8
$\begingroup$

We all love Computational Science Stack Exchange, but there is a whole world of people out there who need answers to their questions and don't even know that this site exists. When they arrive from Google, what will their first impression be? Let's try to look at this site through the eyes of someone who's never seen it before, and see how we stack up against the rest of the 'Net.

The Site Self-Evaluation review queue is open and populated with 10 questions that were asked and answered in the last quarter. Run a few Google searches to see how easy they are to find and compare the answers we have with the information available on other sites.

Rating the questions is only a part of the puzzle, though. Do you see a pattern of questions that should have been closed but are not? Questions or answers that could use an edit? Anything that's going really well? Post an answer below to share your thoughts and discuss these questions and the site's health with your fellow users!

$\endgroup$
7
$\begingroup$

This recent Site Self-Evaluation made me think more about the quality of Questions than I have in previous such reviews. I found myself wishing (but only briefly) for a way to assign separate ratings to the Questions and Answers.

Where in previous evaluations I was by and large impressed with the high proportion of samples where the Answers to decent Questions exceeded my expectations (heh, trans.: I learned something), this group of posts did not give me so much enthusiasm.

In part this is due to a higher proportion of software-package specific Questions. Some of this is outside my experience, and I skipped more of the items than usual. Also it is the sort of thing for which there often will be package or developer documentation, and some appropriate linking to other sites for details is to be expected.

My fondness for the Community and appreciation for its collegiality and rational moderation continues unabated. I hope to contribute more this year!

$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

Final Results

Net Score: 3 (Excellent: 3, Satisfactory: 4, Needs Improvement: 0)


Net Score: 2 (Excellent: 2, Satisfactory: 3, Needs Improvement: 0)


Net Score: 1 (Excellent: 3, Satisfactory: 3, Needs Improvement: 2)


Net Score: 0 (Excellent: 2, Satisfactory: 1, Needs Improvement: 2)


Net Score: 0 (Excellent: 1, Satisfactory: 1, Needs Improvement: 1)


Net Score: -1 (Excellent: 1, Satisfactory: 3, Needs Improvement: 2)


Net Score: -2 (Excellent: 0, Satisfactory: 5, Needs Improvement: 2)


Net Score: -2 (Excellent: 0, Satisfactory: 4, Needs Improvement: 2)


Net Score: -2 (Excellent: 0, Satisfactory: 3, Needs Improvement: 2)


Net Score: -4 (Excellent: 0, Satisfactory: 2, Needs Improvement: 4)


$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

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