Blog

1

1

Following a discussion on another member´s numerous questions I came up with this idea, that I would like to share with the community: it would be convenient to have some upper limit to the number of questions that we can ask, and this limit could be evolving for each individual member depending on his own reputation. For instance, new members could start with a total allowance of questions (say fifteen or twenty maximum) and then as you have improvements in your reputation, based on your answers and questions, your limits might grow proportionally. This could make all of us (including, of course myself!) more careful in terms of asking a new question, ultimately helping to improve the quality of Paleohacks. What do you think?

flag
1 
 I think that this idea has promise - as long as newcomers still have a decent allowance of questions, I think it could promote higher quality questions and answers over the long run. – familygrokumentarian Apr 18 2011 at 13:31
you could have a good allowance of questions for all newcomers plus a certain number of "free" questions for each member per month (say five, for instance). Beyond that you may need to earn your right to ask new questions by improving your rep, either by answering other people questions or being upvoted. The point would be to discourage people from asking questions that are too superficial or have been asked before. – Philosopher Apr 18 2011 at 13:37

7 Answers

7

I'd say the number of questions is less important than the quality. If someone's particularly good at thinking up good questions that haven't been asked yet, you don't want to limit him. On the other hand, I've been here for two months and haven't asked a question yet, because everything I think of has been asked already. Is the problem really too many questions, or questions being repeated by people who didn't search first?

link|flag
1 
 I totally agree with you Aaron but somehow if someone has interesting questions to ask, he/she will end up getting positive votes, so his/her rep increase and then he/she will be able to ask more questions, etc. I am not talking about limits that are too strict, only those that will make you think twice before asking those questions. – Philosopher Apr 18 2011 at 13:26
1 
 +1, Definitely agree with the remarks on 'quality' and refraining from asking previously asked questions (though, I think the mods help with closing threads like that when it happens). – Allie Apr 18 2011 at 13:27
Ignacio, that seems reasonable. I'm not familiar with the software used here; what you suggest may be as simple as setting a configuration value or two, in which case it could make sense. If it required some programming to add the feature, it'd probably be simpler to deal with the occasional "question bomber" with the available moderation tools. – Aaron B. Apr 18 2011 at 14:43
3

I completely disagree with this question, and here is why.

This is a place where like-minded people can gather information, source products, harvest new ideas, share personal experiences, and much more. I have gained more from this website in the past year than any other website. I have achieved this through asking "dumb" or "too many" quesitons early on, and then being conditioned (through positive or negative forum feedback) to better think my questions, or the intent of my quesiton etc. This has also allowed me to fine to my critical thinking skills, to force myself to really figure out what it is I want to do with my nutrition, lifestyle, etc..

This is a place where we come to learn. To censor that, or limit that, is flat out wrong in my opinion.

If a handfull of people are bothered by the amount of questions that are asked by a select few, then

either:

a) don't answer them,

or

b) answer the question more thoroughly.

From my own experience, the people who took the time to sit down and explain their answers, in detail, changed HOW I look at things. This is more important than just the information itself. It is the application of the information AND WHY that really allowed me to grasp it all. In this model you learn what to really value (less wiggle room with choices) and what falls within the spectrum of optimalization. For me, this made Paleo compliance effortless and much more pleasant.

link|flag
Good advice, especially when no one asked in the first place! Here is a question: Do VLC diets reduce testosterone and sperm count/sex drive? I just don't feel as peaked as usual on the VLC-diet given my high-level of oxygen-independant exercise(daily session of 1 hour max.) and oxygen-dependant exercise(not too high really: 2 x 35 minutes of moderate intensity walking per diem). Todd: any ideas about the VLC-diet? I couldn't find any other sources-really! – PersonMan Apr 18 2011 at 20:41
Based on my own N=1, I would say I noticed less "drive" when venturing into lower BF%'s, and my lower BF% was a result of a stint of VLC. I also feel VLC affects my weight training, focus, and soccer. So I added some starch (roughly 250g per day, Sweet potato or Russet) and I have felt benefits in all areas. Whether this is correlation, or causation, I cannot confirm, just that this is what worked for me. – Todd Apr 18 2011 at 21:22
1

While that sounds like a good idea, it might not be great for a newbie who hasn't learned much yet and can't answer many of the questions. If they had 15 or 20 though, that would probably be enough for them to get a feel for paleo and start answering. So it could potentially be good, but it also might be too complicated for what it is. If Patrik wants to do it, I'm sure it would work, but the effort required might be more than the result is worth.

I guess I'm just not sure how much it would really improve paleohacks. There seems to be only one user who would be affected by this...

link|flag
1 
 mari yes I do not know how many users will be CURRENTLY limited but you also do not know whether, in the future, as the number of users gets larger, many more could need these limits. It could also put a more immediate interest on the idea of increasing your rep since then you will have a larger limit of questions to ask. Of course this is just a suggestion and it would be up to Patrick and the users to define whether it would be worthwhile to implement at some point in time. – Philosopher Apr 18 2011 at 13:16
1 
 Well, there have been a few that ask an amazing number of questions and don't respond to any. – sherpamelissa Apr 18 2011 at 13:17
Also some people ask questions that are highly regarded by many which ends up increasing their reputation too. I guess if someone is only asking questions and never gets up-voted at some point the soft could tell this person to stop for a while... – Philosopher Apr 18 2011 at 13:22
1

I'm just a newbie but I do appreciate the assistance I get from everyone here every day of every minute. I personally TRY to find the answers to my questions but really its all very new and can get very complex and I get more confused the more I read. So if I'm limited because I'm a newbie I'd feel less welcome or tolerated for asking such questions.

And there is NO WAY that you've all asked every possible question and given every possible answer, at least from a newbies perspective; I'm learning so much from all of you and I hope that there might still be more for you all to learn from each other as well. I really do want to make a conscience effort to reply when I have an answer or comment, different perspectives give more insight.

THIS FORUM AND YOU ALL ARE AWESOME; don't punish the masses for what sounds like it is one person's abuse/overuse?

link|flag
1

Oh, i get it, y'all talking about PersonMan. Well, at least he's not dumb.

Limiting questions going forward is not a terrible idea, but probably unnecessary, right?

link|flag
I attribute my lack of dumbness to the dietary calcium, but am concerned about 'brain calcification' and that of the soft tissues through overconsuming calcium. What would a weight-trainer need(given bodymass of 160 lbs., negligible adipose, densish bones...). To avoid dumbness and asking inane questions I hope someone can assist me in settling on an optimal daily calcium intake. – PersonMan Apr 18 2011 at 20:45
0

I think pretty much every question has been asked! It maybe time to make this a different type of forum with more options! Plenty of smart people here!

link|flag
2 
 No way Mark V! While the marginal benefit of each additional question has been going down for a while, there are as many questions as there are nutrients and foods and diseases. Factorialized. But yeah, you've got a good point. There has to be a better way to keep exact repeat questions from being asked, or keeping people from asking too many questions (subjective as that might be). I'd imagine it's a bit of a burden for the moderators. – Kamal♦ Apr 18 2011 at 17:06
1 
 though many paleo questions have been asked/answered, old questions don't often get new feedback, and asking/answering again allows fresh voices. also, i personally have learned so much from questions in the feed that i would have never thought to search for. – g. Apr 18 2011 at 18:53
'Subjectivity'=subjective. Kamal: what would you recommend for weight-trainers who have taken the VLC-diet plunge? Are they plunging into cold water here(no shrinkage but less drive...) – PersonMan Apr 18 2011 at 20:42
0

It seems to me that the current system works fairly well, it just has trouble effectively dealing with the odd outlier. So, being more technologically ignorant than the average genuine caveman, I can't help but wonder:

Would it be at all possible to have some sort of automated flagging system?

For example, if someone posts x number of questions in y number of days (which receive z number of votes), or has a ratio of x:y of questions asked:answered e.t.c. then maybe they could be sent an automated alert - a sort of dude chill the hell out/cease and desist forthwith (I'm sure Patrik can figure out the exact wording).

If they ignore this and carry on, then maybe certain account/posting privileges could be temporarily suspended. The more times that people are flagged, and the more times that they ignore the warning messages, the steeper the punishment should be, until serious trolls would end up perma-banned.

link|flag
1 
 I assumed the question limit was 3 per hour? – PersonMan Apr 18 2011 at 20:46

Your Answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.