I haven't looked, but I wouldn't surprised if you ended up drowning in stupid questions, suspiciously homework-ish queries, extremely domain-specific questions, and other such jetsam. Maybe I'm wrong, though.

In my experience, when I've asked a really nasty question that nobody had an answer for, it tends to be upvoted pretty heavily. Which is nice, since it's sort of a consolation prize: "well, I didn't get an answer, but at least I came away with a few dozen more XP!" That might make for search with a higher signal/noise ratio -- "find me SOPW posts with zero replies and somewhat high reputation". Judging from personal experience, it should be valid: if I read a question and think "wow, I have no clue, but I'd love to hear the answer", I often upvote it.

Your request also brings to mind a possible modification to the site to encourage monks to answer old but worthwhile questions. Part of the problem is that you could trawl through old questions and answer what you could, but you would never get that great meaningless-yet-satisfying XP boost you would from answering a recent question. It's because the recent questions get a lot more visitors, while nobody but the poster will ever see your reply to an older question.

So what if we allow the original poster to say whether a question has been properly answered yet or not? Hardly anyone would bother filling it out most of the time, of course -- it's one extra little thing to do that everyone would forget. And why not? The OP has the answer s/he was looking for already. But what if marking an old question -- say, at least a week stale -- as answered automatically popped it back into the list of current items (with a note explaining why it is mixed in with all the recent stuff)? Then people who cared about the same question could click on it and get their answer, so they're happy, and the answerer would get the upvotes, so s/he's happy. So while I would guess that few would bother to mark their recent questions as answered, people would have incentive to mark their old unanswered questions as answered, and hence people would have incentive to trawl through the archives, looking for those older but more difficult queries.

What do y'all think?

In reply to Re: Finding posts with zero replies. by sfink
in thread Finding posts with zero replies. by doowah2004

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post, it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":


  • Posts are HTML formatted. Put <p> </p> tags around your paragraphs. Put <code> </code> tags around your code and data!
  • Titles consisting of a single word are discouraged, and in most cases are disallowed outright.
  • Read Where should I post X? if you're not absolutely sure you're posting in the right place.
  • Please read these before you post! —
  • Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags:
    a, abbr, b, big, blockquote, br, caption, center, col, colgroup, dd, del, details, div, dl, dt, em, font, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, hr, i, ins, li, ol, p, pre, readmore, small, span, spoiler, strike, strong, sub, summary, sup, table, tbody, td, tfoot, th, thead, tr, tt, u, ul, wbr
  • You may need to use entities for some characters, as follows. (Exception: Within code tags, you can put the characters literally.)
            For:     Use:
    & &amp;
    < &lt;
    > &gt;
    [ &#91;
    ] &#93;
  • Link using PerlMonks shortcuts! What shortcuts can I use for linking?
  • See Writeup Formatting Tips and other pages linked from there for more info.