0
\$\begingroup\$

Every question that is both old and not with an accepted answer will be bumped sooner or later by the Community bot into the recently active questions.

However, a fair portion of them are obviously abandoned questions, for example if they were answered in comments. Some even have satisfactory answers, but they weren't accepted.

As we want to keep the noise level low, wouldn't it be logical to prevent the bot from bumping these questions? (I have already accepted that stopping bumping entirely won't happen.)

One way I see to do this would be closing these questions. The simplest way IMO would be to add a close reason to the list that should be chosen in the case of abandoned questions.

\$\endgroup\$
8
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ If there's an answer in the comments it should be posted as an answer. And a question that doesn't have an accepted answer isn't necessarily abandoned...it might just mean that none of the answers satisfied the OP enough to accept it. I'm not necessarily opposed to this idea, but only if it were accepted network wide (as we are not the only SE site to deal with abandoned questions). \$\endgroup\$
    – Null Mod
    Dec 20, 2023 at 16:29
  • \$\begingroup\$ There isn't really a way that the site mods can tweak this. Usually these types of requests don't go anywhere because they need to be implemented network wide \$\endgroup\$
    – Voltage Spike Mod
    Dec 20, 2023 at 16:38
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Null I'm talking of the kind where the OP write a forumesque "Thanks!!11 you nailed it" in comments but don't accept. \$\endgroup\$
    – tobalt
    Dec 20, 2023 at 17:01
  • \$\begingroup\$ @VoltageSpike I see. shame. I thought the Community specific reasons could be edited on a per community basis. \$\endgroup\$
    – tobalt
    Dec 20, 2023 at 17:02
  • \$\begingroup\$ We can add community specific reasons but these have to be approved by the CMs, I'm not sure that the question continually getting bumped would be a reason they would like. If the question is off topic then please close it for the reason it is off topic. If it is an off topic then just leave it, it's annoying but it's the way the SE works they want questions to be answered \$\endgroup\$
    – Voltage Spike Mod
    Dec 20, 2023 at 18:38
  • \$\begingroup\$ How about another voting system, that allows the community to accept an answer? \$\endgroup\$
    – Jens
    Dec 20, 2023 at 21:03
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Jens I have seen such things elsewhere. But it's far too big of a change for it to have any chance of ever happening in SE 😉 \$\endgroup\$
    – tobalt
    Dec 20, 2023 at 21:04
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @Jens - Hi, Re: "allows the community to accept an answer" - I remember seeing that discussed long ago (and declined as a change) over on meta.stackexchange.com . If you want propose that again, you would need to raise it over there, not here on our "local" meta. || What we have now as a voting system isn't perfect, but my personal summary of reading lots of related stuff over there in the past, is that other options which people suggested are even worse, in some important ways. However you might have some new approach that others hadn't proposed, so I'm not trying to discourage you. \$\endgroup\$
    – SamGibson Mod
    Dec 20, 2023 at 23:37

2 Answers 2

8
\$\begingroup\$

According to the appropriate meta post, auto bump can be triggered on non-negatively scored, open questions that have at least one answer scoring 0 and none scoring more than that.

Therefore, questions that have no answers will not be bumped. Only questions that have answers are bumped. Accepted answers have no effect on the auto bump, contrary to what you seem to believe. And using closing to remove them from the auto bump candidates is a twist of the system, there is no reason to prevent other persons to answer a correct question even though it's old.

Since it is hard to remember the conditions for bumping, if you click on the "Timeline" clock icon under the question vote buttons, then click on the "bumped" link, you will land on the Meta link above.

Here are other solutions you have, to make a question excluded from the auto bump:

  • Upvote one answer, if one of them is good enough.
  • Downvote the question, if the question is bad (or, yes, close it, but only if a "real" close reason applies).
  • If the question is good enough, and no answer is satisfactory enough to be upvoted, write a good answer. If good enough, it will be upvoted right away, or the next time the question is bumped, if another person applies the above rules.

There. Applying this reciepe will remove all questions from the auto bump candidates list at some point, and improve the overall site quality. In fact, this is why the auto bump exists.

Sure, it's gonna take more time than just closing them.

Side note: I'm just explaining how the system works, and the solutions available for this problem. I'm not defending the system. I hate auto bump too.

\$\endgroup\$
3
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ I like this recipe, and I will follow it from now on. \$\endgroup\$
    – tobalt
    Dec 21, 2023 at 11:01
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ dim - Nice summary. Just one point where I think this answer is incorrect. It says: "Accepted answers have no effect on the auto bump". I don't believe I've seen an auto-bumped question with an accepted answer, so having an accepted answer does have an effect i.e. it stops the auto-bump. That is confirmed by the meta post you quoted, which says it happens on "open questions" and that means no accepted answer. This is also what it says in this Meta post (from ex-SE staff) that auto-bump can only happen on a post with "no accepted answer". HTH. \$\endgroup\$
    – SamGibson Mod
    Dec 22, 2023 at 5:39
  • \$\begingroup\$ @SamGibson You may be right. I simply interpreted "open question" as "not closed", but maybe there's the accepted status in the equation here also. If this is the case, this should probably be clarified in the FAQ meta post I refer to, however, because this is kind of confusing. \$\endgroup\$
    – dim
    Jan 2 at 9:36
3
\$\begingroup\$

I don't see much wrong with this staying as it is, BUT I am very biased towards "more information", as may have been noticed.

I ongoingly answer a small trickle of open questions where the OP has not visited for years, because the site is about the Q&A in general as much as it is about informing the OP. ("To provide long life quality Q&A pairs that will drive search engine traffic to the site" - non verbatim, but close enough. Jeff, I think).

It's likely that I see the questions of this sort BECAUSE they have been bumped, and answer them because they seem of value.

\$\endgroup\$

You must log in to answer this question.

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