Separate "useful" from other downvotes

One thing that I have been thinking of for a long time on the SE network is that I find it strange to have “useful” grouped together with “clear” and “shows research effort”. Especially since downvotes can result in a question ban. But also because that downvotes can feel a bit hostile.

On the other hand, I do believe that it has some value that questions that are very unlikely to help someone else disappear. But I don’t think it’s fair to punish people that come with a clear and well researched question just because it seems unlikely that it is “useful”.

I think that it’s reasonable to expect that people create clear questions and do their research. But I do not think it’s reasonable to expect people to think about if their questions are useful to others or not.

In my opinion, downvotes should be reserved for cases where posters really have themselves to blame to some extent.

I’m not sure how to solve it in the best way. What do you say?

2 Likes

We can’t, of course, control how people actually vote, but we can and should write guidance – tooltips, help topics, etc – that reflect what we actually want. And I agree with you that specialization shouldn’t be a reason to downvote. The “not helpful to anyone else” cases I’ve seen usually have other problems too, like not explained clearly enough for anyone to be able to help or major, obvious pilot error.

Perhaps I misremember, but I thought “useful” was only a criterion for answers, not questions.

You misremember. Just hover over the vote buttons on a question on SE and it says “This question does not show any research effort, it is unclear or not useful”

OK, then I guess I just always ignored the “useful” part for questions, since it doesn’t make any sense. The site may provide some guidelines, but in the end it’s my call how I vote. I’m going to downvote crappy questions, upvote good ones, and leave the mediocre ones in the middle alone. Crappy and good are what I deem them to be by the criteria I think matter. I expect most users do the same thing.

This all says that while the guidelines should be sensible, we have to understand few people are going to take them too seriously, or bother reading them at all.

1 Like

I think “not useful” can be a reasonable reason to downvote, and it isn’t misused all that often.

There are a few ways in which someone might consider a question to not be useful:

  • It involves some issue or feature that’s too obscure.

    I don’t think people downvoting such questions is currently a huge issue on Stack Overflow. If anything, people are quite fond of them.

  • It’s extremely simple.

    People downvoting for this reason might be a problem, as 20 (or however many) years as a programmer might affect your judgement about what’s too simple to ask about.

    But there are also some cases where it could be justifiable. Stack Overflow (and I believe Codidact) was never intended to teach people programming from scratch, and isn’t particularly well-suited to doing so. If you’re asking some question about basic syntax or something that should be covered in every introduction to some language or programming in general, a good argument can be made that that doesn’t belong on the site because you should be learning that through a textbook or something.

  • It’s asked in a way that wouldn’t be helpful to others, even (especially) if there is a good question hidden somewhere underneath.

    Asking how to fix a NullPointerException in general can make for a good question.

    Dumping some code and asking why you’re getting a NullPointerException is not going to be all that useful to others, with or without the existence of a canonical post on the subject.

    You could argue “research effort” includes breaking the code down until you have a minimal example, but there are also other ways to do research effort that wouldn’t lead you down this path, this may not apply to all such questions and plenty of good questions don’t show much research effort.


Now there are a few other viewpoints I might agree with:

  • We shouldn’t punish a good question for the asker not doing enough research. Although maybe one could argue a “lacking research effort” implies it’s a bad question because, for example, it’s a very common duplicate. But then it’s probably also “not useful”.
  • (Perhaps) we should reward an asker for asking a clear, well-researched question, even if people don’t think it’s a common or interesting (i.e. “useful”) enough issue to deserve an upvote.

Although these points would need to be discussed further to see whether there’s a viable idea behind them. Maybe these don’t need to be addressed at all and doing so would do little more than make the GUI unnecessarily cluttered, complicated and confusing. Or maybe they can be addressed by simply providing good guidance in terms of how to vote or addressed in a less direct way (like considering whether and when a question gets closed).

1 Like