Community-based question answering platforms can be rich sources of information on a variety of specialized topics, from finance to cooking. The usefulness of such platforms depends heavily on user contributions (questions and answers), but also on respecting the community rules. As a crowd-sourced service, such platforms rely on their users for monitoring and flagging content that violates community rules. Common wisdom is to eliminate the users who receive many flags. Our analysis of a year of traces from a mature Q&A site shows that the number of flags does not tell the full story: on one hand, users with many flags may still contribute positively to the community. On the other hand, users who never get flagged are found to violate community rules and get their accounts suspended. This analysis, however, also shows that abusive users are betrayed by their network properties: we find strong evidence of homophilous behavior and use this finding to detect abusive users who go under the community radar. Based on our empirical observations, we build a classifier that is able to detect abusive users with an accuracy as high as 83 .
While Web search has become increasingly effective over the last decade, for many users' needs the required answers may be spread across many documents, or may not exist on the Web at all. Yet, many of these needs could be addressed by asking people via popular Community Question Answering (CQA) services, such as Baidu Knows, Quora, or Yahoo! Answers. In this paper, we perform the first large-scale analysis of how searchers become askers. For this, we study the logs of a major web search engine to trace the transformation of a large number of failed searches into questions posted on a popular CQA site. Specifically, we analyze the characteristics of the queries, and of the patterns of search behavior that precede posting a question; the relationship between the content of the attempted queries and of the posted questions; and the subsequent actions the user performs on the CQA site. Our work develops novel insights into searcher intent and behavior that lead to asking questions to the community, providing a foundation for more effective integration of automated web search and social information seeking. Posing a question to an online question and answer community does not guarantee a response. Significant prior work has explored and identified members' motivations for contributing to communities of collective action (e.g., Yahoo! Answers); in contrast it is not well understood why members choose to not answer a question they have already read. To explore this issue, we surveyed 135 active members of Yahoo! Answers. We show that top and regular contributors experience the same reasons to not answer a question: subject nature and composition of the question; perception of how the questioner will receive, interpret and react to their response; and a belief that their response will lose its meaning and get lost in the crowd if too many responses have already been given. Informed by our results, we discuss opportunities to improve the efficacy of the question and answer process, and to encourage greater contributions through improved design.