Re: Proposal: Nuke negative comments

Yeah, I'm good with it, and can do mass changes via Master, as well as the lowest-rated notes (anyone with access can, it's not just me). Maybe a threshold, for now, of -15 or below (if there are any), then work our way up to a comfortable level. On Sun, Jun 5, 2022 at 8:32 PM Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com> wrote: > > On Tue, May 10, 2022, at 4:46 PM, Daniel P. Brown wrote: > > On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 5:28 PM Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com> wrote: > >> > >> I'm fine with some slightly stricter threshold for purging (-5, or -1 but also at > >> least X months old, or whatever). No strong preference here. > > > > This is another good idea of which I didn't think. I've removed > > thousands of notes that were using coding styles that had deprecated > > functions and other such detrimental qualities over the years, but > > making a point to check - at least after EOLs and major releases - is > > probably a really good idea, Larry. > > > >> .... (I never use Windows, so I have no idea if it's valuable or misleading.) > > > > Hear, hear. Over a hundred devices (servers included) in our > > house, and - aside from the as/when needed spin-up of a Windows VM - > > not a single Microsoft product. Nothing against it, like I used to be > > in the nineties and early aughts, but this was one of my feelings > > toward what Chris pointed out, specifically, about a heavily-downvoted > > Windows-based function notes. Was it because there were factual, > > programmatic design errors, or just pseudo-/cyber-cultural bias? > > > >> To Dan's point, I am happy to discuss better options than this sledgehammer. > >> Mainly I'm just trying to improve the signal to noise ratio to make the janitorial work easier > >> and more productive. But I don't want a mythical future solution to block a simple and easy > >> one now, either. (Having a stricter one-time purge rule could still leave us sufficient data to > >> test more nuanced tools in the future.) > > > > We stand in agreement here. Considering the consistent amount of > > posts and voting on the user notes, it's likely to be substantial > > enough to outweigh the current state of disrepair it's in now. > > > > Regardless of opinions and turnout, though, I have to thank you, > > Larry, for bringing up the point. Because fully-manual intervention > > just isn't a reasonable approach anymore, and it's becoming a > > hinderance to the quality of the documentation as a whole. > > So can we proceed here? Only a select few have access to run any mass-purge like we've > been discussing (which is good), so those few, are you open to it? What deletion rule would we want > to go with? > > --Larry Garfield > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Daniel P. > Brown" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to > daniel.brown+unsubscribe@parasane.net. >