Discussion about a new custom close reason

Doorknob

Jun 7, 2014 18:22

Hmm... there's a slight semantic difference there that makes me feel we're not entirely in-sync on why these questions shouldn't be in the site scope. To me, this looks like the questions should fall under a more specific version of "too broad" or "primarily opinion-based"; maybe to chat? — Emrakul ♦ 30 mins ago

@Emrakul Chat?

user61230

Jun 7, 2014 18:56

Heya!

user61230

@Doorknob Sorry, just saw this now

Doorknob

Hi!

user61230

So! These questions, oh dear.

user61230

From your post, it sounds to me like your objection with them is that answers can't be proven or demonstrated to be correct

user61230

Is that sort of what you're thinking?

Doorknob

Jun 7, 2014 18:59

Yeah, that's basically the problem with the posts. We want to avoid situations where people have to come back and say "That's the correct answer that I was thinking of. That one kind of works, but it's cheating IMO. Ooh, that one's creative! It works too. But this one is wrong because of my opinion."

user61230

Yeah, that makes sense. I guess the question here is: how do we bound this set of questions?

Doorknob

Umm

First let's identify what kind of question causes these types of situations.

(That's what the close reason should refer to.)

user61230

Hmm... I see a commonality in that they tend to have assumptions which are not physically possible, but I'm not sure that's guaranteed to produce poor questions

user61230

i.e. "You are an impossibly small human at the bottom of a blender."

Doorknob

Well, it's not just "situation" or "how do you make this happen in the physical world"-type problems. We want to avoid any kind of question like this.

Maybe something like "avoid questions in which only the original asker can determine the correct answer"

user61230

Jun 7, 2014 19:04

True, though that might invite the asker to grow irritated. "But I think multiple answers are valid!"

user61230

"Isn't that what accepting is for?" &c.

Doorknob

Yeah, that might be a problem.

user61230

Hm. I think we should look a little bit further at what in the question itself invites these problems

user61230

This question appears to be off-topic because it has multiple different answers as the question is not fully defined. — kaine Jun 4 at 14:23

user61230

"Not fully defined" seems like it might be closer to what we're going for, but I'm not sure where to go from there...

Doorknob

Jun 7, 2014 19:10

That's not the problem. Even if a fully defined question was posted, it could still have subjectively-correct answers, such as the bottle question.

If you start saying "you can't affect the bottle or the cork, you can't break the bottle anywhere, ..." then you're basically putting the answer in the question itself.

Wait, hmm, actually, maybe it wouldn't

Okay now I'm confusing myself. :P

Now that I'm thinking about that, doesn't that fall under "unclear what you're asking"?

user61230

Yeah, I'm getting the impression that these questions fall somewhere between "unclear what you're asking," "too broad," and "primarily opinion-based"

user61230

The answers are only right if you subjectively accept them to be

user61230

The questions invite too many answers

user61230

all because they aren't properly defined enough to receive good answers.

Doorknob

But all of those canned reasons (unclear, broad, opinion) don't really explain the issue, and users will get irritated at having their posts closed for a reason that doesn't make sense (to them).

So we still need to make a custom reason.

user61230

Jun 7, 2014 19:15

Yeah. Hmm... maybe... "invites answers which can only be subjectively correct"?

Doorknob

> This question is off-topic because it can have many answers, as it is not fully defined. The validity of some answers may be based upon opinion, and some or all of them may not be able to be objectively determined to be correct by someone other than the original poster. Good questions for this site have a limited number of objectively correct answers. See also: Some meta post.

user61230

That's a lot better.

Doorknob

It's getting a bit... long-winded, though

user61230

Yeah, it's not quite there, but it's much closer.

Doorknob

yep

user61230

Jun 7, 2014 19:17

It may be a good idea to leave off the first bit

user61230

> This question is off-topic because it can have many answers, as the validity of some answers may be based upon opinion. Some or all of them may not be able to be objectively determined to be correct by someone other than the original poster. Good questions for this site have a limited number of objectively correct answers. See also: Some meta post.

Doorknob

Yeah, but I feel like I have to incorporate "not fully defined" somewhere in there.

user61230

I'm thinking about "Which way is the bus going?", which really only has two answers, but neither of them are absolutely correct.

user61230

That's a good point... hm.

Doorknob

> This question is off-topic because the validity of some answers may be based upon opinion, as it is not fully defined. Some answers may not be able to be objectively determined to be correct by someone other than the original poster. Good questions for this site have a limited number of objectively correct answers. See also: Some meta post.

Oops, I kind of lost the "too broad" part in there, though.

um

> This question is off-topic because it invites a large amount of speculative answers, as it is not fully defined, and the validity of some answers may be based upon opinion. Some answers may not be able to be objectively determined to be correct by someone other than the original poster. Good questions for this site have a limited number of objectively correct answers. See also: Some meta post.

user61230

Jun 7, 2014 19:22

> This question is off-topic because it invites a large amount of speculative answers, as it is not fully defined, and the validity of some answers may be based upon opinion. Good questions for this site have a limited number of objectively correct answers. See also: Some meta post.

user61230

I like your wording of the first sentence, and I think it makes the second sentence redundant.

Doorknob

Oh, that's much better. :D

user61230

Which is good; it needs fewer words anyway!

user61230

:D

Doorknob

I think we're narrowing in on the perfect wording

user61230

Jun 7, 2014 19:24

> This question is off-topic because it invites speculative answers, as the question is not fully defined. The validity of some answers may be based upon opinion. Good questions for this site have a limited number of objectively correct answers. See also: Some meta post.

Doorknob

Hm, that also kind of loses the "too broad" part.

"it" should probably be "the question" though, and I like splitting it up into 3 sentences to make it easier to read

user61230

harrng why is this hard

Doorknob

> This question is off-topic because it invites a large amount of speculative answers, as the question is not fully defined. The validity of some answers may be based upon opinion. Good questions for this site have a limited number of objectively correct answers. See also: Some meta post.

asdfasdfrggghhh it just has to be so difficult :P

user61230

Hmm... does the question need to necessarily be broad?

user61230

I'm thinking back to the bus question - there are really only two answers: left or right

user61230

Jun 7, 2014 19:28

But the "correct" answer's completely based on opinion

Doorknob

But there are many ways to get to one of those answers

Hmm, maybe.

user61230

I'm thinking of:

user61230

> This question invites speculative answers, as the question is not fully defined. The validity of some answers may be based upon opinion. Good questions for this site have a limited number of objectively correct answers. See also: Some meta post.

Doorknob

Keep the "is off-topic because" part though. (And then that's just the same as what you just posted, which actually might be better now that I think of it)

user61230

That's fair. Trying to think of ways to make the wording less bulky. I wonder how this compares with the existing close reasons' length...

Doorknob

Jun 7, 2014 19:31

Meh, some sites have much longer reasons. For example, this one from Mathematics:

> This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level.

user61230

Oh, wow, yeah. That's true.

Doorknob

:P

user61230

I'm actually looking at some other custom close reasons, and most of them don't seem to include "off-topic because"

Doorknob

Hm, that's true; maybe I'm just too used to the canned "This question appears to be off-topic because X" custom reason for 3K users. :P

Okay, so I think we've decided on your most recent one! Want to post it on the meta post, or should I?

user61230

Up to you! It may be a good idea to edit your meta post, since I'm not sure how many people have seen it?

Doorknob

Jun 7, 2014 19:34

Wait, from the perspective of a new user, it sort of sounds like "Your question invites speculative answers you are a terrible person and you should feel terrible." :P Maybe it should be "This question may invite speculative answers, as ..."

user61230

Ahaha that's fair

Doorknob

Ok, I'll edit my post.

The Sphinx's Lair

Participants