Timeline for Would we be interested in a concerted tag cleanup effort?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 16, 2020 at 9:30 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Jan 4, 2016 at 19:15 | comment | added | DVK-on-Ahch-To | @MikeEdenfield - agreed, but to be honest I mostly foresee vote magnitues on things like that to be closer to "-3/+4" vs "-2/+7". Just guessing. Yeah, if 30 people oppose a tag, the "3" floor us definitely not enough, so a formula that takes a min/max of absolute vs. % floor may be needed | |
| Jan 4, 2016 at 15:58 | comment | added | KutuluMike | Those are among the details I want to work out, but my plan is to start with the low-hanging fruit and work down. I was trying to come up with a formula that was simple, but account for things like ratio of + to -, minimum number of +, etc. to decide where "clearly bad" cut off. Those details are going to be part of a forthcoming meta post but I don't want to "bias" the voting by telling people the secret forumla too early :) But I think if 15 people vote + and 3 vote - that's different than 34 people voting + and 3 voting -... | |
| Jan 4, 2016 at 15:37 | comment | added | DVK-on-Ahch-To | @MikeEdenfield - Is there a chance we can have a "floor", where if more than a threshohld of people (3?5?) vote to keep a tag, it's kept even if the amount of people voting to delete it is larger? I think that this would severely limit major disagreements about specific tags that have unclear consensus and deep divisions among users, and let us concentrate on unanimous crap. | |
| Jan 4, 2016 at 14:41 | comment | added | KutuluMike | my intent is to open one meta question where people can "nominate" bad tags and vote them up/down; the highest voted tags go first. | |
| S Dec 30, 2015 at 21:00 | history | answered | SQB | CC BY-SA 3.0 | |
| S Dec 30, 2015 at 21:00 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by SQB |