The Water Cooler

« first day (3685 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (725 days later) »

6:01 PM

@GregoryCurrie heya, super-pinging you in case you want to chat about hypothetical Qs... I think that a more canonical Meta TWP post about this could be helpful in future situations, don't you think?

I think that bottom line is: take each question on it's own value.

It can be hypothetical but very good written and not so broad as to be impossible to answer or as it to fall into an off-topic category

(as well as a very real question can be written badly and things go south)

I think that, when such OPs ask those hypothetical Qs, stating "this is not a question for me", or "this is hypothetical", etc, that is like digging your own grave: the Community tends to DV or VTC those ones if they read such things

Perhaps Monday I'll come with a good phrasing and post it, after reading the feedback and thoughts here

Gregory Currie

Yes, I agree. Each question on it's own value.

DarkCygnus

IMHO the one we were chatting in

is close to "company specific" and also depends on local laws etc

so yeah

Gregory Currie

Here is the thing with that close reason

DarkCygnus

no problem with it being hypo, but I think at least OP should narrow it down

to a country or something, to give specific answers

Gregory Currie

I think an answer explaining what may constitute where they may find their answer is best

DarkCygnus

6:09 PM

because I can go an answer "Yeah here in my third-world country blah blah blah"... but I doubt that would be helpful to the rest of the world hehe

Gregory Currie

I think the OP probably needed that level of detail in this instance

DarkCygnus

yeah, sure... I see it's one vote from being closed

Gregory Currie

Because they were pretty much: "Surely if you're hired remote work, they can't change that"

And the answer is: "Well, under some situations they can. You should check the law and contracts etc."

(Not workplace policies, in this instance)

DarkCygnus

which is a very generic answer, but a generic Q gets generic A's I guess...

Gregory Currie

But there are answers for specific countries in there

I think I saw the USA and the UK mentioned

DarkCygnus

6:12 PM

Another issue I see with hypos is that, in the end we are here to help, and specifically help OPs with their issues and questions... but hypos are not real, OP is not suffering such situation, so in the end it feels like ... "the help we give is in vane"... for a lack of better words

Gregory Currie

So I think that provided people specific what their reasonable assumptions or parameters are, it's fine. Which is the same for other questions.

DarkCygnus

@GregoryCurrie yeah but we can't expect to post an answer for every country

Gregory Currie

Of course not

I think this really speaks to two different mentalities

DarkCygnus

that's precisely why company-specific off topic reason and "include a country tag" requests exist

Gregory Currie

I'm happy for an answer not to help the OP, provided that it may help someone else in a similar situation.

DarkCygnus

6:14 PM

well on that you got a point, not only OP benefits from answers

Gregory Currie

So even if I write an answer with a bad assumption, I'd keep my answer up, detailing what the assumption is. I don't feel bad.

DarkCygnus

I think that topics like these, that seem borderline or grey area, are the ones that need to be made Canonical

but that's not trivial

(canonical as to avoid one answer for each country, for example)

Pruning some comments under the post

Gregory Currie

As a community, we've had the similar discussion before, are answers for the OP, or are they for everyone.

I've even had a mod, I can't recall which say, "Well, the OP has an answer they've accepted, there is no need for the question to be open anymore"

DarkCygnus

I'll think about the Meta post about Hypothetical Qs, and try to do it next week, so we have a more solid consensus on which we can step on for future Qs

Gregory Currie

Which, as someone who writes answers with a mind for future readers, I found absolutely bonkers.

DarkCygnus

6:18 PM

Well, I think that answer are indeed for OP... they are the ones facing the problem and the ones reaching for our help... but a good answer is one that also helps others

I think answers should be targeted to OP, but done in a good way that other users and readers can be aided by it

Gregory Currie

And the other thing is I think the close reason is silly

DarkCygnus

I no longet vote to close, except on certain situations, as my votes are binding

longer*

but if I were to VTC, I would have gone for company-specific/legal

Gregory Currie

Because it lumps the law, contracts, policies, and tells you to talk to HR. Which is sometimes the WORST person you can talk to if you have a problem with a contract.

DarkCygnus

Because the answers basically are "check your contract, check local laws"

Whoa, who said talk to HR on that post?

Gregory Currie

"Questions seeking advice on company-specific regulations, agreements, or policies should be directed to your manager or HR department. Questions that address only a specific company or position are of limited use to future visitors."

"Questions seeking legal advice should be directed to legal professionals."

DarkCygnus

6:22 PM

ah, the phrasing, you mean

hmmmm, yes now that you mention it, that HR part is misleading

or at least seems to suggest that the only way is HR

Gregory Currie

I actually think the close reason is to prevent people copy pasting their companies policies and asking for interpretations.

DarkCygnus

We can change or adapt those phrasings if we want ;)

If others think it could have a better phrasing, and someone comes up with one, I see no problem in editing that close reason

Gregory Currie

Something like: "The answers to this question will depend on a complex range of factors including legal regulations, contractual agreements, and workplace policies, that make it ill-suited to be answered here."

That's what I THINK people THINK it means

DarkCygnus

** something on the back of my mind is trying to recall which Close Reason we edited "recently"... or was it years ago?....

A: Question, should we eliminate or change the reason to close regarding company specific policies?

As I suggested here, I propose: Questions about company-specific regulations, agreements, or policies should be directed to your manager, your HR department, or an attorney. Questions that address only a specific company or position are of limited use to future visitors. See this post for mor...

Q: Can we revisit company specific close reason?

I asked this a few years ago.... Question, should we eliminate or change the reason to close regarding company specific policies? I think it's time to revisit this, as this reason has become a bit of a hobgoblin to this site. It appears to me that the mere mention of a specific company or policy ...