Who should be allowed to choose answers for Q&A?
TappedOut forum
Posted on Feb. 26, 2015, 5:38 p.m. by Tyrannosary
I have noticed that no matter who answers questions first on this website or how good the answer is it always will say that it is approved by Epokalyptik. I know that the person who asked the question can change the person who answered it but I still think this is wrong. I don't think the question should be "answered" unless the person who asked the question decides for themselves, not the automatic choice of Epokalyptic and then whoever the questioner picked. Let me know what you guys think about this down below.
vampirelazarus says... #2
The downvotes would be as a counter to those answers that aren't up to par for the community.
Say for example, the question that prompted this thread.
The second answer, "yes" gets one upvote by someone.
I down vote it, setting it's score back to zero, so that your answer, with its up vote of two, which I'd the better of the two answers, looks better to those browsing the threads.
February 28, 2015 5:49 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #3
I mean, it's generally a good idea to care about that sort of thing because it directly impacts what does and doesn't get implemented on the site.
February 28, 2015 5:49 p.m.
vampirelazarus says... #4
Ok, the "I don't care" bit was a bit strong.
Let me rephrase that to "he may not like it, but it's something to consider for this situation"
February 28, 2015 5:51 p.m.
vampirelazarus says... #5
i also think you guys are placing too much emphasis on micromanagement and possible abuses of the system to see that it works elsewhere, so why not us?
Does it really require moderation? Is our user base really that incompetent that they can't upvote a detailed, correct answer?
February 28, 2015 5:55 p.m.
Well we have the resources to micromanage it so we might as well. I think we lack faith because we see the answers that are picked before epoch posts the correct one - it's often not great.
February 28, 2015 5:58 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #7
I don't think the userbase is incompetent as a whole. But we've already seen that single users can and sometimes will pick subpar or incorrect answers. I don't think it's a good idea to move to a system that can solve that only if the users are more involved in thread participation and continue to be involved for a day or so after a question is answered.
That's the issue I have. You're requiring user participation, and you're requiring it over a period of time that goes beyond their initial contribution to a thread.
February 28, 2015 6:11 p.m.
vampirelazarus says... #8
Then close voting after a period of inactivity in the thread, say.... three days since last vote (rather than last post, as the last post may be the best answer, and the upvotes may keep coming in after the three days of the last post, if that makes sense)
February 28, 2015 6:17 p.m.
i use stack overflow all the time and i don't see why i need any kind of guidance to find the best answer. voting. comment blessing. etc.
there's a question and several answers listed under it. usually not even that many.
we can certainly do some cosmetic things to lead people to the Q&A. we've done them in the past and I doubt its likely to ever be 100%.
Elaborate comment blessing and cursing systems. Sounds boring and that's not really the type of stuff I like to do on my weekends. Overhauling the inventory and binder storages to represent collections 5k+ in size, way more fun. Involves highly advanced storage system that will continue to kick down the door of how people use the site to further their MTG experience.
I get the feeling that people think just because a question-er accepts a question that isn't the perfect representation of truth that an abortion of justice of some kind has occurred. I doubt it. In these cases it seems like we already have admin in place to deftly make the correction.
Nobody has really addressed fixes that hope to address why this section is dying. Believe me, I wouldn't even be participating in this discussion, except to field requests for improvement, if it was a healthy section. Its not.
I am starting to narrow down on some changes:
- (yet more...) queues to help new users find the appropriate section.
- 48 hour chance for people to accept their own answers (people don't log on to the site every day).
- only change answers that seem blatantly wrong, trolling, or incredibly vague
February 28, 2015 6:20 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #10
Eh. I'm not totally up-in-arms over it, but I think that, if the feature is there, it should be used as often as possible to denote the most productive answer.
In general, I reselect answers only if another answer is obviously better and more productive. If someone explains a rule and someone else quotes it later, I typically won't bother to reselect it unless something significant comes of it. But that's all stuff on the moderation side rather than on the implementation side.
As for increasing traffic, I think we could add some serious functionality by providing links or complete sets of the Comprehensive Rules and maybe even by providing Gatherer rulings on card pages. That would help us drive internal traffic. Currently, when I want a Gatherer ruling or a CR quote, I have to leave the site and go to magiccards.info, Gatherer, or MTGS.
February 28, 2015 6:24 p.m.
vampirelazarus says... #11
Well, go, I'm not too experienced with html, but given the source code of that section, I could... maybe get a pseudocode mock up to you some time (keep in mind I'm busy with school, work, and my band, so I don't have a lot of free time)
February 28, 2015 6:30 p.m.
vampirelazarus says... #12
Hell, it might even be simple enough that I could get a working prototype.
February 28, 2015 6:30 p.m.
Femme_Fatale says... #14
Gatherer rulings on card pages is a wonderful idea. We can a section on the individual card pages just below the description and image for this. If we wish to go further, we can provide links to relevant rulings that card will follow to other sources that have a more detailed Comprehensive Rules listing in them.
February 28, 2015 6:36 p.m.
Didgeridooda says... #15
Just curious about this, how old is judge chat? Also, has that become the go to for instant Q&A? That could be a reason for less traffic.
February 28, 2015 6:43 p.m.
yeaGO, forgive me if you've already explained why this is a bad idea, but I think that "MTG Q&A" should be renamed to "Rules Q&A". That's a simple change that will fulfill the role of another cue for members.
As for why the section might be dying, there's one reason that this thread might have exposed - people lose interest in trying to answer questions because Epoch always has a better answer, and they're not getting the "pat on the back" from the section. I don't know how widespread this feeling truly is but I know that it definitely doesn't help generate traffic.
In my opinion, the biggest, yet often subconscious reason why people would go to the trouble of creating a thread with a rules question as opposed to simply googling previous answers is because they want to interact with others and receive some sort of response. If that interaction isn't as enjoyable as they might have wanted it to be (the question immediately receives a complete answer and nobody else posts), the person will be less likely to post again next time.
February 28, 2015 7:12 p.m.
tl;dr The section might be fulfilling its primary role but its effectiveness seems to make it less enjoyable
February 28, 2015 7:15 p.m.
Goody, now that you mention it that's totally true. I used to ask/answer more in the Q&A, but my answers usually weren't that great and my questions better answered by gatherer. So I stopped using it. Not consciously, I just handled questions otherwise and didn't bother leaving subpar answers.
Make if that what you will.
February 28, 2015 7:22 p.m.
eh. there's a whole step in place that it put in at the request of epoch. you literally have to click past all of that shit in order to post. does anyone here with a lot of opinions about how this thing should be run actually use this section?
February 28, 2015 7:45 p.m.
vampirelazarus says... #22
I haven't in years, because I was wrong too many times.
I intended to get my level 1 judge certification and come back, but I haven't been able to find the time.
However, the suggestions and opinions are still valid.
February 28, 2015 7:47 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #23
The problem is that some users just will not read anything. That's how we end up with nonrules questions in the Q&A (people clicking past the info page), rules questions in the forums (people ignoring the banners), and people just posting in the wrong forums (people not reading the forum descriptions.
That's part of the reason I proposed the central thread creator; it should help eliminate misplaced anything.
I've also been asking for a mock forum listing on the forum page so the Q&A has higher visibility, but idk how many people use that page.
February 28, 2015 7:50 p.m.
Tyrannosary says... #24
Thank you guys for helping me. I know what my first comments were seemed really bad but what I was trying to do was help simplify or modify the MTG Q&A to be better. Let's keep this going in case there are anything that the Admin./Mods. might want to use. Don't forget this will help everyone's experience on this website!
February 28, 2015 9:26 p.m.
Rhadamanthus says... #25
After all of the ensuing discussion, I'm of the opinion that users should be left to select their own Accepted Answers for Q&A. A moderator should only make a selection if:
- X amount of time has passed since the first "good" answer without any selection being made (48 hours, 72 hours, whatever)
- The user-selected Accepted Answer is incorrect
The issue with posting Rules Questions in the wrong area isn't a matter of not having enough error-checking steps in the posting process. It's a matter of Q&A not being integrated with the Forums, unlike on pretty much every other popular online community. Adding further "are you cocking this up?" checks and making posting in general a pain in the ass is not a good design policy.
March 1, 2015 12:03 a.m.
The good is...we have the Internet! A huge world of knowledge. And sites like this to talk about and strategize about card games, board games, tutorials on how to create things, recipes, basically anything we can think of. And, instead of using sites like this, what are we doing? We are complaining that the information GIVEN (which is correct information) was given in the wrong manner...cry me a fucking river, get over it or figure the shit out yourself.
March 1, 2015 9:09 a.m.
vampirelazarus says... #30
You need to read the last several pages. The good that I'm talking about is that we noticed an issue with the system, and offered suggestions to fix it, suggestions which are being considered.
March 1, 2015 9:16 a.m.
Tyrannosary says... #31
Actually what if the Admin./Mods. Only select their answer if all the other answers shown so far are false, if there is a correct answer but it doesn't go into detail then just write why it is that way but don't select your own answer.
March 1, 2015 11:13 a.m.
So..... you want us spending time and effort correcting answers, but with no reward or point for doing so.
I mean sure, we can do that but it does make it tiresome.
March 1, 2015 11:16 a.m.
Tyrannosary says... #33
Well if the person who asked the question chooses to change their accepted answer to the person who gave the more complete answer then that's fine by me, I'm just saying since they already go through and put their answers then they choose theirs since it's better than the one that the OP picked what is the point of letting the OP choose an accepted answer.
March 1, 2015 11:22 a.m.
Aaaaaaaaaand we've come full circle. If the more, in depth answer provided by a mod/ most likely Epoch after and OP makes a choice, what are the chances of the OP returning after the correct/ or answer they were looking for has returned to mark the best answer as correct. I'm sorry but I'd prefer the accurately described answer to the one worded answer. If I have a question that's already be answered before, but only have a one word answer marked as best, I'm not really understanding why that interaction works, therefore my answer wasn't really answered. Also, if I'm asking a question, I don't want a long, drawn out debate on what is right, I want the answer so I understand when I'm deck building or to determine whether a play has been mAde correctly as soon as possible.
March 1, 2015 11:55 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #36
Again, you've missed part of the point. If the question is already resolved, I typically only comment if the selected answer is incorrect or extremely poor. I usually write up detailed answers for open questions. It's not like I'm going back after-the-fact and looking to reassign otherwise decent answers.
Also, the OP has about a 50% chance of coming back to the thread at all, and a far lower chance of coming back again after selecting an answer.
March 1, 2015 1:03 p.m.
Hahahahaha! This is the funniest thread I have ever read! HAHAHA!
Epoch being some evil illuminati guy, who steal everybody's T/O points! Too good! ;)
March 1, 2015 1:08 p.m.
the only thing that worries me is we still haven't figured out what he's using them for.
March 1, 2015 1:09 p.m.
Please please. Give me / epoch the power to close threads.
March 1, 2015 1:09 p.m.
I had this thread closed for a few hours yesterday and people still posted?
March 1, 2015 1:22 p.m.
vampirelazarus says... #45
Maybe it got unlocked because relevant ideas are still being generated here?
March 1, 2015 1:24 p.m.
Tyrannosary says... #47
Maybe it did get locked but once I commented it unlocked itself since I own this thread.
March 1, 2015 1:25 p.m.
You shouldnt be able to post at all if it's closed. It confused me. Also Epochalyptik mentioned to me that he also didn't think it worked?
March 1, 2015 1:26 p.m.
as happens often on tappedout, just because you have a power doesn't mean you have a power :P
there is no officer discretion. use it only for its intended purpose which, for now, is to satisfy the necro freaks.
March 1, 2015 1:26 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #50
Check Site Updates. Closing threads now works. I unlocked it because the discussion is still productive.
Epochalyptik says... #1
@vampirelazarus: The issue isn't that it isn't possible for an answer to be reassigned or chosen later on. It's that a voting system requires by nature of its mechanism, that people continue to frequent and contribute to the thread for a period of time in order to ensure the most useful allocation of whatever designation is available. From an implementation and management perspective, this is much less efficient than simply allowing admins to designate answers.
February 28, 2015 5:48 p.m.