3
\$\begingroup\$

I frequently see users (most probably close voting, or flagging for closure) leaving stock(?) comments like1

Welcome to Code Review! I'm afraid this question does not match what this site is about. Code Review is about improving existing, working code. Code Review is not the site to ask for help in fixing or changing what your code does. Once the code does what you want, we would love to help you do the same thing in a cleaner way! Please see our help center for more information.

Welcome to Code Review! This question is incomplete. To help reviewers give you better answers, please add sufficient context to your question. The more you tell us about what your code does and what the purpose of doing that is, the easier it will be for reviewers to help you. Questions should include a description of what the code does

Welcome to Code Review! I'm afraid this question does not match what this site is about. Code Review is about improving existing, working code. Code Review is not the site to ask for help in fixing or changing what your code does. Once the code does what you want, we would love to help you do the same thing in a cleaner way! Please see our help center for more information.

Wouldn't it be more efficient to notify the OP (even below 250 rep) directly about close votes, at least for a certain threshold (let's say 2 or 3), instead of that constantly generated comment noise?

1)Left out the helpful links in these examples.

\$\endgroup\$
10
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Can you link to a specific question that shows a bad case of these comments? \$\endgroup\$ – rolfl Apr 2 '18 at 19:03
  • \$\begingroup\$ @rolfl I didn't say these are generally bad, but just unnecessary noise. \$\endgroup\$ – πάντα ῥεῖ Apr 2 '18 at 19:04
  • \$\begingroup\$ @rolfl Interestingly enough, I see these mostly appearing with our mod-election candidates :-). Where I seem to be "the queen of initiated close votes" , and rarely bother to comment about these ;-). \$\endgroup\$ – πάντα ῥεῖ Apr 2 '18 at 19:12
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ You're probably seeing the effects of: codereview.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4952/… \$\endgroup\$ – rolfl Apr 2 '18 at 19:16
  • \$\begingroup\$ If such a thing would be proposed, wouldn't it be better proposed on the main Meta of SE itself? This won't be a site-specific feature, too big for it. \$\endgroup\$ – Mast♦ Apr 2 '18 at 19:16
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Mast Yes, I've been considering that actually, and in fact I made a similar FR at MSO once. But it also depends on the activity rate, and number of active close voters of a specific site it seems. \$\endgroup\$ – πάντα ῥεῖ Apr 2 '18 at 19:18
  • 4
    \$\begingroup\$ I don't quite understand why you consider those comments noise? They give additional supplementary information that's not covered in the close-reasons alone ... \$\endgroup\$ – Vogel612 Apr 2 '18 at 19:35
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Vogel612 Some of them do, others just repeat the same things over and over. \$\endgroup\$ – πάντα ῥεῖ Apr 2 '18 at 19:36
  • \$\begingroup\$ @πάνταῥεῖ Can you post a comment on this meta post for the ones that repeat the same things? Then we could look into improving those specific comments. \$\endgroup\$ – Simon Forsberg Apr 2 '18 at 19:51
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Simon I was already notified about it. TBH I made that question to be a bit more affirmed with my final mod election decisions. But you are a (staying) mod already ;-). \$\endgroup\$ – πάντα ῥεῖ Apr 2 '18 at 20:10
9
\$\begingroup\$

Wouldn't it be more efficient to notify the OP (even below 250 rep) directly about close votes,

Yes it would. Feel free to make a feature-request on the site-wide meta.

instead of that constantly generated comment noise?

I don't consider it noise at all. It only becomes noise when the issue the comment addresses is fixed, and then the comment is often flagged as "no longer needed" and removed.

I think about these comments as friendly and informative about what the problem is with the question. It is also a sign that someone has taken the time to write the comment (or taken the time to copy-paste it or clicked some buttons). I believe it is much better to greet users - no matter how off-topic their question is - with a good comment than an automatic notification about their question being potentially off-topic.

\$\endgroup\$
1
  • \$\begingroup\$ I like your answer most so far. \$\endgroup\$ – πάντα ῥεῖ Apr 2 '18 at 19:49
6
\$\begingroup\$

Once a question is closed it does automatically add a notice that the OP can see as to the reason for closure and how to possibly remedy it, for example:

close-reason

Some of us who regularly help with moderation of new questions have pre-written comments (myself included) to let the OP know what the problem is. Perhaps it's redundant, but I don't think there is any harm in it unless multiple people post the same/very similar comment, so to avoid that if I see someone has already commented then I just vote to close and move on.

\$\endgroup\$
6
  • \$\begingroup\$ I well, know that. Why put a comment saying the same thing beforehand then? \$\endgroup\$ – πάντα ῥεῖ Apr 2 '18 at 19:47
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ we allow for users to fix the issues with their post, before and after closure, then the post might not be closed or could be reopened. \$\endgroup\$ – Malachi♦ Apr 2 '18 at 19:49
  • \$\begingroup\$ @πάνταῥεῖ Besides, it may take a while before the question gets closed. If it takes 12 hours (we're usually faster, but still) between the first downvote and the last close vote, wouldn't you like to know why you got the downvotes in the meantime? \$\endgroup\$ – Mast♦ Apr 2 '18 at 20:11
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Mast "wouldn't you like to know why?" Sure, that's why I actually posted that suggestion. I believe that DVs mostly come for the close reasons. \$\endgroup\$ – πάντα ῥεῖ Apr 2 '18 at 20:13
  • \$\begingroup\$ @πάνταῥεῖ You asked why the comment was put in beforehand. That's why. \$\endgroup\$ – Mast♦ Apr 2 '18 at 20:15
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ downvotes are for bad questions, close votes are for off-topic questions. delete votes are for questions that are not questions. \$\endgroup\$ – Malachi♦ Apr 2 '18 at 20:51
3
\$\begingroup\$

I like to think of the "generated" comments as the community's accepted comment for such close reasons and that other comments may be causing unnecessary noise.

Multiple "generated" comments that communicate different things that are wrong with the post are not "noise" they are the community accepted way of communicating to the user that certain aspects of their post don't meet our Criteria for a good post on Code Review.

A question can have multiple things that don't meet our criteria for a good question.

\$\endgroup\$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .