问题评论
-
19条评论
Recent deluge of trivial problems is really getting out of control. Any thoughts people?
是的，科迪变得越来越有趣。
我怀疑数学工作是否有兴趣策划Cody，并且将这种权力授予某些人可能太多了，因为这总是有判断力的判断，但他们至少可以执行最少数量的不同测试案例。这将迫使海报至少在他们的问题上付出了最小的努力。他们还应该强制为实际通过的测试套件编写测试。
Maybe there should be a way to flag problems. At the very least, a few people could have the privilege of reverting problems to drafts.
Yes. I agree that triviality is a subjective term. But you can easily classify this one as repetitive. And I definitely agree that there should be some flagging system.
Interestingly this surge is associated with a number of posters solving the exact same five problems (1, 2, 3, 167, and 189) and then creating their own (e.g. users 6047402, 6037968, 6042063, 6038651, 6034379, and 6033534), is this some new form of spam?
and all of them from @uab.edu, perhaps this is homework instead! (we should really have a talk with their TA :)
It seems that Ned Gulley is still active, though not enough to keep up with the recent spam influx. Is he the only Matlab moderator? He's helped clean up a lot of test suites before.
同时,(我希望Ned或其他人从Matlab是listening), I think that new sets of problem groups (challenges) would help spice things up. There aren't that many, to start with, and I think that having a bunch of well-written easy- to moderate-difficulty problems would help draw more people in or get others active again.
我认为，防止这种垃圾邮件的最佳方法是设定问题创建者必须解决所有Cody挑战问题（或至少一半）的条件。解决这些问题的人肯定会感谢人们在科迪所做的努力。
我绝对同意像这样的很多问题
我在听。感谢您的讨论。我一直与UAB教授联系，他让学生发布了这些问题。这种特殊的曲折发生在10月和2月教授课程时。我同意这不是科迪的适当用途。在提交问题之前，我们将通过提出最低球员分数来处理这一点。从来没有玩过，就不可能出现并遇到问题。我们必须看看这是否解决了问题，但我认为这是一个很好的一步。
顺便说一句，我会删除这个问题，但是现在它对它有有用的评论。
玩家需要100分的最低分数才能创建问题。约书亚·纽科姆（Joshua Newcomb）的得分为130。
Ned, thanks for setting up the threshold. Simultaneously, this should stop newbies threating Cody like Answers and some spammers as well. According to the last comment by Rifat, maybe threshold of 10 solved problems would be better? It seems to be the same like 100 points, but there are badges points too. In some circumstances one can have over 100 points by submitting only one solution, like and comment: solution(10) + solver(10) + speed demon(50) + leader(20) + promoter(10) + commenter(10) sums to 110. I agree with suggestions about flagging problems and reverting to drafts - maybe in the form of warning, giving authors about 72 hours to fix problems, after that time, problem would be reverted to draft? Speaking less seriously, I would give acces to create problems to those who solved problem 9 without reading comments and asking questions :-)
@aditya。从技术上讲，他的分数不包括创造问题的分数将为60。（两个问题的2x15分 - 重复，创建者徽章的20分和测验大师徽章的20分将消失）
yay
绝对是“垃圾邮件”，除了微不足道时，还向试图“解决”问题的人提出了有效的解决方案！
我同意阈值是一个好主意，但也许二十个问题是更好的水平。
I am starting to feel that maybe even more than 20 problems would be a suitable threshold. Like ~50 from the Cody Challenge (i.e. about half of them), in line with rifat's suggestion from Feb 2015. (I think solving _all_ of the Cody Challenge is a bit too onerous as a threshold.) It is relevant to specify the Cody Challenge due to the large number of 'fun' or 'trivial' or 'spam' problems present in the Community category.
A further proposal I have to address this issue is to ALLOW people (who've reached the threshold) to create whatever 'fun' / 'trivial' / 'spam' problems they want, but to NOT award any points to players for solving those problems! I.e. create a new category with a name like "Not for credit" that a group of responsible people (staff and/or players) can assign problems to. That's much less harsh than deleting problems, but they'll be easier to avoid if shifted out of "Community", and there'll also be less motivation for creating them. It would take some work on the MathWorks side to adjust the point scoring to recognise this: if that's really too much effort, then at least a new Category named "Trivial" (or suchlike) could still be created.
解决方案Comments
-
1 Comment
well done
-
1 Comment
哈哈
-
1 Comment
This user (ALBERT ALEXANDER STONIER) appears to have gamed the system, with fraudulent "likes" of this unremarkable solution submitted by 'sock-puppet' accounts. —DIV
