Timeline for answer to Give each site a parallel site for polling, recommendations and subjective-ish stuff by Oak
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
Post Revisions
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 28, 2020 at 18:57 | comment | added | HansenJC001 | I notice that SE considers a poll to be a low quality question. And yet, within any community, learning what the consensus is on the way that members view an idea or how they use a product may be very insightful. Here is one example: In order to learn the makeup of a community I might wish to know how many people use off-the-shelf commercial parts or products compared to the percentage of those who create their own, or contract for unique custom parts or entire products. This would be especially true in a group that is often discussing theory and practice within a discipline. | |
| Aug 10, 2018 at 13:28 | comment | added | Mike | for the languages SE pools are really important !!! languages have rules but in the end they are modified by communities so sharing opinions about it can help other people out !, like please kill the inclusive language ! | |
| Mar 16, 2017 at 16:33 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.gaming.stackexchange.com/ with https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Nov 25, 2016 at 14:56 | comment | added | Sherwood Botsford | Leave them merged into the main exchange. Mandate a tag of "Opinion-sought" show them shaded in pink on search results so that people's eyes can slide past them. Add search capabilities for not tagged X e.g. -opinion-sought. Mandate requiremets for questions: miminum length, what tried, what really looking for. Mandate requirements for answers: Must compare at least 2 products, must justify answers. A thoughtful opinion is valuable. | |
| Jul 1, 2015 at 4:44 | comment | added | Tobias Kienzler | @twiz letting the community decide what is correct may actually yield unpleasant results such as creationism and anti vaccine | |
| Dec 15, 2013 at 6:10 | comment | added | twiz | I think the real problem with this is that by closing the questions it actually makes them more worthless. Honestly, I don't see why "debatable" is so awful. The whole point of voting on answers is to take something debatable and let the community decide what is correct. What I would like to see is another site that doesn't allow answers to be accepted, since the questions are subjective and often time-sensitive. | |
| Dec 10, 2013 at 21:18 | comment | added | Ben | @JeffAtwood the slant resource is helpful. I do, however, keep finding myself turning to SO and other SEs for highly specific recommendations. It doesn't seem outrageous to ask for recommendations that are long-tailish: discussion on how to integrate system X with system Y on platform Z. Usually I am in this position because there are many resources on systems X,Y,Z, and I don't yet know enough about them to effectively root through the possible results. A response that says google term A, would, in this case, be useful! | |
| Sep 5, 2013 at 20:22 | comment | added | Jeff Atwood StaffMod | See also slant.co which is highly relevant | |
| Jan 27, 2011 at 6:50 | vote | accept | Tobias Kienzler | ||
| Jan 20, 2011 at 8:41 | history | bounty awarded | Tobias Kienzler | ||
| Jan 15, 2011 at 8:31 | comment | added | Oak | @Jeff I don't believe in "anything goes" either, and I don't claim that stackexchange should simply contain anything - there are other websites out there. I understand that some questions are purged from programmers.se as well. But you can't deny that in general programmers is far more subjective than SO. I think that this mythical 4th place should try to be similar to programmers.se - i.e. a place for questions that in essence lack an objective answer, such as requests for recommendations, but still a Q&A site rejecting general discussions, and rejecting "bad subjective" questions. | |
| Jan 15, 2011 at 8:21 | comment | added | Jeff Atwood StaffMod | as programmers shows us, even that solution is awkward because we still have rules about what a constructive subjective question is, and the people who support this seem to want a "no rules anything goes" philosophy that we don't believe in. | |
| Nov 24, 2010 at 11:14 | history | edited | Oak | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 10 characters in body
|
| Nov 21, 2010 at 12:24 | history | edited | Oak | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
Typo
|
| Nov 15, 2010 at 9:30 | vote | accept | Tobias Kienzler | ||
| Jan 24, 2011 at 10:33 | |||||
| Nov 15, 2010 at 9:08 | history | answered | Oak | CC BY-SA 2.5 |