Proper etiquette and timing for voting here on Answers (particularly down-voting)?

[woodcock]

I am having a disagreement^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^ side-discussion with @lguinn and @aljohnson_splunk (and others?) here:

http://answers.splunk.com/answers/243879/field-extractions-using-regex-not-working.html#comment-2441...

My contention is that we should do as dead people do in Chicago: vote early and often! However I am in the minority of the thread so I thought I would bring the question to a wider audience.

What do you think?

[aljohnson_splun]

I guess to quote myself as well

its kind of unnecessary when the vote hasn't been upvoted or accepted. If so, the author of the question could still edit and fix the question, have a comment-dialogue with the asker, etc.

I think it's unnecessary to downvote early and often (which is what was happening). The alternative, upvoting early and often, seems like a much better rule of thumb.

[alacercogitatus]

Although the title references a question, @woodcock never actually asks a question contained within the body of text normally defined for asking questions. For me, this is poor form, and normally would be edited or the author asked to rephrase. I don't typically read titles a questions. But that is personal preference.

As for up voting, my answer is : yes. If the answer/question has helped you, shed some light unto your dark existence, was entertaining (and with correct information) or is just a "better" (two answers are correct, but one provides links to docs, search examples, etc) answer, then by all means, up vote the question/answer/comment.

For down voting, I've done it. But rarely. I keep those down votes for completely wrong answers/bad advice as mentioned prior by a number of people. Using a down vote to express frustration OR to down vote an answer that is CORRECT, but perhaps not in the correct CONTEXT of the question is also prohibited.

Answering a question twice by the same user is, to me, frowned upon. If you have two answers, edit a single answer and say "Or you can do it this way".

Asking a question to a user you answered by answering it your self ( z.B an author questions an answer by answering the question) is also redundant. Use the comment feature.

[DalJeanis]

I disagree regarding answering the question yourself. When a poster has found the answer themselves, and any other answers were not useful solutions, I believe the poster should be encouraged to post the solution and accept it, both as a benefit to others who stumble on the thread, and to mark the question complete.

The rest I agree with.

[jtrucks]

I like your commentary and suggestions about how to use answer vs. comments, as well. It is easy to edit an answer, so why not put multiples together?

[lguinn2]

Also, a pet peeve of mine: when a question is asked, and the first responder puts the answer in the comments box! If I am not sure about my answer, I will still propose it as an answer with appropriate caveats like "I haven't tried this myself but..."
To me, comments on the original question should be clarifying questions, etc. Put your answer, even if it is tentative, as an answer! You can always edit, or comment, or even post a replacement answer if you need to...

[piebob]

yes, one of the things that our beloved @ppablo does is convert such comments to answers when it seems appropriate--but it would be great to have people post tentative answers as answers, and then expand on them by either editing or commenting.

[lguinn2]

Yes, I see that we keep @ppablo very busy indeed!

[woodcock]

I did go back and add an explicit interrogative to the original body text which exactly matches the clearly implied (but admittedly unwritten) question.

P.S. Because your criticism was not personal, I was easily able to resist the temptation to down-vote your answer. 😆

[piebob]

i'm super glad you asked this question, and i'm curious about the responses it will get. this is not something we've had an official policy about on Answers, and i'd really like what we ultimately choose to be concensus-driven.

one thing i'd like to say in particular is that i want to emphasize that downvotes should never given, nor taken, personally--the goal of this site is to provide accurate, timely, helpful information. i would like for us as a community to be able to trust that the other members of the community have our best interests in mind.

[jtrucks]

I concur that down votes aren't (or shouldn't be) personal attacks on the poster - ever. Votes should be about quality of content.

[woodcock]

I like the new feature that forcibly includes the text "I downvoted you because ..."

[woodcock]

I assume you upvoted the question then, right? 😆

[piebob]

yes, yes i did 🙂

[jtrucks]

I think up-voting early and often is a good thing. I think this holds true for both good questions (or interesting ones, even if not well-stated) and good answers (again, or interesting ones, even if not well-stated) that provide valid results. Also, I think we all should encourage the acceptance of the most correct answer for a question.

If we don't vote things up, they won't get noticed. If we do vote things up, they will get noticed. Also, people asking good or interesting questions or providing good or interesting answers will usually do so more often if they get upvotes. This is due to a complex human response and motivation mechanism similar to why social media "like" hits and similar positive flagging works. These actions key into things wired into us humans for feeling good.

The real result of more people voting is not to dilute each vote but to empower each questioner and answerer. If more people do it, we all get more feedback about it and do it more.

As for down voting, I think it should be reserved for straight up poor advice or false answers , yet used far more often in general. A down vote will stand out, and it should do so as an example of something that will not provide a functional solution.

[ChrisG]

I agree about upvoting. I would also like to see a stronger practice of accepting answers, and agree that the community can do more to advocate for people to accept answers.

Downvoting: I think jtrucks is right here, too. I have seen too much downvoting when people don't like an answer, even if it is correct and the truth. Bad advice or inaccurate answers should get downvotes. But I think it is not okay for people to use downvotes to express their frustration that the product doesn't work the way they want it to.

[lguinn2]

@jtrucks and @ChrisG - well said

[richgalloway]

I think upvotes are equivalent to (and preferable to) "I agree" or "+1" comments and should be done early and often. Waiting until an answer is accepted before upvoting it is like waiting until after the Super Bowl to decide which team to root for.

I don't like to downvote, however. Besides taking away karma, it just doesn't do enough. Better to write a corrective comment, IMO.

We should not be trying to discourage people from posting answers. Even a wrong answer may give the OP enough to solve his problem.

[lguinn2]

I totally agree. If you down-vote, I think you should tell the community why you disagree with the answer (politely).

The next person to read the thread may have a slightly different problem. When they look at the comment(s), they may be able to tell if the answer might work for them, doesn't work at all, violates the laws of physics, etc.

[ppablo]

To address the points you brought up @richgalloway and @lguinn, I've requested a feature to be added where users must provide a reason for a downvote upon clicking the down arrow. This reason would be publicly posted as a comment under the downvoted post (question, answer, or comment). I figured this would make users more accountable for providing actual constructive feedback for everyone in the community to learn.

If/when this feature is added, I'll update here 🙂

Patrick

[piebob]

fyi we have a "me too" feature now, to see if that helps with the chatter.

[jeffland]

I slightly disagree with your first point.

The way I feel this board works is that there are three types of answers/comments (and questions): those which are concise, matter to many and are generally "very good" (alternatively: humorous), a type of answer/question which receives some amount of upvotes. Then there is the majority of answers/questions which receive neither up- nor downvotes (or one single upvote from the one asking the question). Lastly, I rarely see the type of answers/questions which are actually downvoted (for a reason).

In contrast, take a look at stackoverflow.com, where up- and downvotes are cast much more regularly by a much higher number of users, which gives each individual vote less of an impact and where there are thus more than these three categories. A vote here on the other hand is much stronger. This makes me feel that downvoting is only for actually bad answers/questions which may be harmful/belligerent/"very bad". The way I see it, an answer which doesn't solve the problem but which is both in good faith and well reasoned/researched does not need downvoting - those easily fit in the larger category with neither up- nor downvotes.

In other words, I feel a downvote here on answers.splunk.com should remain what it is, i.e. a rarely used method to actually state your disapproval/warn others of malicious advice. In the case you cite above, the answer is not "very bad", it simply didn't solve the problem and was a guess - but it was an educated guess and had more information to it, so even if it didn't solve the problem, it helped create knowledge, which is why we are here.