A message from our CEO about the future of Stack Overflow and Stack Exchange. Read now.
26

I kicked the question from HNQ (after 10k views) because I don't think it's a good question to represent our community and attract the users we want on this site. The question itself is one of those "XYZ sucks, am I right?" questions. It attracted a lot of bad answers. 5 with negative score, three of them got deleted. It also attracted a lot of bad ...


17

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 ...


14

The problem with asking for reasons why Trump should be impeached is that it is completely opinion-based. And I do not mean opinion-based for us. It is opinion-based for the congresspeople who make the decision to impeach or not impeach. The US constitution says that a president can be impeached for "high crimes and misdemeanors" and whatever that means is ...


13

I disagree that the basic problem with the question is that it wanted to know what people thought. The basic problem is that it wanted to promote an agenda. The poster wanted to say that people were hypocritical for criticizing Japan for whaling while eating other forms of meat. People gave reasons why whaling is treated differently: Whales overall ...


11

I think it was your prose more than the underlying question. It started out as a decent inquiry — what percentage of terrorism is actually domestic? But using the correct vernacular is the earmark of an "expertly"-posed question. Maybe you were going for effect, but When you start to indulge in acerbic rhetoric: There is this common idea out there ...


11

At this moment, I have neither voted to close nor downvoted the question. That said, the question has several problems. Reasons to close: This is pure history. This does not ask about politics but about historical documents. The question itself has a definite slant. Basically it spends most of the question telling us things. It's only at the very ...


10

When you contribute to Stackexchange, the content you post isn't only your content anymore. It becomes the content of the whole stackexchange community. Our goal is to collect good questions and answers. So I am really reluctant to delete a question when the question is on-topic has received a good answer Doing so would destroy useful content. It would ...


10

The assumption that the author of that question actually wants to seek asylum in North Korea themselves seems pure speculation to me. Nothing in the question indicates that they seriously plan that. The atrocities committed by North Korea's government are common knowledge. Giving migration advice is not our job. That's what https://expatriates.stackexchange....


10

I don't think I ever saw this question in its original state, which to save anyone else having to dig it out was; I read this article and I came to a conclusion how hypocritical non Japanese are. You are bashing us for whale fishing. So what's your favorite cuisine such rabbits, cows, trouts ( they are categorically as fishes ), pigs, chickens, ...


9

While this was protected by a moderator (more privileges than a mere user), it's worth noting that normally you can't just run around protecting questions. Typically they need some low quality answers by new users to meet that threshold (and if enough of those are deleted via review, Community will step in and do the deed itself) That having been said, I ...


9

To give an answer: The tag usage is in principal detailed in How do I correctly tag my questions? and What are tags, and how should I use them?. It boils down to choose tags that significantly describe the content of the question. Your question is about a newly introduced law in Poland. Therefore the Poland tag is absolutely justified. As far as I know it ...


9

One problem that many of the questions have had is that they feel like the poster has an agenda. In this case, the question seems to be promoting that the group of Americans known as black or African-American establish a separate, virtual country. Or a separate, land-based country--it's not quite clear. As a general rule, we consider questions with an ...


9

Yes, I think this question would be on-topic here.


8

So, the reason the post was locked was given in a comment ("vandalistic editing"), and the edit in question was revision 7 (I'm not going to link to it because you didn't link to it and I'll respect that). The lock seems justified to me. You had written a post that asked a certain question, and the answerer put time and effort into providing you with an ...


8

I've saved an edit to your question, feel free to roll it back if you feel that it changes the question too substantially for your liking. The biggest change I made was to remove a lot of the content that doesn't seem absolutely necessary to get to the point, and simplified some of the language of the actual question you're asking. This change may or may not ...


8

The answer was removed by the community, three trusted users to be exact. From what I can see, the removal is under review and has gathered one pending undelete vote. Further reading: Why and how are some answers deleted?


8

As I mentioned in a comment under the question, I think it's still too broad even when narrowed down to a single country: @Matcha_boy98 it's still pretty broad. How a country makes policy is quite complex, too much for an answer here. Consider for example this Wikipedia article on the Government of Japan. I suggest reading such articles first and then ...


7

There are two kinds of aspects to building a canal. The engineering aspects. Is it possible to build a canal from A to B? What would it cost? How long would it take? What physical obstacles are there and how could they be circumvented? The political aspects. Is there political will do it? Is there relevant political opposition? What are the geopolitical ...


7

I've unprotected the question. Having it protected while it was featured in the HNQ list (and was attracting poor answers) was reasonable. Now that it dropped off the list, however, there's little reason to keep it protected. I also took this opportunity to unprotect a handful of other old questions. That said, I am not optimistic that the question will ...


7

Jonita answered with: The best approach to this would have been to kill it early. Ignore the fact that the title is a reasonable question, deal with the fact that the content is a rant by closing the question. Instead of saving the question, create a new one with a neutral content that brings out the same information. I disagree with this. I think there'...


7

I think asking for a salary table of government employees is rather stretching the scope of the site. You might argue it's a matter of government policy how much government employees are paid but I think it opens the door to a lot of uninteresting questions that are only tangentially related to politics. While there is a police tag, it's mostly used, like ...


6

Although I answered the question, the problems with it were obvious to me: too many possible sub-questions with no clear focus on any, as well as the fairly speculative nature of the whole question. In my answer, I basically had to quickly go over all possible scenarios that came to my mind as to how a recent enough [quasi]independence cases might translate ...


6

I voted to close the question because I found it to be rambling and unclear what was actually being asked. No more, no less. I also left a comment to that effect. Paring it down to succinctly address the actual question (which appears to be about forming a landless state?) would be enough for me to retract my vote or vote to reopen. As a general rule, if ...


6

First off, I edited your question to add some additional context. I suspect one problem was that there wasn't enough information about the context of this letter for most readers to understand what you were asking about. It wasn't clear who "Cramer" was, or what this letter was about, or why it's a political subject. Second, we tend to close "mind reading" ...


6

Moving target questions are a big problem. They’re rude to answerers who took the time to write an answer, but then find their answer invalidated. And they hurt the site’s primary goal of collecting specific, high-quality Q&As by creating situations where questions and answers don’t match up. I think the best option in a circumstance like this, where a ...


5

The problem comes from the false dichotomy presented as the premise to the question. One option for resolving this would be inquiring about the origin, domestic vs foreign. Another would be to inquire about the motivations, ie eco-terrorism/anarchist/religious/etc. The question sinks itself into deep trouble by failing to understand this separation. ...


5

When we say a "rant" what we're talking about is a "Question" that is not actually a question. If your question is Obama Sucks. Am I right? It has the syntactical form of a question, but in spirit it is not actually a question. It does not actually seek an answer, rather, its purpose is to tell us something. Generally, so long as your question ...


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