Problems with Incomplete Profiles

Question

New members frequently sign up and ask questions right away when they have insufficient information on their profiles. This causes problems, and those of us who have been around longer know exactly what they are.

It seems to me that we are wasting lots of time because one of the more seasoned members almost inevitably has to comment about this issue and explain—over and over—what the problems are and why they’re important issues, and then has to request that these new members fill out their profiles. Again. And again.

We are not only wasting time, we’re fighting a losing battle. Evidently, that’s just how some people are, especially those who have more immature expectations and/or those who think that SD is a homework machine. ? Type in something sloppily as though it’s a text message, hit Enter, and boom, an answer spits out. There are, of course, those who just don’t realize it at first.

So my idea is this: What’s the workaround to this losing battle? Change the requirements programmatically. Is this something that could be done by whoever is in authority to do so?

If so, why couldn’t SD disallow anyone from asking a question—or answering one, for that matter—until the following profile fields have been completed?

1. English proficiency level
2. Spanish proficiency level
3. Gender
4. About

Gender should be included if only for the sake of convenience in communication. (Sometimes responders do not know which personal pronouns to use when referring to those who have asked questions.) The About section should be required, I think, because it would tend to discourage those who sign up wanting quick and easy answers and/or those who make disrespectful demands. I know that some people will disagree with requiring the About section. But the other three should be the “bare minimim.”

Maybe the programmers could also enter some explanatory information somewhere in this signup process. Perhaps some type of warning message—which would certainly be appropriate—could be installed as well. (Shape up or ship out.) And how about something like making new members “sign off” on having read the rules?

Could this list of rules be updated somewhat to include these two issues or a more specific rewording of them?

1. Correct punctuation and capitalization are required and why they are important. (Guess what? If some people don’t know why this is the policy, they don’t care. And again, why should we keep having to explain these things over and over?) Yeah, and we don’t need six question marks at the end of a question, either. And it’s a must that the personal pronoun “I” be upper case. But because some people evidently don’t know these things, there is, I think, the need to be very specific about the punctuation and capitalization requirements. Stating only that “correct punctuation and capitalization are required” apparently doesn’t work with some people. So a specific list of which errors need to be avoided in order to prevent confusing learners would be very helpful.
2. “Play nice with others”: a.) No demanding that answers be given. b.) Allow reasonable time for translation of longer posts for those who might like them in Spanish. (And how would we know of this need if the proficiency levels haven’t been completed?) c.) Honesty is a must on proficiency levels and why this is important (Yes, this has been a problem causer/time waster lately too.)

If you do what you always do, you get what you always got. Also known as: the status quo isn’t working. So let’s change it. Slowing down or impeding the signup process by enhancing the requirements would, I think, cut down significantly on these same-old problems.

Answer 1

I'm on board at least with the proficiency levels, as it does little good to write a complicated answer in one language if the asker isn't proficient in that language, but how do we know if it's not listed? I'm not particularly bothered by bad punctuation, and the like, but I know that it is important because of those who are learning it. I think you definitely offered some good solutions to the problems at hand.

Thanks BigMike. - brian5764, Mar 20, 2013

Answer 2

This would be an excellent idea. We had another thread about it recently. All the coders have to do is make those fields mandatory for signing up. It´s pretty straightforward. I would love to see it, even if it makes me seem like a golfer (only with slightly less contrived attire). Kudos Brian.

Really? Well, I didn’t search that very well then, did I? I looked before posting this one for earlier, similar topics. Thank you, Rogspax. And thanks for the chuckle as well. - brian5764, Mar 20, 2013

Answer 3

I left various golf clubs because members who believed they had power, lost the ability to understand that nobody is perfect and started making up rules, rather than achieving anything other than feeding their own ego.

Spanish Dict is becoming like a golf club. So guys rip off the captains armband and encourage not preach!!

Venga hombre

You raise a valid concern, but I believe that brian also is correct in his assessment of a few problems that we are having. Are they that big of a deal? Maybe not, but that doesn't mean we can't still get them fixed. - BigMike, Mar 20, 2013

If you disagree, that’s fine with me. Please know, though, that I have no desire to ruffle any feathers. I am frustrated with seeing the same problems over and over and wondered whether there is way to avoid them. - brian5764, Mar 20, 2013

I don´t see it that way all. It´s a matter of efficiency and respecting the time people put in to help others, and just on top of that, a way to see that people get better answers. This is a Win-Win. - rogspax, Mar 20, 2013