10

We used to do that somewhat manually (close a proposal quickly if no example questions submitted). So at least, in principle, it's a good idea. But we're in the midsts of designing a next-generation Area 51 process… so while we're not likely to add this feature to the current software, something like it will almost certainly be part of version 2.0.


6

I marked your feature-request [status-deferred] for the simple reason that we're not likely to add any major infrastructure changes like this to Area 51. If you'd like to see why, check out this post: Next-Generation Area 51 I agree in principle though that there should be more transparency about where the proposal went. It's just one of those features ...


3

Thank you for the suggestion. Your idea has merit, but the Area 51 system is in the sunset of its development so we will not be adding additional features/badges to this system until a next-generation system has been developed. You can read the latest on the future of site creation here: What's going on with Area 51? I will defer this conversation until we ...


1

The divide between the discussion area and the workflow of Area 51 proper has always been, umm… hack-y. It comes from the historical origins where an Area51-wide discussion forum like this was not in the original design of Area 51. I marked your feature-request [status-deferred] for the simple reason that we're not likely to add any major ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible