[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

[tor-talk] Stackexchange Q&A, Guidelines


I'd like to raise awareness and discuss the scope Stackexchange has (or
seems to have).

Initially I planed to await a reply by Runa, but now I assume that
there's no reason to just wait for a reply. Runa will be still able to

Regarding the use-case and their guidelines.

The FAQ [1]

- Phase 1: Follow it and help design the community!

So far so good.

(Less that 100 people follow it, but it's an early state)

- Phase 2: Commit!

"When a proposal enters the "Commitment" phase, we will present a
petition for the site's creation. Interested users are asked to
digitally "sign" the proposal with their full name to help assure that
site will have an active community in those critical early days. While
your full name is never shown, you may add an optional comment which is
displayed alongside your username in the list of committers." ~ FAQ excerpt

Tor is Anonymity, Privacy and Security) Online; doesn't giving your full
name to some site contradict at least Anonymity or more likely
Pseudonymity and maybe Privacy and since crime uses the Internet somehow

(I understand that this is not relevant after the beta phase has been

- Phase 3: Beta!

"Perhaps the most important phase. This is the actual, live site set up
on a "probationary" basis to see if people use it. It is very important
to participate early. The earliest questions set the tone and topic of
the site for a long time. This is also the time to spread the word via
Twitter, blogs, and email far and wide. If the site does not get used,
it will be deleted." ~ FAQ excerpt

It gets deleted if it doesn't get used. Although I know this is in an
early state and I don't think it's likely to get kicked there is the
possibility for this to happen.

Now to the Guidelines for Beta (and leaving beta).

I had asked this on stackexchange already. [2]

- Questions per day

"15 questions per day on average is a healthy beta, 5 questions or fewer
per day needs some work. A healthy site generates lots of good content
to make sure users keep coming back."

I think most relevant questions will be asked at some point. I also
think it's better to have answers before the questions get even asked.
It appears to be more healthy if all questions of a user are answered
and he/she hasn't to come back.

- Answered questions in percent

"90% answered is a healthy beta, 80% answered needs some work. In the
beta it's especially important that when new visitors ask questions they
usually get a good answer."

No objection to this point from my side.

- Avid users vs. total users

"Every site needs a solid group of core users to assist in moderating
the site. We recommend:

    150 users with 200+ rep
    10 users with 2,000+ rep
    5 users with 3,000+ rep"

Maybe doable, but there are probably more new users asking, than "older"
sticking around and answering them.

Beside the Tor Support team and some community members there might be a
fresh supply of new users that don't stick around.

- Answer ratio

"2.5 answers per question is good, only 1 answer per question needs some
work. In a healthy site, questions receive multiple answers and the best
answer is voted to the top."

I think questions answered by Tor Assistants or people close to Tor wont
need another answer. In general, for many questions regarding any topic,
I think answers should be given in such a way to create the maximum
possible outcome.

For example, related to Tor, a question about the supported
OS/device/platform could be answered with all platforms supported by Tor
and forks/alternatives for, let us say, Android etc..

Is it desirable to fit to a metric that prefers multiple answers instead
of a solid answer whenever possible? I understand that not every
question will be satisfied with one answer, but why put it in numbers?

I also understand that this is the risk/nature of Q&A where the peers
up-vote the answer they most like or think is correct, which might not
be the case. Ending up with the up-voted answer that the Earth is flat
is a risk for any Q&A system, but telling the highest answer is the best
is quite dangerous as many people can be wrong.

The majority can be wrong. "Read through all answers given and decide
which one(s) appear plausible to you and if you can validate them."

- visits per day

"1,500 visits per day is good, 500 visits per day needs some work. A
great site benefits people outside the community. Eventually, 90% of a
site's traffic should come from search engines."

I don't know how many visits there will be in the end. (It's far to
early). I don't object to the point.

Might be a reason to delete the Q&A, I don't know.

The concern I tried to raise is that the Q&A sticks in Beta forever,
which is like having the "Sword of Damocles" hanging above ones head (or
cupboard in my case). It could be deleted.

Maybe this is not too concerning, but needs to be considered. They who
pay the bills get to say what to do, I guess.


[1] http://area51.stackexchange.com/faq
tor-talk mailing list