|No such thing as a small change|
RFC: Better Best Answers Gets Realby jdporter (Canon)
|on May 16, 2019 at 20:50 UTC||Need Help??|
This is a followup to RFC: Better Best Answers
The fundamental objective of my proposal is to eliminate the Categorized Questions and Answers section — its machinery is odd, gratuitously different from the other sections; difficult to maintain, and nobody uses it, despite its promise — and replace it with something better.
So I have implemented part of the proposal, up to a basic level of functionality, as follows:
It is now possible to mark root posts in the Seekers of Perl Wisdom section (hereinafter called questions) as "good", and to mark as "good" any replies (hereinafter called answers) to questions marked as "good". (To be very clear: a question can be 'good'; and a 'good' question can have 'good' answers. An answer cannot be 'good' unless its root post is 'good'.)
Furthermore, it is possible to associate one or more tags (aka keywords) to a 'good' question.
In most views (such as the SoPW section and threaded node views), questions and answers marked as 'good' will be displayed with a nice gold star next to the title, as well as the tags.
There is a new section-like page, Illuminations, which lists all the tags currently in use; this view is analogous to the main page of the Q&A section. If you click on one of the tags, you get a page listing the individual questions having that tag.
Marking a node as 'good' (which I have internally called "blessing"), and setting the keywords of a blessed node, are features accessible to the QandAEditors via their nodelet.
Also of interest to the QandAEditors is the enhancement whereby 'SoPWify'ing a Categorized Question not only converts it to a SoPW post but marks it as 'good' and gives it a tag corresponding to the QA section it was in. An example of this effect can be seen in this post. You can see that it is 'blessed' (it has a gold star), and its tags consist of "numbers"; that's because, before conversion, it was a Categorized Question under the QandASection: numbers section.
So that's the basic workings we have so far. There's a bit more to do before we can consider this major task done:
Now my question for you, fellow monk, is:
What do you think of this? Is it a good idea? What more could we do with this capability to make PerlMonks better?
I would also be concerned that QandAEditors (or whatever group is given this power) might be tempted, however subconsciously, to treat this award as a special upvote for themselves.
We do not want these deputies to go casting stars on every question they like.
I reckon we are the only monastery ever to have a dungeon stuffed with 16,000 zombies.