Return to Answer

One up-vote on an answer, two up-votes on a question. That's it. A trivial amount of participation, and you're in and done.

Is it an irritation for that first post? Sure - it is everywhere. But one up-vote on an answer, two on a question, and you're golden.

As rites of passage go, it's not that bad. As always, blame the spammers for ruining it for everyone else.

There's an argument to be made that Skeptics is exceptional, because it demands that answers back up their assertions with references. While this is a fair point, references don't have to be hyperlinks, and throwing in a bunch of hyperlinks doesn't necessarily make your answer well-referenced.

If you're going to argue for a platform change to support Skeptics' exceptional requirements, I think you'd be better off pushing for one that makes references easier for everyone (for instance...), not just very, very new users.

One up-vote on an answer, two up-votes on a question. That's it. A trivial amount of participation, and you're in and done.

Is it an irritation for that first post? Sure - it is everywhere. But one up-vote on an answer, two on a question, and you're golden.

As rites of passage go, it's not that bad. As always, blame the spammers for ruining it for everyone else.

There's an argument to be made that Skeptics is exceptional, because it demands that answers back up their assertions with references. While this is a fair point, references don't have to be hyperlinks, and throwing in a bunch of hyperlinks doesn't necessarily make your answer well-referenced.

If you're going to argue for a platform change to support Skeptics' exceptional requirements, I think you'd be better off pushing for one that makes references easier for everyone (for instance...), not just very, very new users.

One up-vote on an answer, two up-votes on a question. That's it. A trivial amount of participation, and you're in and done.

Is it an irritation for that first post? Sure - it is everywhere. But one up-vote on an answer, two on a question, and you're golden.

As rites of passage go, it's not that bad. As always, blame the spammers for ruining it for everyone else.

One up-vote on an answer, two up-votes on a question. That's it. A trivial amount of participation, and you're in and done.

Is it an irritation for that first post? Sure - it is everywhere. But one up-vote on an answer, two on a question, and you're golden.

As rites of passage go, it's not that bad. As always, blame the spammers for ruining it for everyone else.

There's an argument to be made that Skeptics is exceptional, because it demands that answers back up their assertions with references. While this is a fair point, references don't have to be hyperlinks, and throwing in a bunch of hyperlinks doesn't necessarily make your answer well-referenced.

If you're going to argue for a platform change to support Skeptics' exceptional requirements, I think you'd be better off pushing for one that makes references easier for everyone (for instance...), not just very, very new users.