9
$\begingroup$

Since switching over to the new sandbox its use has been dominated by two users. They have proposed a number of questions that have been negatively received. Many of these questions have either been pointed out as being probably a duplicate or have suggestions of how to modify the questions to a form that would be better received by the community.

Instead of making substantive improvements to their question, the users move on to proposing a new question with many of the same problems as their previous question.

What can we as a community do to encourage more productive use of the sandbox?

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ I wanted to do the sandbox thing yesterday, but it's not a simple thing to do, or at least I couldn't find it in a couple of minutes of trying to work it out $\endgroup$ – Kilisi May 9 '17 at 8:26
  • $\begingroup$ @Kilisi You can find the Sandbox here. If you want to give it a try you can post your question as an answer to that post. Then people will comment and vote on whether they think your post is ready to be posted on the Main Site or not and you can use that feedback to edit the question. It's recommended to wait at least 24 hours before posting on the Main Site to give people in different timezones a chance to have a look at your question. $\endgroup$ – Secespitus May 9 '17 at 8:50
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, too late for me though, already solved my question on the main site. Doubt I'll ask any more. $\endgroup$ – Kilisi May 9 '17 at 8:52
6
$\begingroup$

As I mentioned before...

I'm thinking that a one post per user rule would help tremendously.

Users should be expected to improve their post till it can be posted on the main site, or if it's not salvageable delete it. After all the point of the thing should be to get feedback and improve the question... If that isn't happening they should be discouraged from wasting people's time.

This may not cause specific users to improve, but at least it will cut down on the visible noise and leave a little more room for well meaning users to be heard.

$\endgroup$
3
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I think setting a limit for concurrent active posts in the sandbox would help posters and the community to focus on bridging the gap between a first draft and a solid question ready for posting on main. I think we might want the limit to be a little more generous than one; sometimes people reasonably are working on a couple of questions in parallel, or a single question in the sandbox might need to be split up so why not do it now? I doubt that many of us have the ability to shepherd more than two or at most three questions through the sandbox at once, though. $\endgroup$ – Monica Cellio May 11 '17 at 1:45
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @MonicaCellio fair enough... But... Not to put too fine a point on it... Would you mind taking certain users aside and straightening things out? I'm​ trying to be patient and understanding and all, but it looks like there's a certain amount of deliberate "not getting it" that's been going on. Not sure if it could be corrected with some prodding from a moderator, or if that's already happened... But I hope you understand the frustration. $\endgroup$ – apaul May 11 '17 at 4:33
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I do understand the frustration, and trust me, we're aware even if we aren't having a public discussion about a specific user. In the meantime, everybody please remember that participating in the sandbox is voluntary; you are completely free to decide which posts to read, provide help for, or completely ignore. $\endgroup$ – Monica Cellio May 11 '17 at 13:04
3
$\begingroup$

Exercise patience. This is most likely a temporary aberration. The fact that two users are monopolizing is something that will happen from time to time. Hopefully they will eventually learn to do questions better. In time, other users will post questions.

One way of making the sandbox more productive would be to encourage other users to post their questions to sandbox. Why not post a question of your own?

These things happen. That's why patience is necessary.

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ Congratulations, you are the only sane person here. Cause I'm not. $\endgroup$ – Mephistopheles May 9 '17 at 11:03
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @RedactedRedacted If I'm the only sane person here, we're all in trouble. You will have noticed what constitutes questions is narrowly defined here. Achieving that isn't easy, but it's not impossible. Don't be in a hurry. Spend time answering other WB users' questions. Looking at other questions will give you perspective. $\endgroup$ – a4android May 9 '17 at 11:52
  • $\begingroup$ Btw, Why does everybody hates whatever I post (I mean my self critic) $\endgroup$ – Mephistopheles May 9 '17 at 11:54
  • $\begingroup$ @RedactedRedacted I have no idea. Your self-criticism showed irony and a sense of humour, nothing problematic at all. This makes me the wrong person to ask. $\endgroup$ – a4android May 9 '17 at 12:22
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ @RedactedRedacted people likely downvoted your self critic because it shows many of the same issues that your sandbox posts do. It's​ beginning to look like you're looking for attention more than help with your posts. The jokes weren't amusing to the community to begin with, and you don't appear to be making an effort to drop the nonsense and just ask real questions. $\endgroup$ – apaul May 9 '17 at 14:59
1
$\begingroup$

Correct me if I'm wrong, but answer ban on meta works all right? If it does, then problem will solve itself, as users who post a lot of poorly received, downvoted posts to sandbox will soon be banned f from posting on meta. And last time I asked, deleted answers actually counted more towards auto ban, not less, so the fact they are deleting does not help them.

$\endgroup$
1
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ Post bans can happen on Meta sites too, but the thresholds are deliberately different to account for the fact that Meta sites work differently from the main sites, particularly in terms of voting. $\endgroup$ – user May 9 '17 at 8:15
-6
$\begingroup$

Maybe they should have their own personal sandbox post.

$\endgroup$
6
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ Ummm, are you serious? Like that could work, but it sounds a little strange coming from a moderator... A bit like telling a kid that you want to play hide and seek and then not bothering to look for them... $\endgroup$ – apaul May 9 '17 at 0:13
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Sounds like they've got one already. $\endgroup$ – a4android May 9 '17 at 5:37
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Posts should always be evaluated on their own merit. That was the rule since Stack Exchange beginning. $\endgroup$ – Mołot May 9 '17 at 8:43
  • $\begingroup$ That sounds like a great idea :) $\endgroup$ – Mephistopheles May 9 '17 at 11:02
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @Mołot Absolutely, but it is also reasonable to expect a higher standard from an elected diamond moderator with almost 50k rep on the site than from a random user with anywhere between a few hundred and some thousands of rep. A diamond moderator is "an ambassador of trust", and is "held to a higher standard of behavior" than the rest of the community. stackoverflow.blog/2009/05/18/a-theory-of-moderation $\endgroup$ – user May 9 '17 at 11:11
  • $\begingroup$ @Michael I meant him, not you. I agree with you. $\endgroup$ – Mołot May 9 '17 at 11:13

You must log in to answer this question.

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