Timeline for Testing 3-vote Closures & Reopenings and the Value of Closing Questions
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 27, 2021 at 10:13 | comment | added | MolbOrg | Wb has some problem wih selfidntifiation and purpose of life qnd way to achieve things, so it leds to permanentl ongoing discussions since inception, take look at ontopic offtopic and why closed posts on meta | |
| May 27, 2021 at 10:11 | comment | added | MolbOrg | There is a sister site(kinda) fantasy.se so wb does not accepts q and a(to lesser degree) which based purely on fantasy and can't be processed otherwise. We do not write stories and plots for OP's. We try to discoarge providing lists of handwaviums etc. There will be good questions which will fall in those categories, and even more of bad ones. That is why closing is part of process, with few goals. The process is far from any perfection and has it's problems to work on. I talk from a position of a guy who says there are too many closed q's for wrong or no reason, but many closed for good. | |
| May 13, 2021 at 19:35 | comment | added | Otkin | @elemtilas It would probably be better if reviewers were very specific in their comments and avoid generic statements (copy-paste is even worse). I think that a clear explanation of specific problems in a given question and suggestions on how to resolve them would work better than anything else. This might not make new contributors feel better, but it would definitely help them to improve their questions. | |
| May 13, 2021 at 19:30 | comment | added | Otkin | @elemtilas I would say that there are some cultural differences when it comes to tolerance to critique, but the default assumption for WB.SE should be that closure is perceived negatively and lowers one's self-esteem. Considering technical limitations (no true hold or grace period and inability to implement them), only reviewers are capable of alleviating negative emotions resulting from closure. My emotional EQ is zero, so I am in no position to give specific advice on how to handle this. I can only say that words matter and it would be better to opt for neutral words e.g. not whine but say | |
| May 13, 2021 at 15:06 | comment | added | Tortliena - inactive | Regarding the way the system is made, yep, it's a topic for the top garden the most invested people will get a look at, a group which I'm not part of. Hence, I only talk about it in the comment, as it has been raised by elemtilas | |
| May 13, 2021 at 15:03 | comment | added | Tortliena - inactive | @JBH On the contrary, if an information is presented as important to the matter, but may prove to not be as true as it is, the subsequent logic in the arguments might very well break apart. I mean, if people disliking closure was not an important part of the topic, why would you tell it as your first argument in favor of that? And if that's significant doesn't it mean we need to review it a lil' more carefully before taking a decision? | |
| May 13, 2021 at 12:32 | comment | added | elemtilas | (cont)... all the ways we want to help them. But by then, they're all in a tiff about why we didn't say that in the first place, and then we're back to the beginning with instruction manuals and hurt feelings and rampant emotions. Suffice to say: the System has its problems! | |
| May 13, 2021 at 12:30 | comment | added | elemtilas | @Tortliena -- Reworking the system is pretty much out of the question. That's nothing any of us here can do. If you wanted, you could suggest changing the label. As for the idea of a question prep room, we do actually have that. It's called the Sandbox. But again, a new user won't hear about this if they don't look at the instruction manual first. And because SE isn't set up to really have a good instruction manual in the first place, it's not until after the query is "closed" and "feelings" get hurt and new user thinks everyone and their brother here is an ass that the learn about... | |
| May 13, 2021 at 1:21 | comment | added | JBH | (3) This isn't Worldbuilding's site, it's owned and managed by Stack Exchange and they set the fundamental rules. If you dislike closing questions or how anything is worded regarding the service, you need to address that on Meta Stack Exchange, not here. We have little control over what SE does, which is why this issue and the opportunity for comment is valuable. (4) But most importantly, you didn't address the purpose of the post, which is about the 3 vs 5 vote change. | |
| May 13, 2021 at 1:18 | comment | added | JBH | (1) I have made attempts to help new users better understand how the site works (a, b), but all the help in the world doesn't help if users don't take the time to read it. This goes for the help center. (2) Stack Exchange is not responsible for the emotional well being of anyone. Whenever we tell someone to avoid invective they whine "but we're all adults, right?" right up until their question gets closed, then suddenly we're harming their emotional well being. (*continued*) | |
| May 12, 2021 at 23:46 | comment | added | Tortliena - inactive | Still, I agree with you, "closed" isn't the best term, though rewording it might very well imply that you need to rework much more the system than going from a 5 to 3 votes change. More like going to a "question prep room", where they are closed for answers, but not considered as fully "abandoned". Tricky to make. 'Specially since from my point of view, closed is most of the time "abandoned", design-wise :/. | |
| May 12, 2021 at 23:41 | comment | added | Tortliena - inactive | @elemtilas I know it's based on good intentions and a certain optimism in people, However from my game design experience, you can never expect people to learn the way to do things, nor to get further than the initial perception. As such, long term players and users are much rarer, especially if they are feeling blocked right at the start. That's a reason to be much more cautious on it than you might think at first. On the flip side, you might really well want do that in order to avoid cumulating nasty people in the community, ones who will never be truly invested. | |
| May 12, 2021 at 22:41 | comment | added | elemtilas | (cont)... help the (new) member understand what "closure" really means and how to turn that so-called "failure" into victory. I'd call it a blow for freedom if every new member just understood that "closure" does mean we don't like you, does not mean we hate you or your invented world, does not mean we don't like your question. We WANT you to be a member! We WANT you to ask questions! We'd LOVE to help you with your questions. We just need new members to learn how to do it in the right way for this forum, just like how all the rest of us learned. | |
| May 12, 2021 at 22:41 | comment | added | elemtilas | I don't think that was JBH's meaning. It's more a matter of poor wording on SE's part, user perception, and emotional state. Otkin can probably speak to this better, but humans are pretty bad at taking criticism well, we tend to get defensive. The word "closure" itself has negative connotations (we're shutting you down!) and the concept is not well explained. And also, new users rarely delve too deeply into the instruction manual or the culture of the forum they're joining! All of these things lead to bad emotions and hurt feelings. And all of these things can be avoided if we... | |
| May 12, 2021 at 20:49 | history | answered | Tortliena - inactive | CC BY-SA 4.0 |