# How can we improve the quality of questions/challenges?

I just checked out the site and from the last 10 challenges 4 are downvoted. That doesn't fill me with a great deal of desire to check out the site regularly to see if there is anything worth answering. I know this has been asked before but from todays search nothing has changed.

I think it must be a bit disspiriting for new members to come here, post a challenge that in many cases they have worked hard on and get it downvoted often with no explanation.I have put forward this idea before but it wasn't well accepted but nevertheless I am going to propose it again.

Answer-only membership until you have 100 rep (rep from joining from other sites not included) and then obviously, after that time the new member will have a better understanding of how the site works.

Comments? Ideas? I'm just trying to think of a way to stop new members joining and then effectively being told they are not good enough when they post their first challenge without really understanding what is required. Basically to make it more wecoming and improve the quality of the questions.

• That is the entire goal of the Sandbox. People just gotta use it
– Poke
Oct 21 '19 at 18:40
• "in many cases they have worked hard on and get it downvoted often with no explanation" [citation-needed] Oct 21 '19 at 19:17
• @AdmBorkBork Thanks for the response. here is an example. Plenty of questions in the comments to ask for clarification (that is normal) but why nothing to explain why it is currently on -2? Oct 21 '19 at 19:55
• @Poke I hear what you are saying. I have used the sandbox for all four challenges that I have posted. There are two problems with the sandbox. One, people don't use it. Two, when they do, so few of us go there (including me) that when someone does post something there and they get no feedback,they post it on main anyway after a couple of days perhaps assuming that "no news is good news" so all is OK. Oct 21 '19 at 20:02
• I hear ya and I don't disagree.
– Poke
Oct 21 '19 at 20:07
• I disagree with your example. There were five people that VTC and another two or three commentators. Plus a couple more that agreed with the VTC or comments and simply downvoted, and there's enough to explain the vote numbers. Oct 21 '19 at 20:24
• +1 for the question title (I'd like to see this discussed), but I don't like the idea of forcing answering before allowing people to set challenges. I think writing challenges and learning the hard way should be left open as an option. Some people are mainly answerers/solvers, and others are mainly challenge authors. I wouldn't want to work against that. Oct 23 '19 at 11:24