Hacker News Reader

Comment by pmjordan | Hacker News Reader

The high-traffic tags are full of low-quality or frequently asked questions. The amount of duplication in e.g. the C++ tag is staggering, but there doesn't seem to be a conscious effort to enforce a no-duplicate policy of any kind. Picking out worthwhile questions is difficult with all that noise. Worse, the "unanswered" section is full of questions that have been answered, the asker just never bothered to click accept. After a few upvotes to one of the answers and enough elapsed time that should probably happen automatically. There are also a lot of questions which cannot be answered given the information provided, and the original user is evidently no longer interested in getting it answered.

As you say though, you really can help people who have difficult questions in the niche tags (I've been spending far too much time in 'iokit' and 'objective-c++'). One upvote plus your answer accepted (total +25) is all you can hope for, though.

View on HN

Regarding duplicates: they should be closed as duplicates of a canonical question, but the incentives all work against that so it rarely happens.

There's a ten-month-old widely-supported proposal on meta meant to address this, but it hasn't received any comment from the Stack Exchange Inc. folks. http://meta.stackoverflow.com/q/90620/134300

Incentivizing duplicate finding is tricky:

- rewarding with rep could convert answerers to closers

* answering produces useful stuff, closing is (often) just clerical

- over aggressive closing drives new users away

* blatant laziness shouldn't be rewarded, but subtle variations on a problem shouldn't be punished either

- some level of duplication is a good thing

* http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/11/dr-strangedupe-or-how-...

* in a nutshell, people ask the same conceptual question in different ways, it's good to have all those ways around to help Googlers

We've also improved finding duplicates in the close dialog since that meta post (it's a hard problem, so it's not a perfect suggesting system), so it's hardly like we've done nothing.

Also, as written that feature request is unworkable. Incentivize closing over asking, madness. Even incentivizing over editing (+2 up to 1k rep) is harmful IMO. I suppose we could just decline that post, but what'll probably happen is it'll be status-completed when we've come up with a better solution (which will be documented in an answer).

http://data.stackexchange.com/stackoverflow/query/65516/clos...

^ Based on the most recent data dump, somewhere around a 15 - 20% of closed questions (which are about 3-4% of all new questions). That sounds about right, honestly. I'm sure some stuff is slipping through, and we could make it easier to maintain these rates; but it doesn't seem like a pandemic of duplicates.

Oops, forgot the disclaimer: Stack Exchange Inc. employee, etc. etc.

The duplicates issue is something a little more complicated than just having a canonical answer for everything and it comes down to the naming problem. People understand things in different ways, so having multiple ways of asking the same question, and different explanations of the answers can be very beneficial.

Before looking for duplicate questions, it should be easy to reduce them by improving the Search. I believe it is very hard in SO to find if a question: adding words in may request should reduce the number of results instead of increase it. I mean "C# Dictionary performance" should be same than "+C# +Dictionary +performance".

> the "unanswered" section is full of questions that have been answered, the asker just never bothered to click accept.

Answered questions appear in Unanswered only if no answer has been voted up. If you see a question with a good answer, just vote it up and clear the clutter for the next person looking at the Unanswered section.

Good to know. I tend to upvote anything good I see anyway, so I've already been decluttering the unanswered section without realising.

It seems to be just really hard. I see a ton of duplicates in the MySQL and Java tags as well. New programmers who are also new users of S.O. vastly outnumber the experienced, and they're exactly the ones who are going to ask questions that have been repeatedly answered.

Any forum that welcomes new users is going to have this problem. The same kind of thing happened on Forrst, which should probably have been a little more resistant.

> The high-traffic tags are full of low-quality or frequently asked questions. The amount of duplication in e.g. the C++ tag is staggering, but there doesn't seem to be a conscious effort to enforce a no-duplicate policy of any kind.

This is a tough one. There already is a system for dealing with duplicates, which is to vote to close as a duplicate, but requires 5 people to so vote before it will actually be closed. You could reduce that number, but there would probably be concern about abuse and mistakes if you reduced that too far. The thing is, it's fairly labor intensive to actually find duplicate questions, and ensure that they really are duplicates. In many cases, it's just easier to answer the new question, than to dig out the duplicate, vote to close, and then, if you actually want to be helpful, explain in a comment why the question is a duplicate (since beginners might not understand how the other question answers theirs).

> the asker just never bothered to click accept . . . and the original user is evidently no longer interested in getting it answered.

I find this very annoying, too. I can understand why it would happen from the point of view of the asker: he might have found the answer on some other website 5 minutes later, or he might have just decided to find a workaround. Still, I think SO should remind people to accept answers (penalize them for having low accept rates) or have the most upvoted answer selected automatically after a while. Nobody wants to write detailed answers for someone who isn't interested in the question anymore.

In theory, the system's "economics" encourage askers to accept an answer, as askers with low acceptance rates will receive fewer quality responses (and often comments reiterating the phenomenon). But there's little incentive for drive-by askers with no engagement with the community, such as it is, to choose an answer; a consequence of SO's growing popularity is that these users comprise the largest group (901K users with between 1 and 200 reputation).

There should probably be some mechanism by which moderators or other trusted users can, after a time, accept an answer for such abandoned questions. Perhaps questions thus answered would be treated slightly differently (and identified differently in the UI); the original asker could always return and override the proxy acceptance.

> * Still, I think SO should remind people to accept answers*

It does. Your accept rate is displayed under your username when you ask a question. Let it drop to low and other users will start complaining in the comments under your question, telling you to start accepting if you expect answers.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com