Just came over this question; and I agreed with the comments that the question is too broad, and esp. the part that goes

The second question is: Which way of modifying a string is more standard

made me go for close/opinion-based; to be then told that I failed the test this time; as this question was "OK".

So, even when this question is really "OK" (which I still doubt somehow); is it really that good of a "test" question? And btw: who decides which questions become test questions?

And please note: I do understand the triage process, and the test within. I am asking if the "automation" (which only looks at upvotes) really picked a reasonable example here.

As said: I think this question should be closed! Am I wrong about that?

  • 3
    The system just picks questions that have five or more upvotes and no downvotes. There's no human judging. That's such a basic C question that I don't think it deserves those votes. – Andrew Medico Jan 22 '17 at 18:29
  • 1
    "Deserving votes" is not the same as deserving close votes ;-) – GhostCat salutes Monica C. Jan 22 '17 at 19:13
  • @gnat I understand that I failed the test. I am asking if this question shouldn't have been closed; instead of receiving 5 upvotes. – GhostCat salutes Monica C. Jan 23 '17 at 7:59
  • reasons for posts getting into "known good" audits are typically unrelated with quality so yes, it can very well be that it should be closed indeed. This is explained in the answer in duplicate question – gnat Jan 23 '17 at 8:06
  • 4
    Does it concern anyone else that we always close these questions as duplicates of a question where the accepted answer says: "You've done the right thing in bringing attention to this poor audit by posting this question."? – Cody Gray Jan 23 '17 at 15:30
  • @CodyGray Count me in. That is way I went for "no, I dont like this duplicate suggestion" and put up that comment. – GhostCat salutes Monica C. Jan 23 '17 at 15:32
  • @CodyGray A lot of these questions are answered with, "this is why the audit was right and you messed up". At least as many as where the audit was bad, in my experience. Also keep in mind that the vast majority of audits work fine, and people don't go posting to meta to say that the got an audit that worked great; the only go posting to meta when they think it's wrong. – Servy Jan 23 '17 at 22:39
  • @servy I'm not criticizing the idea of audits. I'm saying it is useful for people who disagree with an audit (since it's only, as you agree, a small number) to get an actual answer to their Meta question, either one saying that the audit was correct and give a reason why so that they can learn, or one agreeing that the audit was incorrect and establishing a community consensus. – Cody Gray Jan 24 '17 at 7:20

The qualifying criteria here require - in addition to those tests mentioned in comments - that multiple people who could have voted to close have instead interacted with the question in some positive way (answered, edited, upvoted).

In this particular case, the question has attracted 4 answers from people who could've instead voted to close, as well as other forms of attention.

That doesn't, of course, mean that they aren't all wrong... But it also doesn't mean that you're right.

Note that the accepted answer interpreted the question "which way of modifying a string is more standard" as "which way of modifying a string is commonly used by the standard library" - and answered accordingly. This is a far less... "fuzzy"... question than the alternate interpretations adopted by the two now-deleted answers, and given its reception I suspect the answerer's instinct to assume good faith in this question was wise.

You must log in to answer this question.

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