Why Auto-Selection of MHOs is Bad, and Why 3 Days is Even Worse

Why Auto-Selection of MHOs is Bad, and Why 3 Days is Even Worse

Yet another site design change has occurred. Here's the official word:

"Regarding the MHO system, the timeframe for picking MHOs was settled on as 3 days. Apart from extraordinary circumstances, the 3 day timeframe is locked in now."

I recently did a poll and the results were that 74% of users do not want any computerized auto-selection of MHOs. Do You Like the System of Auto-Generated MHOs? I realize this is just one poll and it is not defacto, but there is certainly strong support for us having control, not site algorithms.

Time always runs out... or does it have to?
Time always runs out... or does it have to?

Why It's Not Good:

1. 3 days is not nearly enough time to allow for a wide pool of answers, from a variety of users, so that the best can rise to the top. Variety, creativity, brainstorming, out-of-the-box thinking... they all need time to percolate. Good things take time. Ideas are honed, and distilled. We are made better by the presence of each other, not by small, tight, limited echo chambers of thought.

2. It creates confusion. Commenters will rarely know if their comment was actually chosen by the Asker, or if it was just a system choice, which, in essence, means much less to us all. This is, after all, 'social media', not a roulette wheel in a casino, yet with a meaningless point system and no cash. If our reward is sharing, helping, and feedback, why the hell are they messing with the feedback system?

3. It doesn't build relationships, it undermines them. If users don't know if they were selected by the Asker, then they must therefore assume they were not chosen. (The exception being if the choice occurs within 2 days of the question being posted.) If the Asker forgets about the question, or doesn't want to choose you or other users, then this also provides information about that user, and your relationship to that user.

4. It devalues the MHOs that were chosen by the Asker. A computer does not know what the Asker wanted, liked, nor appreciated as a comment. Why must computers/A.I./robots/algorithms decide the events and decisions of our lives?

5. It rewards only current, very active users, and penalizes users who are not online within a very short time frame (2 days.)

6. It encourages a frenzy of activity up until only 3 days, and then people losing interest in what the site deems 'old' questions. A good question is a good question, whether brand new or not.

1. It creates churn. This hugely prioritizes quantity over quality.

7. It gameifies the site (see also #2, above) which is just shamelessly trying to hook users into attachment and addiction and pandering positive feedback. We are better than this. We are smarter than this... right?

Overall, I think @LesterJester said it best. I'll give him the last word:

"People do have lives outside of this site after all and some people only come on here a couple of times a week.

There's no need to bum rush people into answering so quickly and then pressure the asker to select an MHO just as quickly, especially when conversations are still active and people are still posting.

Let them stew a while. What's the damn rush?"

Why Auto-Selection of MHOs is Bad, and Why 3 Days is Even Worse
Why Auto-Selection of MHOs is Bad, and Why 3 Days is Even Worse
Post Opinion