Is there a rating for the quality of questions asked?

Question

Do you think good questions should get more points?

Answer 1

There is the Thumbs Up/Down, but I don't think it gives you any more (or less) points, but perhaps it should. Also the quality of the answers too :-)

However, in the more contentious topics, like politics, sex and religion, I have often seen the ratings used to agree or disagree with a particular viewpoint rather than the quality of the question or answer.

How, also, would you distinguish between the content and the delivery? Sometimes excellent, thought provoking questions are asked by those with little command of the English language... <>

Answer 2

Read community guidelines. Users can rate questions and answers which is a way Yahoo keep track of trends in quality of Q & As. Rate good questions and equally thumbs down to a lot of the bad mannered, crude or plain stupid questions

Answer 3

It might make things more interesting for the askers, but the same purpose is served by the "thumbs up," and the "thumbs down" ratings.

A simple grade will not give as much information. I get a lot of "best answer" points because only one person voted for my answer. I get the same ten points if 10 people voted.

With the "thumbs" rating, the asker can see how many clicked up and how many clicked down.

I'll take this opportunity to encourage people to vote, "thumbs up" or "down" for ALL the questions you look at, and for the answers as well.

Answer 4

I agree with you. You get only 2 points for the question you answer, and 1 point for asking a question.

Answer 5

nicely this question has so a techniques gained 4 stars and is no longer an exciting question. That tells you the relevance of stars gained. As for you remark that skeptics minds are customarily made up, i won't disagree with you on that. yet nevertheless so is yours and Dana's and a great form of of the professional AGW human beings right here. Why are you allowed to be enterprise on your convictions whilst we at the instant are not? i can inform you this. If temperatures had risen notably for the duration of the previous decade, i does not be a skeptic. i won't see any justification interior the rivalry that the data is overwhelming given the stabilization of temperatures considering the fact that 2002 (at a time while greenhouse gases are increasing quicker than expected). The extra human beings make this declare, and the extra human beings insult me, the extra I exchange into confident that it is a politically pushed schedule and not a scientific one. the magnitude of power conservation as a political doctrine got here into existence way earlier Hansen's testimony in 1988. Edit: Dana. If I ask such stupid questions, why do you and many others of the regulars sense so threatened by them you have chose to respond to them to set the checklist rapidly? to boot all of us comprehend which you starred this question because of the fact GCNP stroked your ego. Edit#2: I in simple terms regarded on the starred questions in Dana's profile. lots of the questions that he starred, i do no longer locate exciting. He, alongside with many others, megastar questions that attack skeptics. those he does megastar, the overpowering majority are questions asked by believers. So he's no longer finding to "tutor" himself. he's in simple terms finding for solutions that toughen his ideals.

Answer 6

I agree with you. That would be awesome. Whats the point on rating questions if there is nothing being done to them.

Answer 7

in level 2 and beyond you rate but it really doesn't mean anything the whole points thing is silly

Answer 8

Isn't that what the little "thumbs up" button is for at the bottom of your question?

Answer 9

No and there is no automated way to do it.

Answer 10

I THOUGHT YOU DID