outcome anyway.