Skip to main content

Timeline for Why the low voting rates?

Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0

5 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jul 5, 2013 at 14:39 comment added Raphael Mod @LukeMathieson All of research-level CS is within scope here, but only little on Theoretical Computer Science. Sadly, though, we don't seem to be able to utilize the breadth of our scope. I think we have a chicken-egg problem here.
Jun 26, 2013 at 5:08 comment added Luke Mathieson ... contributors is difficult to grow. Of course the counterpoint is math, which is obviously very active. However it has a much much broader appeal to the "public", giving it a broader base from which to recruit. Perhaps.
Jun 26, 2013 at 5:06 comment added Luke Mathieson A partly formed thought; I wonder if part of the problem is that, broadly speaking, the people answering the questions on cs are much more capable than the level of the questions requires, and hence are disinclined to contribute questions (the questions they have would more likely be appropriate for cstheory) and the people asking the questions are not yet able to answer the sort of questions they're posting, so would have trouble participating further. So we have people who are happy to help people learn, but don't need help themselves (within scope) so the number of regularly active...
Jun 22, 2013 at 15:37 comment added Raphael Mod Thanks for this detailed contribution! Just a few comments. a) "Every person participating chooses to vote or not vote on any content." -- given they even saw the content. Have to answer on that. b) If I compare our rep-in values with the other sites which have been around for much, much longer, they look quite good. c) "the active group at CS is too small" -- can you provide numbers showing that, e.g. quickly falling how rep-in rank curve? d) We have been having many questions of disputable quality (e.g. obvious homework) which quite a few people boycott.
Jun 21, 2013 at 13:13 history answered András Salamon CC BY-SA 3.0