Fortsetzung der Diskussion von Discourse Post Voting:
Da der Eröffnungspost in einem Frage-und-Antwort-Thema die Frage selbst ist, sollte er keine Option zum Hochwählen haben.
2 „Gefällt mir“
Ist das nicht ein Feature, um Themen zu priorisieren?
Ich stimme zu, dass es derzeit verwirrend und unklar ist, warum jemand ein Thema wählen sollte.
2 „Gefällt mir“
Ich habe deinen Beitrag hierher verschoben, @volanar, da er bereits erwähnt wurde. 
Ich dachte, es gäbe eine Antwort, dass es absichtlich war, aber ich kann sie nicht finden. Ich werde nachforschen und sehen, was ich herausfinden kann. 
5 „Gefällt mir“
Als Workaround können Sie dieses CSS verwenden:
.post-stream .topic-post:first-child .post-voting-post {
display: none;
}
6 „Gefällt mir“
Dies ist sehr wohl eine Website-Präferenz. Die Abstimmung über die Qualität von Fragen ist etwas, das auf Stack Overflow-ähnlichen Websites gut etabliert ist.
Wir haben die Abstimmungssteuerung absichtlich beibehalten, das Entfernen über CSS ist jedoch in Ordnung. Wir sind offen dafür, vielleicht auch eine Website-Einstellung dafür hinzuzufügen.
5 „Gefällt mir“
Aber die Frage selbst kann nicht an der Abstimmung unter den Antworten teilnehmen. Außerdem kann sie nicht zusammen mit den Antworten gefiltert werden. Sie sollte immer oben stehen.
1 „Gefällt mir“
Ich frage mich, ob die andersartige Gestaltung der einen im OP helfen würde, zu zeigen, dass sie eine andere Bedeutung hat als die in den Antworten?
1 „Gefällt mir“
Voting on questions is something that I think is really worth discussion in the context of Discourse. I have a bit of experience with SO-like sites 
and I’d like to do a bit of thinking about whether votes are useful for questions on post-voting type topics here at all (for brevity, I’m just calling these “questions” from here on out).
You are correct that on platforms that are solely Q&A (e.g. Stack Overflow), there are specific things that question votes (up and down) are used for. In particular:
- indicating question quality or that you have the same question/can understand the need for such a question
- searching/sorting/filtering questions by score
- indicating the question is in/out of scope for the site
- hiding particularly low-quality content
- enabling deletion by non-moderator users
- rewarding/penalizing users for posting good/bad questions with reputation/karma.
As far as I’m aware, these don’t really apply to Discourse currently, whether using this plugin or not. I know the feature is relatively new but I’m curious how many of these Q&A features are things you’d want to make use of in Discourse. On the surface, it seems like a huge paradigm shift from the current trust level system and other moderation practices.
If your main goal in adding these question types is to allow communities to easily create/host their own SE-style sites where the primary purpose is more structured Q&A rather than discussions, that’s really interesting and I’d love to hear more about it… but I’ve learned a lot in my time at SO that has led me to question some of its core functionality to the point I’d outright discourage replicating many aspects of SO if I were building it from scratch.
When thinking about a hybrid system like a Discourse community running the post voting plugin would be, I don’t honestly know whether voting on questions makes sense at all. I admit that I don’t know a ton about the feature and how it’s implemented but I have poked around with it somewhat and read what posts I could here to learn about it, which has led me to this conclusion.
What value does question votes add in Discourse?
I understand the plugin has been official for less than a year and is likely still in flux. I won’t profess to be an expert in Discourse moderation, features, or scope by any stretch (feel free to correct any errors I make) but it seems that the status-quo uses different (and possibly better) solutions, which render many reasons for question scores unnecessary.
TL;DR - Read the stuff in bold.
| # | Feature | Use on SO | Use on Discourse | Useful? |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Notifications for votes | Upvotes notify poster of reputation change. There isn’t a Like feature on SO. | Votes do not create a notification for the asker but Likes do. | While it’s likely easy to add upvote notifications to Discourse, why have both? Likes are one of the primary reasons question votes seem unnecessary here. [1] |
| 2 | Vote impact on askers (reputation) | Reputation is how privileges are awarded on SO and users’ reputation is a major aspect of their status. Earning rep from well-received questions is one of the only ways users who only ask questions can gain privileges. | There is nothing like reputation. Privileges are awarded through the trust level system, which emphasizes and rewards simply reading content for TL 1. Votes on Q&A style posts seem to count as Likes, which are absent from both question and answers. | The direct tie between post creation, reputation, and privileges is the aspect of SO I most wish to change. Users should have multiple avenues to earn privileges that don’t require content creation. If users don’t need question votes to earn TLs, they seem unnecessary. |
| 3 | Vote impact on askers (non-rep) | One aspect of the non-public, automatic SO recidivism system (that cannot be overridden by mods) relies in part on question score to block future questions from users who consistently post poorly-received questions. SO doesn’t have a way to require preview of content before it’s live on site. | Moderators use tooling to manually silence, suspend or override the user’s TL rather than there being any automations. There are settings that can be used to require moderator review of new posts in some cases but aren’t based on post reception. | Considering SO’s scale and prioritization of allowing anyone to ask questions, the use of automated question bans for users is understandable (though the system needs an overhaul [2]). Relying on existing TL-based post restrictions and use of flags makes question score unnecessary for user moderation. |
| 4 | Score impact on posts | Low-scoring questions are hidden from the front page and more easily deleted by trusted users or automations. Some flag types can delete the question if enough of them are received. All flags of the same type are weighted equally, regardless of who cast the flag. | There’s a robust extant system to automatically close, hide, and delete posts based on flags, which also draws moderator attention to flagged posts. Flags from users with good flagging history are weighted more than flags from users who do not. | The existing system seems incredibly well balanced. By using past flags to weight new ones, users are incentivised to be accurate in their flagging. In contrast, using un-weighted votes to hide/delete content can be misused and doesn’t take past voting into account. Relying on votes to moderate posts is unnecessary in conjunction with the existing flagging system. |
| 5 | Question sorting/ filtering | Question score, answer count, accept status are clearly indicated in all question list views. Search can use question score to filter and sort results on user request. All topics are Q&A, so no syntax is needed to find Q&A only. Search includes syntax to return questions only. | Question score isn’t shown in topic lists but solved status and response count is shown. Results can be sorted by Likes (which includes votes). There’s no way to return Q&A topics only. The in:first syntax seems like it would return questions only. |
Adding search syntax for post type (Q&A vs discussion and question vs answer/response) seems valuable, though tangential. (This feature request post to show question score on the topic list) could be useful but Likes could stand in for question score in topic lists or you could decline the FR and keep the UI as-is. |
| 6 | Upvote meaning | The question upvote hover text states “This question shows research effort; it is useful and clear”. The first half is up for debate and the second half is subjective and ambiguous. Users likely vote on questions for many reasons including, “I had the same question!”, which arguably falls under “useful” but subject experts may decide simple but common questions aren’t useful (to them) and downvote. [3] [4] | Undefined. There’s no UI directions about when to vote and that’s understandable since it’s a new feature and each community may want to encourage voting for different reasons than others. The familiar Like feature is absent in this topic format. While Likes may default to hearts only, communities can configure additional reactions. | Even in communities that manage to find consensus about when to vote, question vote reasons are frequently more subjective and broad than answer votes reasons, which almost always mean “this is correct” or “I agree with this”. Likes, particularly when communities add a variety of reaction options, can better explain why someone votes on a question than pure up/down votes. |
| 7 | Downvote meaning | Ask 10 people when to downvote a question on SO and you’ll likely get 10 different answers, half of which will be “wrong” and many would be better addressed by editing, flagging, closing, or commenting. Underuse of these features leads to askers posting on Meta to express confusion and frustration at their question being downvoted without explanation and asking that such votes be prohibited. [5] | Similarly understandably undefined. Most question issues can likely be addressed more effectively by using comments to point out actionable changes or recommendations, using the flag option on questions to DM the asker, or flagging for moderators. The default heart wouldn’t make sense with the negative connotation of downvoting. | People hate getting downvotes, even when platforms go to great lengths to avoid letting users know they were downvoted. This is often more painful for question askers, who are looking for help and being vulnerable by sharing that they’re stuck and frustrated at people they interpret as unhelpful or obstructing. Question downvotes can be the easy response but don’t help askers improve. By leaning on other tools, you encourage communication rather than alienation. |
Adapting library features to your community’s home
I recognize the urge to follow patterns established by existing platforms - particularly ones you helped build - but my big takeaway about communities on SE/SO is that most (new) users assume SE is more like a forum and frequently struggle with their first question’s reception, particularly when it comes to closure and voting. Asking questions on SO is stress-inducing for many people… the internet is full of references to SO that tell them their question will either be completely ignored or harshly judged by self-appointed platform and subject matter experts who have arcane and capricious expectations for what qualifies as a programming question… and a lot of people don’t want that.
What they have frequently stated they want was smaller, closer communities where they know people, can make connections and ask for help without being made to feel like an idiot. In a lot of ways, I think Discourse is that. By having a broader format that encourages open-ended and subjective topics while also supporting a more classical Q&A format, you allow communities to support each other the way they wish.
Even if SO were the best possible way to create and curate a knowledge library (it’s not), Discourse isn’t (and shouldn’t be) trying to be that kind of resource. Your homepage sells Discourse as “The online home for your community”. When I want my kids to feel at home, I encourage and nurture their questions and make room for them to join in the conversation. When I take them to a library, I frequently have to remind them to be quiet and prevent them from treating the shelves like a jungle gym.
In my mind, question voting is something that may be necessary for a library but probably isn’t for a home - and it may negatively impact how much people enjoy their home.
Armchair PMing time
This section is significantly less important than the giant table above, so if you haven’t read that, go read it instead. The table explains how I’m getting to this summary but will also reveal any issues due to bad info on my part - as a reminder, I’m not a Discourse expert - I keep checking to make sure I don’t write “Discord” instead.
- Remove question voting - If people really want something more like SO’s pure Q&A, it could be an setting but I’d default it to off.
- Reinstate Likes on questions - give people a friendly way to react/support questions. Consider offering some default reactions that suit questions, both positive and negative.
- I understand wanting the consistency of either Likes or votes on the same topic but I think it’s worth mixing them and Discourse users are used to likes already… in fact…
- Investigate the value of Likes on answers in addition to votes and comments. Reactions can feel more friendly than votes and some people may want to indicate more than the binary up/down without writing a comment. If votes and likes are already being used to sort search results, maybe there’s a way to use both when determining answer order - similar to flag scores in the review queue.
- Keep voting on answers - answer votes serve the primary purpose of ranking solutions to a single question and both up- and downvotes are vital, even if they may cause some stress.
I understand wanting to avoid mixing Likes and votes on the same topic. ↩︎
Anecdotally, some users may overuse downvotes on questions with the goal of getting askers q-banned sooner, which can also make it harder to get unbanned. In such systems, it’s imperative to consider unintended consequences and find ways to minimize them. ↩︎
I could give a Ted talk on question voting on SO, but I’ll say that many SO users seem to have forgotten the “library of information” concept and the “shows research effort” hover text has exacerbated that. A great library has all of the information. It’s silly to refuse adding something to your library simply because it’s in the library two towns over. ↩︎
Also, don’t even get me started on “Voting is different on meta” - though, since my solution is merging Discourse and Q&A, maybe it’d at least be on topic. ↩︎
Regardless of what people say on SO, downvotes feel personal, even if they’re not intended to be taken that way. ↩︎
2 „Gefällt mir“
Ich liebe diese Analogie. Ich sollte anmerken, dass mein Zuhause manchmal wie eine Bibliothek behandelt wird (wenn die Kinder ihre Hausaufgaben machen) und die Bibliothek manchmal mehr ein Spielbereich sein kann (wenn sie Gemeinschaftsveranstaltungen veranstalten). Aber der Standard zählt. Discourse hat, ob zum Guten oder zum Schlechten, den Standard eines entspannteren Diskussionsforums. Es ist kollaborativ und nicht gegnerisch. Q&A wird für die meisten Discourse-Communities die Ausnahme sein.
Ich habe gemischte Gefühle. Ich denke, Downvotes können eine freundlichere Art sein, Meinungsverschiedenheiten auszudrücken als die Alternativen. Nachdem ich viele Beschwerden über Downvotes bearbeitet habe, ist die größte Sorge der Leute, dass anonyme Downvotes im Kontext eines verbundenen Reputationssystems unfair sind. Die Leute wollen wissen, warum sie downgevotet wurden. Oberflächlich betrachtet wollen sie es wissen, um das Problem zu beheben. In Wirklichkeit vermute ich, dass die meisten mit dem Downvoter streiten wollen und nichts haben, woran sie den Streit aufhängen können. Das ist normalerweise eine gute Sache, da diese Streitereien selten produktiv sind.
Downvotes, besonders bei Fragen, passen bei Discourse angesichts der kollaborativen Natur der meisten Foren schlechter. Ich bin mir nicht sicher, ob das Abstimmen über Fragen etwas wäre, das die Leute wollen würden, wenn es ohne das Stack Overflow-Beispiel entwickelt worden wäre. In einer idealen Welt würden Stimmen die Qualität der Frage widerspiegeln:
- Erklärt sie das Problem klar?
- Bietet sie genügend Kontext, damit andere das Problem untersuchen können?
- Kommt sie auf den Punkt und vermeidet unnötige Hintergrundgeschichten?
- Fällt sie in den Fachbereich der Community?
Die harte Realität ist, dass Fragenstimmen dazu neigen, die Gefühle der Community gegenüber der Frage widerzuspiegeln. Wenn Sie auf Stack Overflow nach dem NullPointerException-Fehler fragen, werden Sie eine schlechte Zeit haben, egal wie gut Sie fragen. Es wurde schon eine Million Mal gefragt und die Leute sind nicht daran interessiert, eine weitere Version der Frage zu beantworten.
Vielleicht ist das ein Merkmal von Fragenstimmen und kein Fehler. Wenn ja, ist es ein Merkmal, das Sinn macht, wenn es so viele Fragen gibt, dass die Community nicht mithalten kann. Es ist kein Merkmal, das neu gebildeten Communities oder Communities hilft, die normalerweise kollaborative Foren sind, die gelegentlich in Q&A abrutschen. Mit anderen Worten, ich bin mir nicht sicher, ob das Abstimmen über Fragen einer sehr großen Anzahl von Discourse-Communities hilft. Daher denke ich, dass es eine Einstellung sein sollte, die standardmäßig auf “deaktiviert” steht.
Ich habe kürzlich Post Voting einem Kunden vorgeschlagen, der Fragen für ein Video-AMA sammelte. Das alte System bestand darin, die Top-X-Fragen nach Likes zu nehmen. Die Person, die Fragen stellte, hatte keine einfache Möglichkeit, Antworten auf die Anfrage nach Fragen zu sortieren. Post Voting funktioniert hierfür hervorragend, da die Antworten automatisch sortiert werden. Die enthaltene Fragenabstimmung ist jedoch sinnlos und verwirrend. Viele Leute besuchen die Community, um ihre Fragen für das AMA einzureichen. Likes wären ein nützliches Signal. Downvotes? Wahrscheinlich ein Fehlklick oder Experimentieren mit der neuen Funktion. Ich werde es heute Nachmittag über CSS entfernen.[1]
Es gibt noch ein paar andere Anpassungen, die ich vornehmen muss, damit es mit ihrem Thema funktioniert, also ist es genauso gut, diese Ärgernis auch zu beheben. ↩︎
1 „Gefällt mir“
Wenn ich über die Frage selbst abstimmen wollte, wäre es dann sinnvoll, das Topic Voting Plugin zu verwenden? Oder verstehe ich das falsch?