Timeline for Is [code-challenge] necessary?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 4, 2011 at 18:14 | comment | added | Jeff Swensen | Definitely play it by ear but I think your benchmark is off. Only if 100% of Questions were code-golf would that tag become superfluous. The fact that > 50% are code-golf has zero bearing in my opinion on the usefulness of the code-golf tag. | |
| Jan 28, 2011 at 14:29 | comment | added | C. K. Young | @marcog: Not yet. Once the pro tempore moderators are appointed, it'll be easy for them to, if indeed that's still the direction the site is going. | |
| Jan 28, 2011 at 11:23 | comment | added | moinudin | So the question is now, do we delete these superfluous tags? | |
| Jan 27, 2011 at 22:10 | comment | added | C. K. Young | @marcog: Indeed, play by ear. :-) | |
| Jan 27, 2011 at 22:07 | comment | added | moinudin | If it's that much (I really can't predict) then I'm less sure how to handle the distinction. Questioners should have an easy way to identify code golfs, without saying "this is a code golf". If >50% of questions are code golf I can foresee many questioners forgetting to tag [code-golf]. I guess we'll see how this evolves over time. | |
| Jan 27, 2011 at 22:01 | comment | added | C. K. Young | @marcog: True, though, I expect code golf to comprise at least 50% of posts, regardless, so, such a tag is probably still mostly content-free. | |
| Jan 27, 2011 at 22:00 | comment | added | moinudin | Right now [code-golf] is redundant, but if (and I'm going to answer a lot of questions like this :P) we widen scope then it will serve a purpose. However, however we move scope I don't see any on-topic questions not being [code-challenge] questions. | |
| Jan 27, 2011 at 21:55 | history | answered | C. K. Young | CC BY-SA 2.5 |