2
$\begingroup$

Sometimes questions are protected to prevent low-key answers. Is this applicable to comments as well?

And I want to say that sometimes users with >10 rep also make bad responses. There are plenty of such cases faced by us editors of late answers and other questions. So I request the bar for protected questions to be raised to 50 rep at least.

| |
$\endgroup$
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Might Meta Stack Exchange be better suited for your query? $\endgroup$ – Kyle Kanos Oct 30 '15 at 21:09
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ I'd be surprised if the team will go for it. The point of protection isn't too make really bad answer impossible, but to keep the number of them down to something that can be managed with the usual tools (downvotes, delete votes, and flags). As always it is worth noting that the 10 point limit is exclusive of the association bonus. $\endgroup$ – dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten Oct 30 '15 at 22:54
  • $\begingroup$ I would also be surprised if the team went with this, but then again there is the recent late answer queue change. $\endgroup$ – user10851 Oct 31 '15 at 15:27
3
$\begingroup$

If you suggest a number like 50, I would (and I would imagine the people who actually have to implement it) like to see proof that a substantial number of bad responses comes from people with 10 < rep < 50 and that it would make a dent at all in the signal-to-noise ratio.

There are approximately 2800 users with between 10 and 50 rep who have been seen in the past 180 days that would be impacted by this change. This is out of roughly 30000 total registered users who have also been seen during that time. So your proposed change to the barrier would affect somewhere around 9% of the "active" user-base. For comparison, there are approximately 20000 users in the past 180 days with a reputation of less than 10 or exactly 101 (the association bonus). So the current barrier limits posting such that only 33% of the active participants can post. Your proposed barrier would limit the participation to 25%.

(Disclaimer: All of these numbers were found by poking around in the Data Explorer today -- the last data dump was Oct 25, 2015 so it should be close to current numbers. If anybody in the future decides to run the numbers again, they may not match exactly!)

Therefore, you must somehow show that a non-negligible number of the bad posts to which you are referring are posted by this 9% of the site and that changing the barrier would significantly reduce the amount of bad posts. These numbers are based on your proposed barrier of 50, if you pick a different barrier, the same analysis would apply and the same requirement to justify the number exists.

| |
$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

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