0

Proposal: Tor - online anonymity, privacy, and security

I guess it will be difficult to leave beta. Obviously this isn't in reach, yet.

Please have a look at http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/10/when-will-my-site-graduate/

Questions per day

15 questions per day on average is a healthy beta, 5 questions or fewer per day needs some work. A healthy site generates lots of good content to make sure users keep coming back.

I think most relevant questions will be asked at some point. I also think it's better to have answers before the questions get even asked. It appears to be more healthy if all questions of a user are answered and he/she hasn't to come back.

avid users vs. total users

Every site needs a solid group of core users to assist in moderating the site.

Maybe doable, but there are probalby more new users asking, than "older" sticking around and answering them.

answer ratio

2.5 answers per question is good, only 1 answer per question needs some work. In a healthy site, questions receive multiple answers and the best answer is voted to the top.

I think questions answered by you, Runa, or other Tor Assistants or people close to Tor wont need another answer. In general, for many questions regarding any topic, I think answers should be given in such a way to create the maximum possible outcome.

(For example, related to Tor, a question about the supported OS/device/platform could be answered with all platforms supported by Tor and forks/alternatives for, let us say, Android.)

The Q&A sticking in beta forever is my great concern. (and I also don't understand why the Q&A is handled by a third-party [SSL being worked on], especially with exposing users to Google and Quantcast/Quantserve, while having a Q&A available)

  • I'm going to wait for Runa to reply and wanted to address my concerns regarding the process this Q&A has to go through and if the outcome would be "If the site does not get used, it will be deleted." or sticking in beta (limbo) forever. – bastik Jun 15 '13 at 6:17
  • The additional, one could say, comment in brackets probably doesn't belong here. It might be required to take this to the tor-talk list as it affects the tor community. It's not about me as I can freely choose if I like or dislike the Q&A system. I'm not having anything against stackexchange itself, (as you can see I'm here to make it happen) just the third-party issue is another concern that might needs to be addressed. (Me awaiting Runa's input) – bastik Jun 15 '13 at 6:23
  • 1
    I am not too concerned about the requirement that the site has to be used, otherwise it will be deleted. If we cannot get this page from proposal to live site, with an active community, then I don't see why we should spend resources (time, money, people) on setting up our own Q&A page somewhere else. – Runa Jun 19 '13 at 11:37
  • These topics have been discussed on the tor-talk mailing list, and in various Trac tickets, for a while now. I'm not going to repeat everything here, so if you do want to catch up and figure out why we're trying out Stack Exchange, see lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/2013-June/028475.html, lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/2013-June/028474.html, and lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/2013-June/028473.html – Runa Jun 19 '13 at 11:40
5

You are looking too far ahead. Its hard to predict how a site will grow. However, I do share your concern if this is intended to primarily be a technical support site.

Site proposals are evaluated at about 30-40% commitment for feasibility by the Stack Exchange Team. So, until the proposal crosses that point, even a beta site is not guaranteed. Hence, I really wouldn't worry about stats so early.

Whats more important is to work on some of The 7 Essential Meta Questions of Every Beta. The ones that can be discussed right now are :

  • Are questions about [subject] on or off topic?
  • What should our FAQ contain?
  • How do we promote our site (proposal)?
2

Something in your question makes me think that you might be a little confused. If I'm mistaken, then I apologize, and we'll leave this post here just to help others avoid confusion:

I think questions answered by you, Runa, or other Tor Assistants or people close to Tor wont need another answer. In general, for many questions regarding any topic, I think answers should be given in such a way to create the maximum possible outcome.

At this point, there shouldn't be any answers. The point of Area 51 is to propose example questions and then use the comments to discuss ways to improve them to make them better examples of on-topic questions on the site.

As AsheeshR mentions, you may be thinking too far ahead. This proposal isn't even close to entering beta, much less leaving it. What's more, the statistics you mention, questions per day and avid users, can't even be measured yet until a few months into the beta phase.

The goal at the moment is to get more followers and elicit more good example questions so that the proposal can move from the definition phase (phase 1) to the commitment phase (phase 2), which comes before the beginning of the beta phase (phase 3).

If you need more guidance, please see the Area 51 FAQ. Hope this helps! :)

  • Oh, yes I understood. This is "just" a proposal. Not what will be there when the site is ready, there are no tags or a way to search for questions, yet. There are no answers, yet and there aren't supposed to be ones just, yet. But when there will be answers given I assume such that most nail it. – bastik Jun 15 '13 at 6:08
-1

I agree with your points.

If a simple question with really only one sane answer gets answered by the Tor support desk, why bother having 1.5 extra answers?

The question remains, is stackexchange flexible enough to ignore this requirement, if this page otherwise works fine or will it be victim of the algorithm?

What say does The Tor Project have with respect to this server? Are they just guests using a free service, having equally no rights as anyone else? Being just another community using this service? Can the service can get terminated at any time?

Have you spoken with stackexchange? Are they willing to let Tor users access this server forever or might they some day decide to install some anti spam software which routinely blacklists the Tor exit servers?

(and I also don't understand why the Q&A is handled by a third-party [SSL being worked on], especially with exposing users to Google and Quantcast/Quantserve, while having a Q&A available)

After all the years of arguing over a forum, you now finally end up using some free service with no control about its servers? Didn't the trac ticket say, you have sponsoring for the forum?

Do you want to ditch askbot.torproject.org and use this stackexchange instead? If thats the case, I am a bit disappointed. Well, I guess having any non-ideal Q/A forum is better than forever having no Q/A forum.

  • The requirements for graduation are not strict. They are more of guidelines than benchmarks. If a site works, has critical mass, and is self sustaining, it moves ahead. – asheeshr Jun 15 '13 at 3:13
  • My main concern was the Q&A being deleted or useless. "If the site does not get used, it will be deleted." Those might be answered right now. My comment in brackets may require another topic and this might be not the place to discuss this. – bastik Jun 15 '13 at 6:06

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .