Chat of Things

Henry WH Hack v2.0

10:32

@BenceKaulics Hi! :)

Don't forget our Site scope Event everyone it starts today.

2

Aurora0001

10:48

Anyone here?

Henry WH Hack v2.0

Me

Bence Kaulics

@HenryWHHackv2.0 I remember.

Henry WH Hack v2.0

@BenceKaulics K

Aurora0001

Has anyone got any questions they want to add to the site scope event?

I'm going to draw up a proper list of questions and points to discuss in a minute

Henry WH Hack v2.0

20 hours ago, by Henry WH Hack v2.0

Will Cloud Computing be on topic?

2

How about.^

Aurora0001

10:51

I'll add that to the list of topics

Anything else?

Henry WH Hack v2.0

AIs?

We already have a site for that it's called: AI.SE

We have an artificial-intelligence tag.

Aurora0001

That's true

Overlap between sites is allowed, but I think there will be some questions in-scope here

E.g. using artificial intelligence/machine learning to process data from IoT sensors

Sean Houlihane

11:12

On the subject of easy questions being more popular, yes I agree this is certainly the case. Across the sites, my high scoring answers seem to be mosly on what I'd regard as trivial or at best 6th-form level questions. Partly, these seem to appeal to the cross-site population as surfaced through 'hot network questions' (and a rapid burst of quick answers on posting the question).

Helmar

We totally need a question like "Alexa insulted my dog, what do I do?" to hit the hot network questions. That will be great publicity :D

Sean Houlihane

I think its important to avoid getting too distracted by their popularity though, they might only attract drive-by visitors, and are unlikely to do anything to help us retain the core of experts and competent enthusuiasts that the site needs to be effective. The Arduino SE is the one example I know where there are not enough interesting questions (from my perspective as an MCU designer, and non-arduino developer)

Helmar

Yeah, we need to find a good mix between the difficulty levels. And I agree mostly the hot network questions are not the ones that one would want to stand for the site.

Bence Kaulics

11:28

Why can I mark my own question as favourite?

Helmar

Why shouldn't you?

Maybe Yoichi wants to find some of questions as well?

Bence Kaulics

I can track my questions without favouriting them.

Helmar

Look at his profile ;)

Bence Kaulics

11:42

Fair enough.

I was narrow-minded.

Helmar

That happens to everyone who looks at the profile the first time.

The guy has 7! Socratic badges

Other topic, I made a draft for the on-topic page, revive the very old Ghanima thread, create a new one, answer the scope chat thread or put it on google docs until after the scope event?

@BenceKaulics, @Aurora0001, @SeanHoulihane, @Ghanima, @HenryWHHackv2.0

Ghanima

@Helmar lets see after the scope event

Henry WH Hack v2.0

Why can't I change my SE password?

Bence Kaulics

I did not even know that Socratic can be earned multiple times.

Helmar

They patched it in at some point

Bence Kaulics

11:55

I was more like an answering user before this site.

Ghanima

@Helmar and by the way, I am not very old

Helmar

@Ghanima :D I was referring to the question ;)

Ghanima

:-P

Helmar

Draft: drive.google.com/file/d/0B_uilf1X6OquQy1rMEpHcTl0blU/…

hm, tag uk, or should we make it united-kingdom?

Comments should be enabled

Bence Kaulics

We should IMO.

We should define this list as well when we enter Public?

Helmar

12:20

The migration list is tricky and not easy to be edited

But we get to define 3 custom off-topic reasons

Sean Houlihane

I'm staring all the 'good' questions which I think should be on-topic, so I can check they all clearly match the scope definition...

Henry WH Hack v2.0

I think

@Ghanima is Away From Keyboard

Sean Houlihane

13:11

@Helmar, I think it would be good to add 'design considerations specific to a device being part of an IoT system', and in the off-topic a link to EE.SE - it would be good to capture hardware and software aspects.

Bence Kaulics

13:36

Also general networking should be asked on Super User, general Cloud&Server on Server Fault and general security on Information Security.

But I think @Helmar left that empty point at the end of the list as an indication of its incompleteness.

Aurora0001

@BenceKaulics I suggest that we leave it as it is

Just let the pro tem mods migrate manually

Bence Kaulics

Sure, I was referring to Helmar's draft in my previous message.

Aurora0001

I think we really ought to address the issue of making it clear what our site is actually about, though

A casual visitor might not know what 'Internet of Things' involves

And we shouldn't expect them to read the whole help center just for that

@Helmar The 1k tools might be useful to judge which close reasons work well too

We definitely need a reason for closing general network questions

Bence Kaulics

IoT connects devices/objects into networks that usually, normally would not be connected or not necessarly connected.

Questions involving only router, switch, server, PC, laptop in the network should not be asked here.

I gave upon asking about port forwaring for my MQTT broker after I have checked super user's port-forwarding.

Aurora0001

Perhaps a canned reason like "Questions asking about networking in general are off-topic for Internet of Things. For questions about personal and computer networking, you may be able to get help at Super User. Enterprise networking questions may also be on-topic at Network Engineering."

Bence Kaulics

13:50

Yep, it is a good start.

Aurora0001

That's the only off-topic reason that has actually been used so far

Bence Kaulics

I did not like the open source stuff seeking questions.

Aurora0001

Yeah, they'd be better at Software Recommendations

Not sure whether they are actually off-topic though

Bence Kaulics

And Hardware Recommenations for open source hardware.

Aurora0001

I'm slightly concerned though that a lot of our definitions just keep looping back to 'IoT device' or 'relevant to IoT'

Does anyone else agree that it's a bit harmful to keep referring to the same vague definition?

Bence Kaulics

13:57

Yep.

Aurora0001

It's perhaps a symptom of a bigger problem: the whole site is defined around something with an unclear definition

Bence Kaulics

Connecting the unconnected.

Gtg now, will be back for the discussion.

Aurora0001

Alright, see you later

Ghanima

15:33

@Helmar united-kingdom over uk

Henry WH Hack v2.0

Guys get ready for the event! :)

@Ghanima I need some help

Bence Kaulics

16:27

@Aurora0001 Site analytics are available for you.

Aurora0001

@BenceKaulics Woo!

I'll take a look and see if there's anything interesting

Ghanima

@HenryWHHackv2.0 what's up?

Henry WH Hack v2.0

I need you to reset my SE password

Ghanima

@Aurora0001 just in time!

Aurora0001

There were 103 posts on day 1

That's incredible

Ghanima

16:37

@HenryWHHackv2.0 I cannot

Henry WH Hack v2.0

In one hour the event will start! :)

@Ghanima Ok

Aurora0001

Click the 'contact us' @HenryWHHackv2.0

Ghanima

I think you'll have to go through the contact CM thingy that should be on your profile

Aurora0001

They'll be able to sort it

Henry WH Hack v2.0

I know that but I have no access to the recovery email right now but hey I'm still logged in so! ;)

I just added my google account as a login.

Aurora0001

16:40

Also, 55% of questions were asked in the first 4 days

A lot of traffic seems to come from SO

Can't tell exactly where, though

@Helmar: it looks like your reddit post was useful after all

We got about 25 new visits from them

Anyone want to try sharing a link on the Google Home subreddit?

room topic changed to Chat of Things: General discussion for iot.stackexchange.com | While the Site Scope Event is in progress, please take other discussion to the Things room. [stars]

Henry WH Hack v2.0

16:59

Can you provide a link to the Things room?

Aurora0001

room topic changed to Chat of Things: General discussion for iot.stackexchange.com | While the Site Scope Event is in progress, please take other discussion to the Things room. [stars]

Markdown doesn't seem to work

Henry WH Hack v2.0

Ok

well that's good

Aurora0001

room topic changed to Chat of Things: General discussion for iot.stackexchange.com | While the Site Scope Event is in progress, please take other discussion to the Things (chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/49761/things) room. [stars]

Henry WH Hack v2.0

[Event: Starts in 57 minutes]

Aurora0001

Amusingly, you can see a spike in downvotes after Helmar posted this:

1

Q: List of important IoT references

This is a list of useful references and resources in the IoT environment. Standardization Bodies IoT Protocol Specifications If the accompanying meta post will validate the usefulness of this question, I'll ask the SE staff to make it CW.

references

Henry WH Hack v2.0

17:31

Damit I forgot to tell the SE team my acccount.

Ok I contacted the SE team. :)

Aurora0001

17:49

Everyone ready for the event?

Bence Kaulics

Have to open the meta topic.

Henry WH Hack v2.0

Welcome @Helmar @Aurora0001 @Ghanima @Bence Kaulics @Henry WH Hack v2.0 @Sean Houlihane to the: Site Scope Event
Hosted by @Aurora0001
Moderated by @Ghanima ♦

Aurora0001

We'll start in about 5 minutes

Assuming everyone's here

Alright, let's start with discussing the site title and tag line

Useful resources to read:

7

Q: Essential questions #4: site elevator pitch / tag line

According to The Real Essential Questions of Every Beta one of the essential questions private beta is to establish our tag line. This site's elevator pitch. I will not include a suggestion in the question itself but just ask everyone who has an idea to post an answer that can be voted on. One...

discussion

Also this is worth a read

6

Q: Let's discuss the site scope in chat! - January 2nd, 6PM GMT

After a discussion in the chat, it seems like it might be a good idea to have a discussion event about what we consider on/off-topic so that the site is more prepared for public beta. The event will be held in the Chat of Things room (the site's main chat room), and you can register your interes...

discussion site-scope chat

So, is the site title appropriate, or is it too ambiguous/vague?

Bence Kaulics

and what possible alternatives do we have at all?

Aurora0001

Well, any suggestions are good

I can't really think of anything that concisely describes the topic

'Home Automation' covers part of what's on-topic, but not all of it

Helmar

17:59

Unless there is an amazing alternative, I'd stick with the title and use the tagline for a more precise description.

3

Ghanima

checks in

Aurora0001

The Dark Web private beta was basically shut down for using a buzzword as the title, from what I could tell

Henry WH Hack v2.0

[Event Status: Opened]

Aurora0001

Let me see if I can dig out what Robert Cartaino said about the Dark Web proposal

Ghanima

@Aurora0001 but in that case I do not get why they would start a beta that way

but then again I am not against "IoT" no matter how broad that current definition might be

Aurora0001

18:01

"Sometimes a technology buzzword can be a somewhat uncertain premise on which to build a site. Pop culture sees it as one thing; the actual participants use it for something else... and a fledgling community tries valiantly to tie it all together into something on which to build a site. It was a really good try, but this time it just did not work."

That was what was said about the Dark Web proposal

Do you think we face the same issue or will the tagline be enough?

Ghanima

well this is the point where the alternatives should be brought up

Aurora0001

Anyone got any ideas?

Or would it be better to discuss what's on/off-topic first

Henry WH Hack v2.0

I need my answer on Cloud Computing.

Ghanima

@Aurora0001 no, I'd say stick to your well formulated agenda

Aurora0001

Fair enough

OK then - taglines

Ghanima

18:05

I don't yet see amazing alternatives for the title coming up even when discussing the topicness

Aurora0001

@HenryWHHackv2.0 We'll get to it in a minute then

Henry WH Hack v2.0

Ok

goldilocks

Lemme preface this by apologizing for having signed up but not lived up to the commitment contribution wise. That doesn't mean I don't think the site is a bad idea. Anyway: I like "Q&A site for everyday objects embedded with electronics to be sensed, monitored, and controlled remotely" but I think "everyday" could be ditched. Does that seem like too minor a point?

4

Aurora0001

@goldilocks sounds fine to me

I suppose industrial devices connected to the Internet aren't exactly 'everyday'

But are still IoT

Bence Kaulics

Yep.

goldilocks

18:07

Yeah, exactly.

Helmar

I agree

Bence Kaulics

Also we should and somehow that these objects are connected

Aurora0001

Also, by the way, if you want to 'vote' for an idea, just star it - that will be helpful for later

Helmar

Well, let's change everyday to interconnected

6

goldilocks

The "networked" aspect does seem integral.

Sean Houlihane

18:08

Scope outside everyday seems important in an emerging field...

Aurora0001

@goldilocks indeed, otherwise it's just electrical engineering/embedded devices

However, there is also the home automation aspect which is less connected to the 'networked' aspect

goldilocks

The only other private beta I've been in was the 2nd? 3rd? iteration of Embedded, and it is kind of amazing that failed 2 or 3 times, so that's something to consider. I think they mostly look at numbers.

Ghanima

in that case we maybe should distance ourselves from home automation unless it is networked/interconnected

Bence Kaulics

IMO if I set up a switch that opens a window if I push, that counts as home automation, but not IoT.

Aurora0001

@Ghanima that's true, however an awful lot of our questions are based around home automation, and some questions are obviously on-topic

goldilocks

18:11

I do think there's a potential tension between something consumer oriented and something developer oriented, although I dunno if it means they have to be mutually exclusive.

3

@Aurora0001 Yeah it would be hard to not include that.

Aurora0001

@BenceKaulics an important question to ask is: does it become IoT if you can control it by smartphone or something similar?

Where should we draw the line, exactly?

→ 1 message moved to Things

goldilocks

@Aurora0001 Well, very broadly you could say anything that's not a general purpose computer that relies on network connectivity to serve its purpose.

Helmar

So, "Q&A site for interconnected objects embedded with electronics to be sensed, monitored, and controlled remotely"

4

goldilocks

I'm wondering if we should say something about "for consumers and developers of..."

2

Henry WH Hack v2.0

15

Q: What exactly is an "Internet of Things" device?

So, let's define this part of our scope. What do we call an IoT device? Does it contain non-commercial products (for example hue being allowed but homemade iot devices being not allowed - I think that this is a bad idea)? Does it contain raspberry pi or similar devices? Will we allow other intern...

discussion

Helmar

18:15

Good point, do we want our target audience in the tagline? What's our target audience?

Ghanima

@goldilocks should that be in the tagline? or in the opener of the on-topic part of the FAQ

Aurora0001

@Helmar at the moment, "consumers and developers" is the way to go I think

Helmar

Q&A site for consumers and developers of interconnected objects embedded with electronics to be sensed, monitored, and controlled remotely

3

Aurora0001

We need to make it clear to visitors that we accept consumer-level questions (that's if we do want to accept them)

goldilocks

@HenryWHHackv2.0 The "proxy device" is an interesting line. I was initially going to say IP based, but a lot of radio based things aren't. Throwing in "proxy device" refines that.

Ghanima

18:16

@Helmar right now I don't think we could exclude either group as a targeted audience

Aurora0001

@Helmar I preferred @goldilocks's phrasing

Helmar

consumer or end user?

Aurora0001

I can roll with @Helmar's new suggestion

@Helmar Either would work

Helmar

Any further suggestions?

Bence Kaulics

I support your last suggestion @Helmar.

Ghanima

18:20

nope, that's fine with me (and it's based on @goldilocks' suggestion, so I cannot say anything against it)

Aurora0001

I'm happy with it

goldilocks

I don't have a major preference("user", "consumer", "developer", "creator" -- well, maybe I like "developer" more), but I do think indicating that distinction explicitly, and that it is open to both, is good.

3

Obviously there's some cross-over between the two as well.

Aurora0001

@goldilocks this is absolutely crucial in my opinion

Otherwise the experts think it's a consumer site and don't join

And vice versa

goldilocks

Exactly.

Aurora0001

So, is the tagline pretty much settled then?

Ghanima

18:22

aye

goldilocks

Seems pretty decent.

Bence Kaulics

Yep.

Aurora0001

Next topic:

kenorb

@Aurora0001 Re above: There was no Dark Web proposal yet (afaik), but Deep Web, it was closed, because it was ambiguous, that's why I've created Dark Web proposal to narrow it down.

Aurora0001

Off-topic questions: which questions seem to be off-topic for the site, and can safely be listed in the Help Center as off-topic?

@kenorb Ah, sorry, I forgot the exact name

Helmar

18:23

0

A: Essential questions #4: site elevator pitch / tag line

Internet of Things is a Q&A site for consumers and developers of interconnected objects embedded with electronics to be sensed, monitored, and controlled remotely.

Aurora0001

@kenorb do you think this site has the same problem or it is better in your experience?

goldilocks

@Aurora0001 I think then the focus definition wise has to be on restraining the "user" half of the equation, because that is what is likely to get most out of control.

Helmar

- Purchasing recommendations

Gilles

@goldilocks Both numbers and quality. Embedded failed twice due to quantity but there were other private betas that had enough posts and users but failed to produce enough useful content. IIRC AI and sex both failed twice because of this.

kenorb

I think the name of this site is fine.

goldilocks

18:25

@Helmar Yeah, perfect. None of that.

Bence Kaulics

Over EE.SE we have askers who think that he can ask other to design a device for them. I think we could have the same here. So this site is not a design service.

Helmar

@BenceKaulics I agree, the site can help if one is stuck, but cannot act as a design service

Gilles

@goldilocks I'm wary of insisting of network connectivity. Some IoT devices don't have IP connections except maybe while they're being managed.

Bence Kaulics

Some initial idea, effort, plan is needed, and we should help find the problems with the idea.

kenorb

IoT has a wiki page, official definition, some standard organisations who cares about this name, the proper name is not so important as people. Life hacks site has more challenging definition what is life hack. IoT is still fine I think.

3

Bence Kaulics

18:26

Help to move on if someone stuck.

Aurora0001

So, to everyone: purchasing recommendations should go to Hardware Recommendations, would you say?

goldilocks

Yes.

Bence Kaulics

Agree or software recommendations.

goldilocks

We won't have ordinary migration paths though, so that's kind of abstract.

kenorb

@Gilles AI failed before, because of huge overlap with several sites at the same time (over 10 of them), so it was too confusing.

Aurora0001

18:28

@goldilocks Well, the mods can do that

goldilocks

Yeah, that's what we do...

Aurora0001

Here's an interesting question to think about - is this question on-topic?

Bence Kaulics

@goldilocks Also we could offer other sites in the help center where specific topic could be asked.

Gilles

@Helmar I don't think consumers is right. Or at least, that wouldn't be a site that I'm interested in (I'm a software developer, I write firmware for devices, some of which qualify as IoT). I think we should aim for developers and power users, not for anybody and their aunt.

2

Ghanima

@kenorb that could be an issue here too

as there is an very obvious overlap with many other sites

Aurora0001

18:29

@Gilles So you're thinking more the "Server Fault" of IoT?

Gilles

@goldilocks It's best to push experts forward. Non-experts will participate on an expert site anyway. Experts have no interest in a site that's inundated with “help my device won't turn on”.

kenorb

@Aurora0001 Services/product/software/libs recommendation should be off-topic (what this question is about). Most of the software recommendation is on-topic at Softwarerecs.SE

Gilles

@Aurora0001 The SO+SF of IoT (in this field, there's rather a continuum between development and administration)

Ghanima

@Aurora0001 given our current questions (and the user base) we have now it's a little hard to see how we can make it fly for developers and power users only

Helmar

I have no problem with changing consumers to power users

Bence Kaulics

18:31

@Aurora0001 Off-topic IMO.

Aurora0001

My concern about the idea is this: is the audience actually big enough if you exclude consumers altogether?

Gilles

@kenorb I'm worried that in a couple of years IoT will stop being a buzzword and this site will just be a bunch of unrelated topics with no cohesion. But I don't have a better name.

goldilocks

@Gilles Yes, part of my worry is the potential for too much consumer level stuff to discourage expert regulars.

2

Gilles

@Aurora0001 I don't want to exclude consumers, but I want to not focus on them.

kenorb

Then people can vote to change the site name.

Gilles

18:32

Information Security is a good example for that.

Aurora0001

@Gilles that's something I could support then

goldilocks

Then there's the inverse problem, as Aurora points out, which is why I think welcoming both, but focussing on constraining users/consumers in terms of definition.

Gilles

> Information Security Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for information security professionals.

Aurora0001

That tag line is far shorter than our proposed one

Gilles

> IT Security Stack Exchange is for Information Security professionals to discuss protecting assets from threats and vulnerabilities. Topics include, but are not limited to: (…)

Aurora0001

18:33

And much more straightforward

kenorb

google.com/trends/explore?q=IoT going up, a little drop at Christmas.

Gilles

See how the site focuses on professionals, but Information Security (unlike Server Fault) never rejects a question for being too non-professional. End-users can ask question and get useful answers if they're interested in understanding how things work.

3

Aurora0001

As @Gilles says, the trouble with the current scope is that it's a combination of EE, consumer-level technology (Gadgets-style questions), Info Security, Cryptography, AI, Super User, Server Fault, Network Engineering, and a load more

kenorb

We can always post a meta post with proposal of the new site names and people can have their vote, if anybody is not after IoT.

Gilles

I think the site needs a barrier of entry if it's to be useful to professionals. Counter-example: Super User has no barrier to entry. Example: Unix & Linux has a barrier to entry, because not everybody thinks of themselves as a Unix user.

goldilocks

18:36

@Gilles I agree Isec is pretty good that way but at the risk of upsetting someone -- and this is just a casual vibe thing -- E.E., e.g., seems not so good that way, despite saying they're not just for professionals.

Aurora0001

@Gilles the barrier to entry serves as both a strength and a weakness, though

Ideally speaking, we want experts only

goldilocks

This is the tricky part.

Aurora0001

But pragmatically speaking, we need more simple questions to survive

2

Sean Houlihane

There will never be enough experts who want to spend time here, unless we help some to grow to be experts.

2

Aurora0001

I simply don't think there are enough experts to sustain the site without lowering the barrier, at least a little

Gilles

18:38

@Aurora0001 No. Recommendations are best handled where the experts are, not ghettoed to their own site. Software Recommendations and Hardware Recommendations are not the way to go: they lack experts. If you want Android software you should ask on Android Enthusiasts, if you want Linux software you should ask on Unix & Linux, etc. The fact that those sites exist is due to a failure of moderation on some sites such as Super User and we should not follow this model.

Aurora0001

@Gilles so you suggest we accept them?

Bence Kaulics

I agree with @Sean. For example I am learning MQTT by the help of this site.

Gilles

@Aurora0001 Yes.

Aurora0001

Interesting thought, I haven't really looked around Software/Hardware Recs too much

Ghanima

@Aurora0001 I am afraid so

Aurora0001

18:39

So I don't know how well they work

Helmar

Are we re-discussing the tag-line or the on-off-topicness now?

goldilocks

The way we deal with a lot of off-topic and cross over stuff on Rpi is to just say it's a gray area, and we (mods and the community) use that to reserve the right to say no sometimes and okay sometimes.

Gilles

@Aurora0001 It's far too early for that. Give it a few months. Wait until we have experience of what off-topic questions people ask naturally, and not just the scope determination attempts of a few early adopters.

Ghanima

@Gilles shopping rec don't need to be referred to anywhere else, they could simply be off-topic

Aurora0001

@Gilles well, I'm not saying make everything except what we list off-topic

Gilles

18:41

@Ghanima Shopping recommendations are generally on-topic but not suitable. But most recommendation questions are not shopping recommendations, that's just a bogeyman pushed by some of the SU crowd.

goldilocks

@Ghanima I'm thinking of "closed as off-topic" with a comment recommending HR, and mods at their discretion always have the option to migrate.

Bence Kaulics

So we should accept if someone seeks open source resources?

Gilles

@BenceKaulics open- vs close-source is unrelated

Helmar

0

A: Essential questions #4: site elevator pitch / tag line

Another one from the chat event: Internet of Things is a Q&A site for power users and developers of interconnected objects embedded with electronics to be sensed, monitored, and controlled remotely.

Gilles

Browse Software Recommendations to get a feeling. Most questions there are not shopping recommendations. They're asking how to do something, with the expectation that there's some pre-made tool that will do most of the job. That's the definition of a recommendation question. It's not “what should I buy” but “how do I do my thing”.

Aurora0001

18:43

I suppose if we get beyond the stigma of recommendation questions, they can be useful

But they suffer the issue of becoming outdated quickly

Ghanima

@Gilles in that case it is just as you've said before, such questions should be where the experts are and not sent to HR SR

Aurora0001

Also, I think we might run into the issue of running out of stars soon

So, in that case, just say if you oppose instead :P

Ghanima

which then brings us back to the overlap with other sites infosec, unix, EE, whatnot

goldilocks

@Gilles No doubt, but I do think literal "What foo control hub should I get to do foo?" should be closeable that way. There are variations on it that are okay, and it is good to encourage people to make that kinds of distinctions -- i.e., how to ask a good and not a bad question.

Helmar

Ok, so we do not seem to have a consensus on making recommendations off-topic per se, right?

Maybe we should focus on on-topic first

goldilocks

18:47

@Ghanima No worries remember ;) In all seriousness I think (sort of like Gilles is saying) there's a feel for this which will evolve.

Aurora0001

It seems not, @Helmar

Gilles

@goldilocks No, that question is fine if it has precise enough requirements and some way to rate answers.

It's no different from “why won't my device turn on”, which is obviously not a suitable question if the question gives nothing else to go on but can be perfectly fine with e.g. a wiring diagram

Aurora0001

I much prefer the solution here:

Q&A is Hard, Let's Go Shopping!

Jeff Atwood on November 23, 2010

Over the last 2.5 years, we've identified a few problematic classes of questions that tend to get asked on our sites. Many of these are documented in our standard set of close reasons: exact duplicate, off-topic, subjective and argumentative, not a real question, and too localized.

goldilocks

Have I dropped the "gray areas" concept enough yet?

Ghanima

@goldilocks sure, the feel will evolve... but until then where would you ask given the overlap, at the established site or at IoT

Gilles

18:49

@Aurora0001 That post is bad and Jeff should be ashamed.

Aurora0001

Why would you say that?

Gilles

I recommend what I wrote on SR:

27

A: What is required for a question to contain "enough information"?

A software recommendation question has two essential components: a goal to accomplish, and a set of requirements. The goal establishes the setting and explains in broad terms what you want to do with that software. The requirements put specific constraints that the software must satisfy. Think o...

goldilocks

@Gilles Yeah I'm a little confused -- at a glance he seems to be saying what you're saying, which is a very well written shopping recommendation is okay.

Whoops never mind.

Aurora0001

Still, the solution Jeff proposes makes question/answer pairs that are valid for years

Shopping questions just asking for a product are valid for a year, maybe two

Bence Kaulics

So going back to this question:

12

Q: Is there a fully open source platform for IoT presentation and visualization?

I had decided to use the AWS IoT communications platform in order to talk with our sensors. However, when it comes to visualization, I was hoping it wouldn't be necessary to reinvent the wheel. As you can see in the above picture, the IoT framework connects to an application server. My previo...

web-services

Aurora0001

18:51

Maybe less in a rapidly evolving market like IoT

Bence Kaulics

@Gilles is it OK?

goldilocks

I agree with the Jeff thing too, you should be able to spin your question such that it is not a literal shopping request. If you can't, then you probably don't have a worthwhile question.

Aurora0001

I'm torn about that question personally though - answers may not be useful for very long but the question itself is very useful

As shown by all the voting

Gilles

@Aurora0001 Length of validity is a bit of a red herring. For example SO has plenty of “how do I communicate with this online API?” which have historical interest only when the server API changes. Whereas some hardware doesn't change all that much on the scale of how long SO has existed, and some old software lasts even longer.

Aurora0001

So perhaps it's best to allow well-formed ones after all, and just curate the answers to keep them valid

Gilles

18:53

@Aurora0001 yes, that

Aurora0001

I admit I've gone in a full circle with my opinions

But I take your point on the validity issue

Gilles

@Aurora0001 so you're reinventing the wheel?

Aurora0001

@Gilles improving the wheel

I say keep the good shopping questions and bin the rest as 'too broad'/'unclear what you're asking'

Opinions?

goldilocks

Part of the reason I like the plain jane "no recommendations" thing is it spares a lot of tedious moderation work. Tweaking things that are already well formed to make it fair is less work.

2

Gilles

@goldilocks We can shorten that to “no questions” and we'll have even less moderation work

goldilocks

18:55

True.

Aurora0001

@goldilocks Might need to be re-evaluated as the site grows, but in a small community it hardly matters

Helmar

I can work with too broad/unclear or on-topic

goldilocks

Also true.

Aurora0001

There probably won't be an awful lot of moderation work at the minute, with 2 or 3 questions per day

Gilles

@BenceKaulics That's a good example of a good recommendation question

goldilocks

18:57

So maybe we should not explicitly ban recommendations...as long as people are aware of the quality pitfalls, which it seems we are, it should all work out.

Helmar

Ok, I tried to make a basis for an on-topic list: docs.google.com/document/d/…

Henry WH Hack v2.0

I'm still waiting to put my questions on cloud computing.

Helmar

I made off-topic a bit vague

goldilocks

@Aurora0001 Give it six months or so ;) Twenty questions a day doesn't sound like a lot either, but...

Aurora0001

@goldilocks it'll be 1 question a day in 6 months :P

Helmar

18:59

List is based on: meta.iot.stackexchange.com/a/164/78

Bence Kaulics

So then accept recommendations in general and make closure decisions based on the quality of the specifications provided by the OP?

2

Helmar

@BenceKaulics Looks like it

Aurora0001

Anyone against this?

Transcript for