1
$\begingroup$

Suppose I have some questions that I would like to see answered. May I use the chat to attract (indiscriminately) some users' attention towards my questions?

| |
$\endgroup$
11
$\begingroup$

I suppose you may, but it isn't the preferred way to attract attention to your question. Be aware that most questions aren't answered immediately; it can be a few hours at least before a question is answered. Once your question drops off the main page, though, the amount of attention it garners will decrease substantially. At that point, you could edit your question to add more information and that would 'bump' it to the top of the main page again, so that it would get more attention. After two days, if it still isn't getting much attention, you could add a bounty. But chat isn't the ideal strategy. In addition, it isn't very likely to work; there is very little traffic in chat.CV.

| |
$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ +1. The evidence appears to be that far more active users look at recent questions than follow chat. Moreover, I doubt very much that if a question is interesting and intelligible then extra publicity through chat will do anything to attract extra interest. It could even work as an irritant. Put all your effort into making your question comprehensible and worthwhile. $\endgroup$ – Nick Cox Jul 29 '14 at 16:13
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @NickCox and Gung. Many thanks to both of you for your answers. One more question. And those who know more, like you, will also look more at recent qst than chat? For example, I posted a question that I'm not sure, but I don't think is basic, and possibly will not get answered unless someone with some knowledge of functional statistics helps me. And by surveying a bit the questions asked, not many are of this subject. stats.stackexchange.com/questions/109751/… $\endgroup$ – An old man in the sea. Jul 29 '14 at 18:03
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I really think very few people ever look at chat, @Anoldmaninthesea. As for your Q, yes it does look like it will require someone w/ specialized knowledge. Unfortunately, I don't know anything about functional statistics. If no one answers after a couple of days, we can put a bounty on it. $\endgroup$ – gung - Reinstate Monica Jul 29 '14 at 18:59
  • $\begingroup$ Ok. Thanks Gung. ;) $\endgroup$ – An old man in the sea. Jul 29 '14 at 22:58
5
$\begingroup$

[How did I miss this question before? I have no idea. I've checked meta almost daily in the last three or four weeks, and I think this is the first time I've spotted it.]

The usual ways to get attention:

1) improve your question

2) offer a bounty

3) pique someone else's interest so they offer a bounty

In normal circumstances, I wouldn't suggest you do it in chat (a few people have done so now and then). It's usually only going to catch the attention of active users (who probably saw your question already), and it's more likely to annoy than interest.

On the other hand, given how empty chat is, just lately, it might be worthwhile just having anything vaguely relevant post there. I just today posted some nonsense there because it had been silent for 8 days - I wouldn't want it to freeze just when I need it.

What question(s) needed attention?

| |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Hi Glen_b, the question that needed attention has already been answered. Thanks anyway. :) Given the downvotes, I would think that this question at meta was not interesting enough to get two answers. Sometimes, I don't seem to understand how a question people think is a bad one/uninteresting one, can get two answers, that don't dismiss the original question as unimportant or inadequate, and those two answers get a lot of upvotes. This makes me wonder how large is the go-with-the-flow effect of always upvoting users with an already big reputation... $\endgroup$ – An old man in the sea. Aug 18 '14 at 9:17
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ In meta, downvotes tend to mean something different. If the post has any sense of "I think X should happen" or even "Should I do X", then it's likely to be seen as an invitation to vote on it as a proposal. As such, upvotes and downvotes don't reflect the quality of the post, but agreement with what it's seen as proposing. Since you don't gather reputation from posts here (your reputation is your main site reputation), this use is of little consequence. I found your question useful and valuable, and highly appreciated the post, but strictly speaking, I should probably have downvoted it also. $\endgroup$ – Glen_b Aug 18 '14 at 9:32
  • $\begingroup$ I didn't know that it was seen as agreeing/disagreeing with the proposal. Thanks for explaining it. ;) $\endgroup$ – An old man in the sea. Aug 18 '14 at 9:39
  • $\begingroup$ At the same time, answers that people agree with will gather upvotes. So gung got heavily upvoted because a lot of people agree broadly with the sentiments expressed there. My response was somewhat similar, but different in some aspects (like the second thought about posting to chat given it's been empty for a week), so I figured it was better to post than simply upvote. $\endgroup$ – Glen_b Aug 18 '14 at 10:29

You must log in to answer this question.

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