18

Questions on the HNQ is often the first impression people will get about our site. Ideally, only the best of our content should appear on that list. Your question, while not bad, shows zero prior research effort. A quick look at the relevant Wikipedia article is enough to answer it. In fact, that's all the accepted answer does, point you to Wikipedia. I ...


11

No. Looking at the politics.SE stats, the site isn't doing so well on "questions per day", so incentivizing asking questions seems like a good thing. That doesn't necessarily mean that it will help us get out of beta status, but I think more high quality questions can help the community in general. The "answer ratio" is also not that great here, and more ...


10

To the specific question in the body: probably not. There aren’t many questions here, so there aren’t many ways to keep certain people from reading your question. As for your bigger question: politically motivated votes are an unavoidable fact of life here. You can try to minimize it by trying as hard as you can to ask your question in good faith – that is: ...


10

Unless this takes a lot of work on the part of the moderators, I'd leave it as is. While in beta we have many users that can vote to close. Furthermore, once a troll is known it seems a few down votes does the trick when the question is asked by a known troll, at least I think that's what happened here. As of yet, I don't think banning questions from ...


9

I've done this temporarily. What that means depends on how long it takes. I'll probably re-enable anonymous participation when I'm confident that we've got this situation under control.


8

Perhaps the rejection reason isn't 100% accurate, but it looks like you're trying to post a new answer. You can't, since the question is closed, but that is no reason to edit an existing answer and trying to put your words in the author's mouth. When you edit a post, there's this widget which says "clarify meaning without changing it". It is also ...


8

Yes, but we should be careful about two things: Only close questions if they're actually asking if something is an impeachable offense if committed by the US president. There may be other similar questions and we should check if the dupe target actually answers the question. If there are subquestions that are not covered by the dupe target then we should ...


7

Let's dissect the two Why do US presidents play golf? - There's no attempt at a political angle, just a general "Why play golf?", which should be closed as off-topic (I can't tell you why any one president likes golf, let alone all of them for the last 30-ish years). An on-topic question might be Why do people sometimes get mad at US presidents for ...


7

It worth noting that there's a post notice for these very questions: This post relates to a rapidly changing event. Only ♦ moderators can apply and remove these notices. There are currently two questions on Politics Stack Exchange which have this notice: What options are left, if Britain cannot decide? Did Erdoǧan cheat in the 2018 election? You can find ...


6

I would suggest placing a bounty on the question with outdated answers. There is even an option for this on the bounty dialog: In the specific case linked in this question, the original suggested duplicate question was closed for being opinion-based, so a bounty couldn't be started in this situation. However, as the community decided that the original was ...


5

If I need to say it again (defending my question), politicians supporting [or not] a social cause by their personal but public behavior (rather than legislation per se) seems reasonably on-topic. To give a different example of that kind, Modi personally collecting trash on a beach was newsworthy for this reason. If I ask here if some other politicians engage ...


5

Is a question that depends on estimating the level of political expertise or political talent of a political leader of the past or present necessarily so opinion-based that it must be put on hold? A question like that would be at risk of being closed. Someone's level of talent or "expertise" can be a subjective thing to ask. You might be able to get away ...


4

Better idea: flag for a moderator. They are much better equipped to handle these types of situations. If the content is bad, then yes it should be closed and deleted. But this is independent of the OP starting an edit war. If you think the question is worthwhile, is should be kept, even if the OP is trying to start an edit war. Please, don't delete good ...


4

A cursory check of last couple of pages of open questions sorted by vote count yields this question, which despite garnering 17 downvotes, (+7/-17), has never been closed or deleted. The question has also survived two close reviews: 1, 2. If we include Meta, this question has 21 downvotes; (+4/21).


4

As long as politics stackexchange does not stand on its own, I'd argue that the (potential) benefit of using the same rules as the main site outweighs the (potential) drawbacks of using +10/+10. This argument of mine becomes irrelevant if/when the bulk of new politics users come here from other sources than hot network questions.


4

Are there ways of formulating a question title so that it will be more likely to be of no interest to anyone who would be likely to be displeased by the body of the question? Generalize As an asker, the easiest way to avoid down votes is to avoid controversy. If something is controversial, try to ask it in neutral terms, asking about a more general case ...


4

If you are among the 5 that closed, can you elaborate on why you did so? Not making much sense, at least to me. If I recall correctly, I voted to close for the following reason: Questions asking for the internal motivations of people, how specific individuals would behave in hypothetical situations or predictions for future events are off-topic, because ...


4

I'm not terribly convinced that stopping unregistered accounts has helped much. The problem user is now posting from registered new accounts I think the same person was in control of an older registered account with 40 or so reputation, account which has now been deleted, asking "Will Fascism win in the end?" And a few more registered accounts I suspect ...


2

As the author of the question Why do US presidents play golf? I might be regarded as biased. It is not obvious who benefits by enforcing a strict rule about relevance - a quick look suggests that this site has about 15 questions per day, so relevant questions are hardly being lost in a flood of poor questions. Regarding my golf question, it has attracted ...


2

You proposed a huge edit to a question that's (at least for me) essentially a separate answer.


1

No. A site dies without a continuous supply of quality and on-topic questions. Anything that could be seen as suggesting "we are twice as important/valuable as you are" might feel discouraging to those who mostly ask questions, and generate a subconscious less-than-optimal attitude in those who mostly post answers. Yin-Yang, chicken-and-egg, questions and ...


1

An unambigous yes would be absurd alone due to the fact that in many countries, a lot of politicians hold day jobs. Such politicians might create notable facts in science, academia, art, engineering, sports due to their main career path or private interests. Questions on topic in these fields could have zero to do with politics. Or a lot. Crassly put, a ...


1

While I don't think it should be a specific requirement, it's one of those things that makes your question more likely to be answered. If someone can learn everything they need to just from looking at it, without doing loads more reading, they're far more likely to take time to respond to it. In this specific instance, from reading the term "Modi's ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible