Timeline for Are we a bit overzealous with closing questions as homework?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 16, 2017 at 18:16 | comment | added | pentavalentcarbon | I suppose I'm in agreement with all those points in principal, except the last one (explain the technique without giving away the answer). It still seems too error prone. Consider that we have some verbiage currently saying to not give away answers, yet it happens quite often among people who haven't been here > 2 years. It may not start off perfect, but eventually the revised policy should be bulletproof against this abuse. | |
| May 16, 2017 at 15:30 | comment | added | R.M. | @pentavalentcarbon You're right that the rote calculation style questions are also an issue, but even then I'm not sure that "homework" is the right close. If we have a canonical question about how to do such calculations, then it's close as duplicate. If we don't, (or the question addresses a situation not well covered by the canonical answer) then it is a good question, and we should explain the problem solving technique (without necessarily "giving away" the answer to particular calculation being posed). | |
| May 12, 2017 at 1:20 | comment | added | pentavalentcarbon | Let's assume that Chem.SE should cater to all levels, where there is no baseline for chemical sophistication required to participate. Do you think one could split apart basic conceptual (maybe "foundational") questions from those that are nothing more than rote calculations (or the chemical equivalent of calculations in reaction form)? | |
| May 10, 2017 at 20:37 | comment | added | orthocresol | I agree that there is definitely a double standard when it comes to "basic" vs "advanced" questions. Most of the misuse of the homework close reason is probably on questions being too basic, although I believe it goes beyond that as well. | |
| May 10, 2017 at 19:11 | history | answered | R.M. | CC BY-SA 3.0 |