Timeline for What's the point of voting on "questions"?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
18 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 16, 2017 at 15:46 | history | edited | CommunityBot | replaced http://meta.codereview.stackexchange.com/ with https://codereview.meta.stackexchange.com/ | |
| Mar 16, 2017 at 15:46 | history | edited | CommunityBot | replaced http://meta.codereview.stackexchange.com/ with https://codereview.meta.stackexchange.com/ | |
| Mar 16, 2017 at 15:46 | history | edited | CommunityBot | replaced http://meta.codereview.stackexchange.com/ with https://codereview.meta.stackexchange.com/ | |
| Sep 7, 2014 at 3:16 | comment | added | bjb568 | "programmersexchange" giggles | |
| Aug 29, 2014 at 17:01 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackCodeReview/status/505399925132492803 | ||
| Aug 29, 2014 at 6:45 | comment | added | Elias Van Ootegem | @LarryF: An honest review can boil down to telling the OP his/her code can't be salvaged. You have to be brutally honest, which can come across as being blunt, and if the OP is used to be nudged gently into the right direction, someone telling you you've really got things wrong in every conceivable way, can seem harsh to a newbie. There is a psychological threshold when first requesting a review... at least: I found it difficult at first | |
| Aug 28, 2014 at 22:16 | comment | added | LarryF | I don't think code review should be "harsh", I think it should be informative, educational, and valuable in general. It's not hard to submit code for review... That's the easy part. CORRECTLY reviewing it is the hard part. It almost becomes an issue of, is this site based on "PEER" review, or just, "THIS IS WHY YOUR CODE SUCKS...".. IMVHO... Perhaps the question UP votes can be tied to the REVIEWERS as well as the OP. ? Yea / Neigh ? | |
| Aug 28, 2014 at 11:04 | vote | accept | Elias Van Ootegem | ||
| Aug 28, 2014 at 10:58 | history | edited | Elias Van Ootegem | CC BY-SA 3.0 | clarify an assertion |
| Aug 27, 2014 at 14:05 | history | edited | JamalMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 | deleted 306 characters in body; edited tags; edited title |
| Aug 27, 2014 at 13:44 | answer | added | rolflMod | timeline score: 13 | |
| Aug 27, 2014 at 13:35 | history | edited | Elias Van Ootegem | CC BY-SA 3.0 | added 294 characters in body |
| Aug 27, 2014 at 13:17 | comment | added | Elias Van Ootegem | @SimonAndréForsberg: I wrote this question in a hurry, so there might be some contradictions in there. But basically: code-review can should be harsh, so there's a threshold in that respect. However: providing code to be reviewed does not make the site (CR) a valuable resource. The actual value comes from the reviewing of that code, not submitting it, that's what I was trying to get at | |
| Aug 27, 2014 at 13:03 | answer | added | RubberDuck | timeline score: 8 | |
| Aug 27, 2014 at 13:01 | answer | added | Simon Forsberg | timeline score: 12 | |
| Aug 27, 2014 at 12:54 | answer | added | Pimgd | timeline score: 7 | |
| Aug 27, 2014 at 12:54 | comment | added | Simon Forsberg | "Submitting code for review is not the easiest thing to do." - is that really what you meant to write there? It doesn't seem to fit with what you said right before | |
| Aug 27, 2014 at 12:25 | history | asked | Elias Van Ootegem | CC BY-SA 3.0 |