Re: Proposal: Nuke negative comments

Well, if you were looking for information on SNMP for Windows and you can't
find anything then you could still discover the note which Christopher has
indicated.

It's not clear to me what we win by removing the downvoted ones.

Having a hackathon which clears up curl_setopt would have, I'd argue, a
much bigger impact. Because, you know, there are an incredible number of
completely incorrect or just outdated (safe_mode, anyone?) comments there
-- massively upvoted, of course because they are old enough to drink in any
number of countries :P But I have not seen any concentrated efforts on
dealing with the comments but I might have missed something.

Drupal, for example, started a bug smash initiative (not my making nor do I
have anything to do with it) which is steadily trying to decrease the
cumulative bug age.

Overall, both from a theoretical perspective and from a practical one,
deletion seems to be pointless to me. What does it enable which we can't do
currently and how does it help with things that we should do?



On Sun, Jun 5, 2022 at 6:12 PM Daniel P. Brown <[email protected]>
wrote:

>     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].
>