Return to Answer

• We have a large quantity questions of all classes 1,2, and 3.

• We have a large amount of new users (1 reppies) coming in and asking questions of class 3. Closing their questions does not solve their problems; rather they must, as people, be redirected to ELL because that's what they are seeking. Over there, they will learn how to meet their question standards.

• We have a large quantity questions of all classes 1,2, and 3. A shocking amount are not being closed/migrated/put on hold, and are receiving several answers.

• We have a large amount of new users (1 reppies) coming in and asking questions of class 3. Closing their questions does not solve their problems; rather they must, as people, be redirected to ELL because that's what they are seeking. Over there, they will learn how to meet their question standards.

• We have a large quantity questions of all classes 1,2, and 3.

• We have a large amount of new users (1 reppies) coming in and asking questions of class 3. It is our duty to resolve their confusion and send the users to ELL, because that's what they are seeking. Over there, they will learn how to meet question standards.

1. A modified algorithm has potential to be put to work in forming review queues, easing the burden from the community (Colleen and Mitch).
2. As I mentioned before, and as you can see in the results, the algorithm can currently separate the questions into two pools: classes 1,4 and classes 2,3. The questions from class 2 belong on ELL, and so do their askers. The questions form class 3 do not belong on ELL, but their askers are learners, and thus do belong to ELL. Therefore, the algorithm effectively distinguishes not between questions, but between user English proficiency. So I propose that when a user is preparing to send a question, the algorithm checks it. If it deems that the English of the question is more in line with a learner's level, it simply informs him of the ELL site, leaving the choice to the user. I think this could be a huge solution to the flood of new users who are actually seeking the ELL. We do them no favor by closing their questions; a wizard to help them reach the ELL before they even send their question would do everyone a great favor. Of course, a native English speaker who the AI erroneously perceives to be a learner can just dismiss the message.

• We have a large quantity questions of all classes 1,2, and 3.

• We have a large amount of new users (1 reppies) coming in and asking questions of class 3. Closing their questions does not solve their problems; rather they must, as people, be redirected to ELL because that's what they are seeking. Over there, they will learn how to meet their question standards.

1. A modified algorithm has potential to be put to work in forming review queues, easing the burden from the community (Colleen and Mitch).
2. As I mentioned before, and as you can see in the results, the algorithm can currently separate the questions into two pools: classes 1,4 and classes 2,3. The questions from class 2 belong on ELL, and so do their askers. The questions fromm class 3 do not belong on ELL, but their askers are learners, and thus do belong to ELL. Therefore, the algorithm effectively distinguishes not between good and bad questions, but between user English proficiency. So I propose that when a user is preparing to send a question, the algorithm checks it. If it deems that the English of the question is more in line with a learner's level, it simply informs him of the ELL site, leaving the choice to the user. I think this could be a huge solution to the flood of new users who are actually seeking the ELL. We do them no favor by closing their questions; a wizard to help them reach the ELL before they even send their question would do everyone a great favor. Of course, a native English speaker who the AI erroneously perceives to be a learner can just dismiss the message.

Both solutions keep the HITL, and take into consideration the level of the user, and the research of the question. What is to be implemented, I leave to the community to decide. I'm not aware how implementation happens here, but when/if you're ready, I'll happily release the algorithms and do my part in the process.

Both solutions keep the HITL, and take into consideration the level of the user, and the research of the question. What is to be implemented, I leave to the community to decide. I'm not aware how implementation happens here, but when/if you're ready, I'll happily release the algorithms and do my part in the process.