Re: Proposal: Nuke negative comments

    I disagree with it being a "harsh" action, but it is permanent.
We have already been making them less visible by changing the color by
the decreasing popularity, but hiding entirely is tantamount to
deletion.

On Sun, Jun 5, 2022 at 9:10 PM Karoly Negyesi <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Have we considered allowing a threshold to be set and hiding comments voted below it? Default to zero if you so want. Deletion is a harsh action.
>
> On Sun, Jun 5, 2022 at 5:36 PM Daniel P. Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>     Yeah, I'm good with it, and can do mass changes via Master, as
>> well as the lowest-rated notes (anyone with access can, it's not just
>> me).  Maybe a threshold, for now, of -15 or below (if there are any),
>> then work our way up to a comfortable level.
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 5, 2022 at 8:32 PM Larry Garfield <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Tue, May 10, 2022, at 4:46 PM, Daniel P. Brown wrote:
>> > > On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 5:28 PM Larry Garfield <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> I'm fine with some slightly stricter threshold for purging (-5, or -1 but also at least X months old, or whatever).  No strong preference here.
>> > >
>> > >     This is another good idea of which I didn't think.  I've removed
>> > > thousands of notes that were using coding styles that had deprecated
>> > > functions and other such detrimental qualities over the years, but
>> > > making a point to check - at least after EOLs and major releases - is
>> > > probably a really good idea, Larry.
>> > >
>> > >> .... (I never use Windows, so I have no idea if it's valuable or misleading.)
>> > >
>> > >     Hear, hear.  Over a hundred devices (servers included) in our
>> > > house, and - aside from the as/when needed spin-up of a Windows VM -
>> > > not a single Microsoft product.  Nothing against it, like I used to be
>> > > in the nineties and early aughts, but this was one of my feelings
>> > > toward what Chris pointed out, specifically, about a heavily-downvoted
>> > > Windows-based function notes.  Was it because there were factual,
>> > > programmatic design errors, or just pseudo-/cyber-cultural bias?
>> > >
>> > >> To Dan's point, I am happy to discuss better options than this sledgehammer.  Mainly I'm just trying to improve the signal to noise ratio to make the janitorial work easier and more productive.  But I don't want a mythical future solution to block a simple and easy one now, either.  (Having a stricter one-time purge rule could still leave us sufficient data to test more nuanced tools in the future.)
>> > >
>> > >     We stand in agreement here.  Considering the consistent amount of
>> > > posts and voting on the user notes, it's likely to be substantial
>> > > enough to outweigh the current state of disrepair it's in now.
>> > >
>> > >     Regardless of opinions and turnout, though, I have to thank you,
>> > > Larry, for bringing up the point.  Because fully-manual intervention
>> > > just isn't a reasonable approach anymore, and it's becoming a
>> > > hinderance to the quality of the documentation as a whole.
>> >
>> > So can we proceed here?  Only a select few have access to run any mass-purge like we've been discussing (which is good), so those few, are you open to it?  What deletion rule would we want to go with?
>> >
>> > --Larry Garfield
>> >
>> > --
>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Daniel P. Brown" group.
>> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected].
>> >
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Daniel P. Brown" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected].