Skip to main content
edited tags
Link
added 190 characters in body
Source Link

I think the recent experiment of suspending the homework close reason has already produced a very valuable result. However, I really feared that this will happen, and I hope I can steer our thinking into a different direction with this post.
To partially quote Wildcat

And now I think, it is quite apparent that we need a close reason for zero-effort questions to simply save out time, because the absolute majority of questions that were previoulsy closed as homework ones are now closed with this very custom reason (zero-effort).

I would like to back that up with some numbers (10k+ tools). In the past seven days there were 213 questions asked, of which 70 were closed (33%). Of these 22 were closed with custom reasons (10%). From the summary of the close reasons, they are all a variation of "no/any effort shown".

While I agree with most of you that we need a system to protect our site from dilution the great content with questions of the zero-effort kind, I don't think that effort itself is a good metric. Just as Wildcat says, zero-effort is easy to identify and closing them on sight would be easy. But I think it wouldn't be enough to sort out other questions, too. I am of the opinion, that just showing effort doesn't necessarily ensure that it is a good, or even useful question.

I personally would like to have conceptual questions and answers, that in principle can be adapted to various situations. One of these approaches certainly is the tiny list of duplicates. If such questions include very concrete examples, I think that's fine (if not, then it would probably not be off-topic).

Please note, that this is an attempt of replacing the current homework policy to a more generalised and more objective version.

As a (very first) draft for discussion, I would like to propose a custom close reason of the following form:

At Chemistry.se we aim for questions that are helpful to as many visitors as possible. Therefore you should identify the specific chemistry concepts and the problems you are facing with it. For more information how to improve your question see: How can I make my question conceptual?

(demonstration link only; 400 total characters allowed, 334 used)

The above certainly is far, farn from perfect, but I hope it will provide a new angle on the whole closing issue. The experiment will continue for another two weeks (roundabout); please be vocal about your opinion. And if you are thinking about commenting now, maybe write an answer instead.

I think the recent experiment of suspending the homework close reason has already produced a very valuable result. However, I really feared that this will happen, and I hope I can steer our thinking into a different direction with this post.
To partially quote Wildcat

And now I think, it is quite apparent that we need a close reason for zero-effort questions to simply save out time, because the absolute majority of questions that were previoulsy closed as homework ones are now closed with this very custom reason (zero-effort).

I would like to back that up with some numbers (10k+ tools). In the past seven days there were 213 questions asked, of which 70 were closed (33%). Of these 22 were closed with custom reasons (10%). From the summary of the close reasons, they are all a variation of "no/any effort shown".

While I agree with most of you that we need a system to protect our site from dilution the great content with questions of the zero-effort kind, I don't think that effort itself is a good metric. Just as Wildcat says, zero-effort is easy to identify and closing them on sight would be easy. But I think it wouldn't be enough to sort out other questions, too. I am of the opinion, that just showing effort doesn't necessarily ensure that it is a good, or even useful question.

I personally would like to have conceptual questions and answers, that in principle can be adapted to various situations. One of these approaches certainly is the tiny list of duplicates. If such questions include very concrete examples, I think that's fine (if not, then it would probably not be off-topic).

As a (very first) draft for discussion, I would like to propose a custom close reason of the following form:

At Chemistry.se we aim for questions that are helpful to as many visitors as possible. Therefore you should identify the specific chemistry concepts and the problems you are facing with it. For more information how to improve your question see: How can I make my question conceptual?

(demonstration link only; 400 total characters allowed, 334 used)

The above certainly is far, farn from perfect, but I hope it will provide a new angle on the whole closing issue. The experiment will continue for another two weeks (roundabout); please be vocal about your opinion. And if you are thinking about commenting now, maybe write an answer instead.

I think the recent experiment of suspending the homework close reason has already produced a very valuable result. However, I really feared that this will happen, and I hope I can steer our thinking into a different direction with this post.
To partially quote Wildcat

And now I think, it is quite apparent that we need a close reason for zero-effort questions to simply save out time, because the absolute majority of questions that were previoulsy closed as homework ones are now closed with this very custom reason (zero-effort).

I would like to back that up with some numbers (10k+ tools). In the past seven days there were 213 questions asked, of which 70 were closed (33%). Of these 22 were closed with custom reasons (10%). From the summary of the close reasons, they are all a variation of "no/any effort shown".

While I agree with most of you that we need a system to protect our site from dilution the great content with questions of the zero-effort kind, I don't think that effort itself is a good metric. Just as Wildcat says, zero-effort is easy to identify and closing them on sight would be easy. But I think it wouldn't be enough to sort out other questions, too. I am of the opinion, that just showing effort doesn't necessarily ensure that it is a good, or even useful question.

I personally would like to have conceptual questions and answers, that in principle can be adapted to various situations. One of these approaches certainly is the tiny list of duplicates. If such questions include very concrete examples, I think that's fine (if not, then it would probably not be off-topic).

Please note, that this is an attempt of replacing the current homework policy to a more generalised and more objective version.

As a (very first) draft for discussion, I would like to propose a custom close reason of the following form:

At Chemistry.se we aim for questions that are helpful to as many visitors as possible. Therefore you should identify the specific chemistry concepts and the problems you are facing with it. For more information how to improve your question see: How can I make my question conceptual?

(demonstration link only; 400 total characters allowed, 334 used)

The above certainly is far, farn from perfect, but I hope it will provide a new angle on the whole closing issue. The experiment will continue for another two weeks (roundabout); please be vocal about your opinion. And if you are thinking about commenting now, maybe write an answer instead.

Tweeted twitter.com/StackChemistry/status/874419613337079809
Source Link

Let's talk about effort, shall we?

I think the recent experiment of suspending the homework close reason has already produced a very valuable result. However, I really feared that this will happen, and I hope I can steer our thinking into a different direction with this post.
To partially quote Wildcat

And now I think, it is quite apparent that we need a close reason for zero-effort questions to simply save out time, because the absolute majority of questions that were previoulsy closed as homework ones are now closed with this very custom reason (zero-effort).

I would like to back that up with some numbers (10k+ tools). In the past seven days there were 213 questions asked, of which 70 were closed (33%). Of these 22 were closed with custom reasons (10%). From the summary of the close reasons, they are all a variation of "no/any effort shown".

While I agree with most of you that we need a system to protect our site from dilution the great content with questions of the zero-effort kind, I don't think that effort itself is a good metric. Just as Wildcat says, zero-effort is easy to identify and closing them on sight would be easy. But I think it wouldn't be enough to sort out other questions, too. I am of the opinion, that just showing effort doesn't necessarily ensure that it is a good, or even useful question.

I personally would like to have conceptual questions and answers, that in principle can be adapted to various situations. One of these approaches certainly is the tiny list of duplicates. If such questions include very concrete examples, I think that's fine (if not, then it would probably not be off-topic).

As a (very first) draft for discussion, I would like to propose a custom close reason of the following form:

At Chemistry.se we aim for questions that are helpful to as many visitors as possible. Therefore you should identify the specific chemistry concepts and the problems you are facing with it. For more information how to improve your question see: How can I make my question conceptual?

(demonstration link only; 400 total characters allowed, 334 used)

The above certainly is far, farn from perfect, but I hope it will provide a new angle on the whole closing issue. The experiment will continue for another two weeks (roundabout); please be vocal about your opinion. And if you are thinking about commenting now, maybe write an answer instead.