LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB Archives

CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB  April 2012

CODE4LIB April 2012

Subject:

Re: possible new stackexchange site for Digital Preservation

From:

Joe Hourcle <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Code for Libraries <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 26 Apr 2012 13:42:48 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (78 lines)

On Apr 26, 2012, at 12:26 PM, Nada O'Neal wrote:

> I haven't seen the proposed new Stackexchange digital preservation site:
> http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/39787
> mentioned on code4lib yet. I'm sure most of you have turned to Stack Overflow 
> in your darkest hours of need, so if you think you might like such a site 
> specifically geared towards Digital Preservation, please take a look. 
> 
> The proposal is currently in the commitment stage and needs about 900 more 
> "committers" to make it to the next stage. 

It was mentioned yesterday, but it doesn't need 900 more 'committers'.

If you click on the 'more info' near the 11% commitment score:

	The commitment score is the minimum of three scores:

	56%  112/200 committers in total
	11%  11/100 committers with 200+ rep on any other site
	40%  commitment score, based on committers' activity on all other sites and how old the commitment is

So ... yes, we need another 88 people to commit ... but what's going to be harder to get (as evidenced by the 'Libraries' proposal, which has dragged on for so long that the folks at Stack Exchange renamed it to 'Library and Information Science' incorrectly thinking that it'd be broadening the category : http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/12432/)

Now, the important thing is that the 'any other site' is specifically 'Stack Exchange 2.0' sites, which means that Unshelved Answers, even though it was a 'Stack Exchange' site *does* *not* count.  It must be one of the sites listed at:

	http://stackexchange.com/sites

And it's really not that hard ... ask a few good questions (make sure they're not a duplicate, or they'll mark you down), or answer some questions, and you'll get voted up.  Now, the thing is, some of the larger sites get so many questions that fewer people are going to look at them unless you make it really intriguing (which could get it marked down and closed as subjective).

So, I'd recommend sticking with some of the smaller sites, including these that haven't yet graduated out of 'beta'.  For example, likely relevant for those on here, being an intersection of MLS folks and programmers:

	Databases : http://dba.stackexchange.com/
	Drupal : http://drupal.stackexchange.com/
	Wordpress : http://wordpress.stackexchange.com/
	User Experience : http://ux.stackexchange.com/
	Graphic Design : http://graphicdesign.stackexchange.com/
	Unix / Linux : http://unix.stackexchange.com/
	Apple : http://apple.stackexchange.com/
	Ubuntu : http://askubuntu.com/
	
	English Language : http://english.stackexchange.com/
	Linguistics : http://linguistics.stackexchange.com/

	Project Management : http://pm.stackexchange.com/
	Academia: http://academia.stackexchange.com/
		eg, "Is there any world-wide ranking of conferences/journals?" : http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/1199/
		or "Preprint services other than arXiv (for other fields)" : http://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/84/ 

(don't bother with Literature -- it's going to be culled)

And of course, the original three:

	programmer questions :	http://stackoverflow.com/
	sysadmin questions : http://serverfault.com/
	other computer users : http://superuser.com/



So, and for advice on getting reputation ... writing good answers tends to be the best way to go, but you want to :

	Format it clearly.  (bulleted lists are your friend;  they use MarkDown, but there's an editor to make it easy)
	Use good grammar / punctuation (minor ones, not so bad ... if it looks like you're being sloppy and didn't even try ... not so good)
	Cite authoritative sources when appropriate
	Give an answer, not just a link (eg, summarize, then cite the authority)
	Speak from a position of authority and you're more likely to get voted up even when you're wrong... a 'it might be (x)' or 'have you tried (x)?' isn't going to go was well as 'As you said (y), based on previous experience, there's a good probability of it being (x)'
	Don't be repetitive; if there's already a similar answer, you're better off commented on that answer to improve it ...
	Answer quickly; most people look to see what they can answer when they first see a new question, and so if there's already a good answer there will vote it up ... two weeks later, not so much.  (although, I find that I'll get sudden bursts of lots of old answers being voted up ... and I know that if someone gives an interesting answer, I'll look at what else they've posted, which often leads me to vote their stuff up)
	

If you're going to ask questions:

	Make sure it's not something that can be answered easily with a search on the internet.
	Select good 'tags' for it.  (although, others may change the tags, but having good ones up front helps)


... and, I should add ... anything marked as 'community wiki' gets no reputation for the question or the answer.  (so if you want to help me on my attempt at documenting differences in cooking terms between English dialects, I'm not going to complain, but it won't help you for reputation : http://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/784/ )

-Joe

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTS.CLIR.ORG

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager