Agreed this is a good idea. Will do it next time. Though I urge you to consider that the first description people read will shape their kind of response afterwards, so sometimes the “first mover advantage” is good for establishing, tacitly, what kinds of remarks and format of response will be used. (which is a mild instance of what I defend in the solved one)
Though it has some unfairness to it, which may be corrected by separating “expected form” from “first example”. Shall do so next time.
Or you could put your answer in the body as an example, explaining that you’ve also posted the answer as a comment. Then people can vote on your answer independently from your question, and you can establish the expected form before people begin reading other people’s comments.
Just one thing: both you and gwillen mentioned “voting on your example”
I didn’t think the point of giving an example was to allow for it being voted. An example is an example. Sure, one may like or dislike it, and think it more or less good. But why is the goal of voting an example important? For me, what matters is creating your own example, and helping those who put theirs.
Advice is 99,9% of time not a 1 bit thing that can be summarized in thumbs down or up.
But why is the goal of voting an example important? For me, what matters is creating your own example, and helping those who put theirs.
I agree with you. Receiving votes on our posts and comments is only an instrument to help us build better content. The content and how people use it is what matters.
Although the karma voting system provides imperfect information, it provides cheap imperfect information. Separating the question and answer seems like an easy way to make better use of the information that the votes provide. One benefit that I see from the separation is that you receive slightly more detailed feedback, like in a case where some people might upvote your post because of the thoughts that your question provokes but others may downvote the post because they take issue with your example. If enough people downvote the post because of the answer despite the quality of discussion that they think your question provides (which seems pretty unlikely), the post might become buried because of its low rating.
On second thought, No one actually undertook the exercise, which may have been related to the sheer size of the original post. I should edit it inside a comment now, and see if that changes.
Agreed this is a good idea. Will do it next time. Though I urge you to consider that the first description people read will shape their kind of response afterwards, so sometimes the “first mover advantage” is good for establishing, tacitly, what kinds of remarks and format of response will be used. (which is a mild instance of what I defend in the solved one)
Though it has some unfairness to it, which may be corrected by separating “expected form” from “first example”. Shall do so next time.
Or you could put your answer in the body as an example, explaining that you’ve also posted the answer as a comment. Then people can vote on your answer independently from your question, and you can establish the expected form before people begin reading other people’s comments.
Then that I will try on next time.
Just one thing: both you and gwillen mentioned “voting on your example”
I didn’t think the point of giving an example was to allow for it being voted. An example is an example. Sure, one may like or dislike it, and think it more or less good. But why is the goal of voting an example important? For me, what matters is creating your own example, and helping those who put theirs.
Advice is 99,9% of time not a 1 bit thing that can be summarized in thumbs down or up.
I agree with you. Receiving votes on our posts and comments is only an instrument to help us build better content. The content and how people use it is what matters.
Although the karma voting system provides imperfect information, it provides cheap imperfect information. Separating the question and answer seems like an easy way to make better use of the information that the votes provide. One benefit that I see from the separation is that you receive slightly more detailed feedback, like in a case where some people might upvote your post because of the thoughts that your question provokes but others may downvote the post because they take issue with your example. If enough people downvote the post because of the answer despite the quality of discussion that they think your question provides (which seems pretty unlikely), the post might become buried because of its low rating.
On second thought, No one actually undertook the exercise, which may have been related to the sheer size of the original post. I should edit it inside a comment now, and see if that changes.