@sarge_smith There have been several issues that we took forever to make a decision on (ITG), and all it did was lead to dozens of meta posts and chat discussions. I'd much rather have people take action and then reverse it than have everyone spend hours discussing an issue and never get off their asses and do anything about it
@sarge_smith You don't need to get the input of the entire community on every decision. That's just a waste of time. We make metas on larger issues, and on edge cases which people seem really divided on.
agreed, but you are talking precedent for dealing with questions that apply to games that can no longer be played... that potentially affects a large amount of people's work on this site.
@sarge_smith One of the nice things about SE is that every "destructive" action (closing/deleting) that users take is reversible. If the community changes its mind about a decision or someone gets a bit overzealous in making a decision, it can be reversed.
@sarge_smith yes, because they are no longer relevant and about a game that is still online; what they do is add confusion and/or keep outdated information online - and that's not good.
So City of Heroes shut down over the weekend. There is no longer any way to play it, as the servers went dead.
Now, we only have seven City of Heroes questions, so there's not a lot of content, one way or the other.
But it brings up an important question: For games that you can no longer play ...
One thing is a game that is completely offline, frozen in time if you will until it returns back to being relevant; another thing is a game that has changed so much some of the questions no longer make sense
@sarge_smith It's nothing new for the community to weigh in; we've already deleted questions for being no longer relevant 1.5 years ago when minecraft boosters were removed from the game
We have quite a lot questions about minecart boosters and water elevators, neither of which work anymore in patch 1.6.
The community's consensus is currently: "add a disclaimer on them all"; as the person who suggested this, I'd like the community to reconsider this.
When I suggested this, I fi...
...so it's time to do a mass clean up of our Minecraft content, yes?
We have two options:
You flag outdated questions (= about items or mechanisms that are no longer there, etc) and we delete them.
The homepage should not get trashed by question and answer deletion.
Some reputation will be lo...
The internet nets no gain from knowing how to make boosters in Minecraft one year and a half ago, or from knowing what happened to SWTOR trial accounts at level 15 half a year ago.
that said getting a list of deleted questions with a tag is... trivial (although manual)
@agent86 My issue was just that it was closed and it couldn't stay that way. Whether it gets deleted or stays open with your disclaimer I don't care either way.
What's the point in closing each and every post every time a game closes, especially if that means if the game starts up again we have to go and reopen each and every one?
If we want to keep the content on the site, we reopen it. Closing means that there's something that we don't want, fixable or otherwise. We don't close things we don't have an intent to keep, unless the closure is intended to spur changes to make it something to keep.
So, that's really the rule here - do we want to keep legacy stuff that got outdated? There's arguments for and against this - even for outdated and no-longer-existent games, we can remain a knowledge base of "That which once was" as well as "That which still is". Alternatively, we keep in tune with what is actually presently usable information, and trim away stuff that no longer suits the state of gaming.
I am trying to get The_ INDEPENDENT_hack, and i need to activate 2 Kill streaks during 1 sessions. My questions are:
Does stun streaks also count (they activate kill streak skill bonus)
Can i combine both, kills and stuns? For example kill -> stun -> kill to activate streak?
Why i am asking? ...
removing (or otherwise touching) stuff that's outdated is painful and unlikely to succeed with 100% accuracy. I say deal with the squeaky wheels instead of trying to cull the content in some sort of wholesale fashion
@GraceNote If there was a way to make questions "unlisted" then I'd be all for it. (You can still find the question if you have a link to it.) But I'd say it's easier to just hit delete.
ie, a question is no longer valid and it becomes popular. add a disclaimer saying it's no longer valid. no reason to go around attempting to preemptively find those things that are out of date and likely to become popular
I'd rather make the historical lock/notice/whatever the exception for questions that have had significant inbound links
(not something that's rather easy to prove though)
If we're really worried about losing information to the mists of time, may I remind us all that we have a blog for that. "Minecraft boosters, how did they work?" would make a killer blog post :P
the organizational structure of posts on this site is very loose. it's very much a heap where we lose pointers to stuff on a regular basis. the best way to say "this is dumb" is to forget about it. it just disappears into the mass of data.
which is why my suggestion is to forget until it's notable for whatever reason. there's enough stuff around on a daily basis to keep busy with without making work for ourselves and so forth.
@agent86 Unlike data for games that no longer can be played - we can afford to have those dangle around - data for games that still get played, googled about etc. is very much not-dangling by effect of the all-seeing Google deity
Why do we want to pollute information about "Minecraft booster tracks" with information about "Minecraft boosters"?
badp's point is a salient one about the fact that irrelevant, and more to point misleading information on our site is given equal prominence to relevant information to the current state of the game.
@GraceNote I'm not saying it's so localized as to be not noteworthy; I'm saying it's a problem that we handle when it comes up, rather than trying to cull the existing question base for invalid content
I'd be willing to bet that there's a very low percentage of things on the site that, on a daily basis are both obsolete and noteworthy.
Gaming is a fast moving field and sometimes things get left behind or shut down. What should we do with the content on the site that is no longer pertinent to the current state of gaming? Should we preserve it as a nod to the past and those people who put some effort into answering and curating t...
it seems like already we've come to several conclusions about ways we could handle these noteworthy obsolete things, we should probably pick the one that actually works best and just save it for those times we come up with these obsolete but noteworthy items
perhaps consolidating the discussion on the subject would be good.
@agent86 I can't speak for badp, not being he, but I think that "noteworthiness" isn't much an issue so much as the presence of any sort of misinformation can be googled and traced to us, our authoritative reputation thus deceiving folk or otherwise marring their ability to find the right stuff if they stop at the wrong stuff first.
Yes, these can be handled on a case-by-case basis as they each turn up. Each case being a bad experience for someone, being the crux point of opposition here.
@GraceNote If there was a way to make questions "unlisted" then I'd be all for it. (You can still find the question if you have a link to it.) But I'd say it's easier to just hit delete.
I think trying to optimize that problem past "handling the squeaky wheels as they come up" is likely to end in an amount of work that doesn't match the amount of benefit generated.
@agent86 That doesn't mean we shouldn't try; the "we aren't running out of questions ID" argument you've used a little ago is an argument for, not against deletion.
@JasonBerkan Well, I think part of it is that we tend to get lofty goals in our minds, but we're working with software, created, designed, and implemented by humans with jobs and schedules and so forth. we'll eventually be there, it'll just take 6-8 weeks :P
@badp it's hard to go back from deletion. making a mistake and deleting something useful in the future outweighs the cost of a "this has been reported as obsolete" edit template.
@JasonBerkan I had a nice philosophical dive yesterday or so about our performance in terms of fulfilling our stated mission versus fulfilling our platform duty.
@agent86 Personally, I think they designed some great software and after it took off, created the lofty goals, without noticing that their software did not actually work great with the lofty goals.
@GraceNote semi-related. Is it intentional that closed questions can be googled? If they weren't we would have theoretically the option to close them and keep them out of sight from the outside. I'm not sure this is a good idea, but I also don't like to remove questions that were useful and were answered in good faith.
@badp I see the additional 2-3 clicks as being worth the effort to avoid the possibility of false positives. it also distributes the work (any user can edit, only some can delete)
You could argue it's more specialized work, anybody on the internet can edit but not anyone can delete, but still not anyone in the world gives a fuck about this janitorial work to begin with
@JasonBerkan well, I think also there's a tendency within a community to elevate the purpose and goals of their work. I saw the same thing in previous communities. people got very upset about stuff, and it was just, y'know, playing a game.
@badp tell ya what, every time one of these obsolete and notable things happens, I will cut and paste myself. you can just ping me with the question id or whatever.
@badp I'd also take the current, lengthy discussion on the bridge as evidence that there are several people who would be willing to take a community-approved action on an obsolete, notable item.
Past duplicates, again, it all rolls back to "Closure is a temporary state". Introducing weird Google rules for questions closed under certain circumstances sometimes for a state that either it'll be back to Google-able or won't be Google-able anyway... not really a thing I see anyone looking forward to implementing. Low gain for complexity.
The discussion's length is brought to us by our unwillingness to change our mind and/or failure to change others' minds rather than the amount of people who chimed in on this.
@GraceNote despite the intention of closure as temporary, which I very much agree with, in practice reopening is the rare exception. And by exposing closed, non constructive and similar questions to Google we're not exactly making the internet a better place
@badp this discussion isn't really making sense to me anymore. I don't really know what point we're even trying to make anymore. I think we're just arguing to argue.
what I've said is, if anyone wants to bring to my attention obsolete content, I'm happy to put a notice at the top of it, which is one of the more popular things I saw on meta to solve the problem.
I thought a few times about making a feature request that would distinguish temporary closure better from permanent closure, but all my ideas were rather complicated and weren't convincing enough
@GraceNote Though I will say this. SE created an awesome way for a community to answer questions and for the community to rate the answers. How that can or should be used to "make the Internet a better place" (whatever that truly means) has always perplexed me.
I see that many missions have a challenge associated with them, in order to get 100% synchronization. What benefit(s) do I get for achieving 100% synchronization? Some of the challenges are kind of hard, and there seem to be a million of them, so I want to understand if it is worth it.
Gaming is a fast moving field and sometimes things get left behind or shut down. What should we do with the content on the site that is no longer pertinent to the current state of gaming? Should we preserve it as a nod to the past and those people who put some effort into answering and curating t...
There's a lot of issue with closing and reopening, largely the difficulty of the latter in the cases where it should be happenin'. We're working on some nice changes based around the entire theory of closure, but it still sticks strong to "This is a temporary state", and not a brand on the question.
I think it would be a waste of time to dig through old content looking for things to do work on. If someone else wants to dig through old content and point things out, I'm happy to be the Action Guy and Action those things into submission.
@GraceNote I disagree to some part. There is a rather large part of closed questions that are not salvageable and where closing is anything but temporary.
@badp This is based on whether we consider "irrelevance" in this manner to be an actual harmful knock against it, something that would require salvation. This is kinda what the original inquiry posed.
By choosing to accept the mission of a museum, naturally the implication is that these questions do belong on the site.
@GraceNote because if we mods delete them immediately we circumvent the community review, and the process to delete older,, closed questions is rather arbitrary and annoying because you can't filter out duplicates, which should not be deleted
I think we don't distinguish enough between questions that just need some edits', and questions that are fundamentally not a good fit and can't be saved. Reapating that closing is temporary is fine, but telling someone that his questions could be reopened is unfair and a waste of time if that question is not actually salvageable
@GraceNote Do we have what it takes to run a museum in the first place? Like, glass cases to put those questions in so that no people can get their greasy fingers all over 'em?
@MadScientist What I can hint at probably is that one of the things we looked at is the instruction that is given through closure, what can be changed to convey the things that can be repaired versus what must be overhauled versus nothing helping.
@GraceNote Ages ago, conquest too. Trying to get to chapter 4 for the 4th? time to get all the various other endings for trophies (no more playthroughs though)
@BenBrocka Well, if I say something along the lines of "The discussions about closure got heated to the point that, for a moment, all I heard was indistinguishable from a bunch of CPUs bickering with each other", that ring a bell and illustrate an appropriate image in your head? Granted, in this case it was more productive right afterwards, but point is, for that moment... that one moment...
@badp So, one thing I was going to say was that "This requires a certain amount of resource that not all places have, which rounds to my point that museum curation didn't wait until we had proper tech and resource before the practice began."
@GraceNote Yeah, well, but then you need to place one steward per museum room, and they need to - like - be actually watching what's going on rather than chatting casually with people.
An "unlisted" question is deleted for all practical purposes, except it's visible to people who have a link to it. This would allow us to have a graceful way to "retire" questions about topics that are no longer relevant to the world here and now but have been in the past.
They don't have to be...
@BenBrocka This isn't quite that, link rot was mostly used to refer to the very first review queue to audit outgoing links (the one that was never published)
Wow, I made the mistake of creating my connection pool and datasource in my app server's application instead of the main pool... and redeploying the app wiped the connection pool and datasource.
@Mana Do what I did. Go on a three month hiatus from gaming so that you can do hardcore focus on your game dev work, then realize that you were far less productive in those three months on account of burn-out and so you realize that there's a necessity to play games in order to make them.
@Mana One would assume that that song is just common knowledge. I mean, why wouldn't it be?
> Thor thinks it’s likely that you have a pretty poor understanding of what Mjolnir, Thor’s hammer, is really all about. War, Pete. It is war hammer! You could not hammer out love between brothers and sisters. Hammer out brains between brothers and sisters maybe! Ha! Thor conquers humor! Thor should do an open-microphone night!
> And you should know that there has been a spirited and still ongoing debate about alerting the authorities, since establishing love between your brothers and your sisters with a … hammer?! … has many of us very nervous.
> To be quite honest, the childhood I spent in our house was one of constant blinding terror, owing entirely to the location: in the middle of our street. Not along our street or recessed from our street or up a winding footpath from our street like other houses. No. Our house? In the middle of our street. I mean, whose idea was that? A disgruntled city planner’s?
> Also, as you know, we were all quite fond of your father, Tubold. Knowing how rigorous Tubold’s academic standards were, we thought his son would be just as thorough and insightful. But you are not like your father, Tubold.
> Then, in the midst of all this chaos, you informed us that the screaming itself was the sound that doves make when they cry. And, I mean, what? No it’s not.