-3
\$\begingroup\$

If we were to make popularity contests "Protected", new users would be obliged to answer at least one other question before having "fun".

I don't have the energy to enumerate what problem this attempts to solve, but it seems like it could help with the "have cake/eat cake" dilemma as it pertains to pornographic programming.

\$\endgroup\$
1
  • \$\begingroup\$ Relevant, timely blog post. \$\endgroup\$
    – Geobits
    Commented Apr 9, 2014 at 17:54

2 Answers 2

6
\$\begingroup\$

Well, I see several problems with this:

  1. You can't protect things that are less than a day old
  2. If you protect too many things, there's no point in even having a protection system anymore
  3. We really don't want to lock out new users too much; in fact, new users are key to expanding our community
  4. Not all bad answers to pop-contests are from new users

etc.

\$\endgroup\$
3
\$\begingroup\$

I don't think that is really necessary, because there are also some poor posts from users with more than 10 reputation points, and these users can still post answers to protected questions. Also, I have looked at some popular popularity contests, and there are not that much poor posts from new users.

If you see a popularity-contest that has many poor answers from new users, then protect it. But I don't really see a reason to protect all popularity contest, even the ones without poor answers.

\$\endgroup\$
2
  • \$\begingroup\$ Ahem, association bonus doesn't count towards answering protected questions. \$\endgroup\$
    – Doorknob
    Commented Apr 9, 2014 at 11:50
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Doorknob: Oops, I missed that. I changed it into "users with more than 10 rep points", because I've seen some poor answers from these users. \$\endgroup\$
    – ProgramFOX
    Commented Apr 9, 2014 at 11:54

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .