in reply to Re^2: New node - Supersearch - Feature proposal !
in thread New node - Supersearch - Feature proposal !

I disagree with you. Wrong behaviour can only be corrected in a limited way with technological changes. People who don't want to search and read first, but who want answers quick and easy, just are not going to search and read. They will ignore any search results that might be presented when the solution is offered that the OP has thought of.

More experienced Perl Monks often answer questions with a link to a thread with a question and accompanying answer. By doing that, they educate the monks that ask those easy to answer questions. Search first, and if nothing is found, or if things are still not clear, only than ask the question. Most monks learn this lesson quick.

Presenting the monk with a tool that offers search information while the question is being formulated, does not educate the monk, it is spoiling the monk, while putting an unnecessary strain on the system.

An old saying applies here: the whole village is needed to educate a child.

  • Comment on Re^3: New node - Supersearch - Feature proposal !

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: New node - Supersearch - Feature proposal !
by 5mi11er (Deacon) on Oct 11, 2005 at 13:57 UTC
    I think we are, for the most part, in agreement; but talking past one another. Technology can not fix behavioral problems, if someone doesn't want to search, even doing the search for them isn't going to get them to stop and read what the search found. I agree with that.

    And I understand the desire to not put unnecessary strain on a system by doing what would largely be futile searches. I'm not an advocate for the OP's original idea, but I'm willing to entertain weird ideas for the sake of finding something that would work.

    What I did say was that the user interface presented by PM has room for improvement, and that the interface could do a better job encouraging people to search for answers before posting their questions.

    So, the basic tenet I'm presenting is that while technology can't fix behavioral problems, it can, through the use of good user interfaces, encourage correct behavior. The XP system here is simply one way technology is used to encourage correct behavior. While not perfect, it can certainly be said to be mostly successful.

    I'll add some more comments about possible improvements I've thought about in a different node.