++

Joe Montibello, MLIS
Library Systems Manager
Dartmouth College Library
603.646.9394
[log in to unmask]








On 7/8/13 9:53 AM, "Shaun Ellis" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>I like the idea of vote to promote as well as having a searchable
>archive of answers on the web.  For me it comes down to it being "out of
>sight, out of mind".  It has to come to my "inbox" for me to pay
>attention, which is one of the nice features of the "Code4Lib Jobs"
>app.  In that vein, StackExchange has an API, which could be used to
>simply forward a daily digest of questions to the mailing list.  If all
>we need is an increase in traffic to establish the forum, that might do
>it.
>
>Questions could be tagged with "code4lib" to make them easy to
>aggregate.  For example, we can get all the "php" tagged questions
>posted in the past day:
>
>http://api.stackexchange.com/2.1/questions?fromdate=1373155200&todate=1373
>241600&order=desc&sort=activity&tagged=php&site=stackoverflow
>
>-Shaun
>
>
>On 7/7/13 4:46 PM, Galen Charlton wrote:
>> The main thing that the SE model adds is the ability to build up a set
>>(in
>> one, search-engine-visible place) of consensus answers to questions over
>> time via the process of commenting and up-voting.  In other words, I
>>view
>> it as a way to maybe achieve a community-built FAQ or best practices
>> database.  Mailing lists and IRC channels provide immediacy, but there
>>are
>> some important library mailing lists whose archives are not
>>(intentionally)
>> accessible to search engines, and there are none that I'm aware of that
>>try
>> to maintain a community-curated set of "best" questions and answers.
>>
>> Of course, for that model to work, there has to be a sizable number
>>people
>> participating and actually getting answers to their questions (as
>>opposed
>> to caviling about asking their questions "properly").  Providing
>>immediate
>> and (hopefully) well-informed answers to questions would have to be
>> priority for the community of users; a goal of building a knowledge
>> base would not be achievable without a recognition that it's
>>necessarily a
>> secondary goal.
>>
>