I say that we should go ahead with this change.
Apart from simply correctly appreciating the massive amount of effort put into writing good challenges, this would also be a very nice added incentive to start writing questions, especially for existing users who now want to earn more rep. :)
PPCG is different from most other sites on Stack Exchange in that it is not a Q+A site; in fact, many questions that ask for help (other than "how to golf in ____") are marked as being not on topic. The thing that makes PPCG unique is that the interaction between question asker and question answerer is important. PPCG is not a site where ...
Yes, but only if downvotes scale to -4
Peter Taylor brought up a very good point in a comment: There are many questions which would change from being worth negative rep to positive rep should this change be implemented without scaling downvotes accordingly.
Currently, downvotes on both questions and answers are worth -2 reputation. I propose that downvotes ...
I don't think this is a frequent enough issue to warrant using one of the custom close reason slots. But I do think it's a big enough issue to warrant not only a downvote and a close vote but also a delete vote. Having questions which ask for malicious code can only be detrimental to the reputation of this community, so they should be expunged as quickly as ...
I'm late to this party, so I probably won't get many votes.
Upvotes +15, Downvotes -5
For each one challenge, approximately 9.9 solutions are written. It seems obvious to me that challenges are far more valuable to the site than solutions. Make upvotes count for +15.
Fifteen reputation for an upvote will reward poorly written challenges. We have a Sandbox ...
Keep It, but...
...we should definitely update e.g. the tag info. The recent discussions have not been unproductive, and I think we have better guidelines than ever before but at the moment they are still all buried in meta questions/answers.
Example: As far as I know it is the first time that the term validity criterion emerged so clearly which definitely ...
View all question with today's standards. If the question fits as current standards then leave it open; if it doesn't fit then vote/flag to close it. If we keep the questions which don't fit as per current standards, then people will ask why the questions are still open.
hims056 on meta.SE
The same thing applies to all Stack Exchange sites, really. Just ...
The tooltip for the downvote button says
This question does not show any research effort; it is unclear or not useful.
It is an excellent description of the question you link.
Does not show any research effort
The particular example linked looks like a "Do my homework" question, and does not show any evidence of effort beyond a poor transcription.
I'm with xnor on this one. The purpose of an objective winning criterion is that answers are comparable. Whether that is used to determine an overall winner or a winner per language isn't all that important. In particular, there is no obligation for anyone to mark an answer as accepted, so if we'd rule out challenges that only have per-language winners, I'd ...
Retire it but leave it be
As it stands, only 4 challenges bear that tag. It wouldn't be a huge endeavor to retag them. However, the 1p5 tag itself obviously has notable historical significance for our site. Thus I think we should keep the tag around to mark the challenges that were part of this effort, but retire its use for new challenges.
In general, I ...
If the challenge is a homework question in disguise, or otherwise looks like an attempt to get this community to do someone else's work for them, then I would downvote it. I would certainly not direct them to Stack Overflow.
If the post is a regular programming question and is suitable for Stack Overflow, then I would refrain from voting and leave a helpful ...
One time bonus for Nice Questions
This probably won't be implemented. But it seems to be exactly what all you want:
Easy questions getting a lot of upvotes won't be affected much.
Questions having a lot of upvotes and downvotes won't be affected much.
New users writing bad questions won't be affected much before understanding this situation.
Should the tag be split?
I think it's clear that the majority want to see popularity contests continue, but also the majority find problems with most challenges that are posted with this tag.
Is part of the problem that the tag is used for more than one thing?
There seem to be at least two different challenge types that are tagged popularity-contest.
Challenges should never be reused.
If a challenge has been posted in the past and you think it would be fun to participate in it, participate in the existing challenge. Don't repost an old challenge because
It isn't your own work
It doesn't provide new content for the site
By the very definition of the term, it's a duplicate.
There's nothing wrong specifically with popularity-contest (indeed it is a good scoring criteria for several popular kinds of challenges, such as image-processing). The main issue is that people misunderstand that popularity-contest does not make your challenge exempt from the standard rules of what is on-topic here (an issue in particular is that ...
That's a standard message
Certain close messages are standard across all Stack Exchange sites and cannot be changed on a per-site basis. People who vote to close as unclear should specify in comments what exactly is unclear.
These are just some ideas I've been collecting over the past couple days. I make no promises about their efficacy, but I do hope they will help. These are all individual actions that I believe we can take to make our challenges better received: they are not meant to be policies or anything like that.
Contribute to the sandbox yourself
By reviewing other ...
As I said in the question, I'm not a fan of these, and would prefer if they were simply off-topic.
That being said, I think they violate 3(e) of Stack Exchange's Terms of Service. But even if you could throw that hammer at every such question, it would still be nice to have an explicit close vote reason, since we do get these at least every other month (I ...
It's OK not to accept any answer in a code golf challenge where multiple languages participate. The important thing is that answers in the same language can be of objectively compared; cross-language comparisons do not make sense. Accepting a single answer is a feature of the SE platform that doesn't fit our purpose.
Although I am a mod, I am not speaking on behalf of anybody but myself in this post.
The Community Team looks at a number of factors in deciding when and whether to graduate a beta site. The stats you see are one indication, but it's definitely not "only one part keeping us in beta". Sites that are Excellent in all categories are not guaranteed a graduation,...
I definitely agree that titles should not be meaningless. It's difficult to set a rule as the level of meaning is subjective, but I encourage everyone to add comments to questions they think could benefit from a more informative title. Titles can be both useful and funny - like this delightful title.
My own personal opinions on your examples:
If a program ...
Enforce standards for these questions
I think a lot of the problem is that golf-this-for-me tips questions aren't held to the site's usual standards of clarity, completeness, and objectiveness. I know these can be hard for new askers to get a handle on, but we already require the same for challenges they'd post. Sandboxing should be strongly encouraged here ...
As of yesterday, November 13th 2019, this is now in effect network wide:
We’re changing the reputation earned from getting a question upvote to ten points, making it equal to the reputation earned from an upvote to an answer.
The generally accepted rule is:
Can answers from one question be copied over to the other with little or no modification and still be competitive?
If you are unsure, post your revised challenge in the Sandbox and ask if others think it is a duplicate.
Is this type of question on-topic for PPCG?
I certainly think so. It is a kind of programming puzzle, and it has a
well-defined, objective winning criterion. One potential problem is the
language-specific-ness, which is discouraged on PPCG in general. However, I
don't think it's much of a problem in this case, and that the Golf Practice
I don't believe there is anything to do in this situation. While people are strongly recommended to search for duplicates before posting, I don't think that should extend to the sandbox. Adding yet another obligation to our current "pre-posting checklist" is not a good idea.
(I personally believe that question titles should be kept as clear and concise as possible, no misdirection, but for the sake of addressing my own hypocrisy I'm going to play devil's advocate here.)
Unless you're the kind of SOer that reads everything on the front page all the time, you're not going to click every question. This, by nature, means you're ...
Yes, but don't be hasty. Even after the author edits the question in response, the comments are still valuable in certain scenarios:
The question was closed as unclear (or is headed that way). In that case, as someone who uses the reopen review queue I want to see the comments because they help me understand why the question was opened and to form my own ...
Voting and closing serve two separate purposes, so doing both can send two separate signals. The purpose of a (challenge) downvote, as per the tooltip that appears when you hover over it, is:
This question does not show any research effort; it is unclear or not useful
Granted, the description is a bit out of place on PPCG, but downvotes should be used ...