@Ash yes, it is the way I feel it should be done. I could of course be wrong--it might turn out that the way I feel things should be done won't work in practice on a Q&A site.
But I've been right before, so... IDK... take from this what you will.
Of course, I fail to see how reading a book about a topic would make people on this site worse off or make the site do a worse job of asking/answering questions about a certain topic.
If anything I would expect it would make things better. But what do I know?
Probably overreading. Plato's ideal-transcendence can't be reduced to a quantifiable dimension. — CJ Sheu16 hours ago
@Mithrandir @Zyera I'm not really sure why my flag was declined on that comment. It's pretty standard that comments aren't for answers (they can't be critiqued and/or voted on).
Comment answers can't be searched, so their usefulness as content on a site dedicated to providing answers for later users is barely noticeable. They're also used to bypass question holds and thus pull the teeth from our most important tool for optimizing for pearls: comment answers reduce community interest in improving closed questions to get them re-opened (since they already got an answer without any extra effort needed). — BESWSep 27 at 3:09
And they're broken windows that encourage other, even less productive use of comments (like arguing, or avoiding using meta). Personally I've found that a Stack's attitude toward comment answers is a good gauge for its overall attitude toward quality, rigor, and general niceness. — BESWSep 27 at 3:09
I challenge the idea that answers-as-comments contain meaningfully useful information: the information in a comment is not accessible according to site standards and is only useful inasmuch as it gets moved into a full answer. The benefit is minuscule, because the transition from a comment to an answer is so rare, and is far outweighed by the quality reduction associated with the cultural problems that comment-as-answer permissiveness encourages. — BESWSep 27 at 7:13
Asking people to turn comments into answers doesn't work. I've seen it tried on far too many sites, and people who leave comments as answers did it because they don't want to (or think they can't) turn it into a full answer. (Consider this a sign of the low quality of comment-answer content, btw.) Turning someone else's comment into an answer yourself is better for the site, but still doesn't do anything to discourage the comment culture: in fact, it validates the notion that we should leave incomplete answers and expect others to do the hard work. — BESWSep 27 at 8:04
This is basic stuff and it's symptomatic of the problems this site faces that this has to be debated.
I recently flagged this comment. The comment reads:
Probably overreading. Plato's ideal-transcendence can't be reduced to a quantifiable dimension.
I flagged it because it was an answer posted as a comment. Stack Exchange policy could not be clearer about these comments: they should be remo...
That's a good question; I dunno. As an actor I tend to view plays through that lens, but the name "literature" tends to imply something read rather than viewed. Neither lens is superior, but a greater diversity of views would help broaden the site. The StackOverflow base tends to draw from a sitting-in-chairs view. Acting is a not-uncommon hobby for programmers (who make up the initial core of any StackExchange base), but looking outside that base may be necessary to gain more perspective. — Joshua Engelyesterday
@Hamlet Heads up though, I have ... limited investment in literature.se. It looks like a lot of its membership came from Sci-fi.se and wants it to be sci-fi.se #2, and I don't want any part of that considering how toxic sci-fi.se #1 is. Around beta I couldn't be here much, and it looks like it shook out that way.
Were it different and had users interested in what I was interested in being here for, that'd be different, but it looks like it didn't go that way in my absence.
Not only does it cast doubt on Rodolpho's masculinity, the context in which this quote comes from suggests a lot more of Eddie and his attitude towards Rodolpho. While I quite agree with the word choices Matt highlighted, and his description of those words, some of the implications given are a li...
I agree that there are several toxic people who want a SFF #1
Why is it that people bringing lessons from RPG.SE here tend to be greeted with "great, RPG is good at handling everything, let's do things the same way they do" while people bringing lessons from SFF.SE here tend to be greeted with "that's a different site, we should make our own policies here, not just go by SFF's" or at worst even "SFF is toxic and we don't want to be anything like them"?
No offence to the good folks of RPG.SE, but this is a strange double standard.
@Randal'Thor I don't know about the sci-fi.se solutions that get brought up, but I bring RPG.se solutions here by pointing out why we did them such that they resolved problems we experienced consistently with stack principles. I don't try to suggest "do this because we did it".
@doppelspooker I'm not suggesting you do say "do this because we did it". Neither do I when bringing SFF solutions here. I'm talking about the way these suggestions are received by others, not the way they're given by RPG/SFF people.
I feel nervous every time I mention a lesson learned from SFF, or the reasons behind a policy there, for fear someone will jump down my throat to point out that this isn't SFF and we shouldn't adopt their policies.
I don't think SFF is a good example for this site because the type of answers they do is completely different from the types of answers we do/should be doing
And a huge portion of their policies are based around the types of answers they do.
I think I've told you many times that I consider SFF a useful resource.
@Randal'Thor People no, but maybe it was mean of me to call sci-fi.se toxic. I may have a poor limited exposure to it via the issues I've had my attention drawn to; I certainly have a different exposure to it from a regular or a moderator such as yourself. I do feel strongly that I don't want this site to shape out the same way sci-fi.se did; there are factors to that site which have me limit my involvement there.
I can definitely say that Lit and SFF have very different 'tones' to them, different approaches to answering style and various policies. How much of that is due to the subject matter and how much due to the mix of users/personalities on the sites, I'm not sure, but they definitely feel different.
(There are also criticisms of SFF which, as an SFF moderator, I probably shouldn't make ;-) )
But when Hamlet complains about the volume of unuseful meta posts, and makes sarcastic gibes at people in here for having meta discussions about tagging rather than literary discussions about the definition of genre ... and then makes a whole meta post himself about comments of all things ...
Tagging is actually a useful thing to discuss. It helps people to find questions they can answer. It channels expert users to the best places for them to provide expert content.
Comments are a very tiny part of the functioning of the site. They're small and insignificant, even hidden if there are enough of them, not searchable, ...
@doppelspooker Yes, but Hamlet has said repeatedly that he doesn't have much time to spend on this site, and he's one of our best producers of Q&A on main.
If he's not posting good answers because he doesn't have time to, fair enough. If he's not posting good answers because he'd rather complain about comments ...
I personally like that he brought it up on meta. I've raised enough metas about declined comment flags myself that I won't jump down someone's throat for raising one about one that I declined ;)
I recently flagged this comment. The comment reads:
Probably overreading. Plato's ideal-transcendence can't be reduced to a quantifiable dimension.
I flagged it because it was an answer posted as a comment. Stack Exchange policy could not be clearer about these comments: they should be remo...
The second was a one line answer in a comment. The first - to me at least - felt more like a push in the direction of an answer, not an answer itself. While it could be argued that those don't have a place in the comment section either, I don't think it's as clear cut.
Because I kept misreading it as being about a mod in the room.
@Hamlet Note that it was originally posted as an answer. Do you think that answer should have been left in place and downvoted, instead of being converted to a comment?
@Randal'Thor OK. TBH I have no idea why it was flagged or removed as an answer. TBH I don't particularly care. I do know that it shouldn't be a comment. So I guess... if you're going to delete it, then no need to convert it as a comment.
Reposting this as it's crucial for the long-term health for the site that we at least give questions about performance a chance to succeed.
That's a good question; I dunno. As an actor I tend to view plays through that lens, but the name "literature" tends to imply something read rather than viewed. Neither lens is superior, but a greater diversity of views would help broaden the site. The StackOverflow base tends to draw from a sitting-in-chairs view. Acting is a not-uncommon hobby for programmers (who make up the initial core of any StackExchange base), but looking outside that base may be necessary to gain more perspective. — Joshua Engelyesterday
@Randal'Thor my ability to produce good Q&A content is almost entirely due to the fact that I'm willing to research not just facts about literature but theory about literature.
If I'm not producing enough good Q&A content, the resources exist in this chat for anyone to replace me.
Playing in the Dark. Folklore Matters.
user61230
9:01 PM
@Randal'Thor I strongly dislike The Lord of the Rings in written form. I even lean towards considering them prosaically clumsy and thick. The worldbuilding is excellent, though.
user61230
(I may be biased, but those books stopped me reading cold for multiple years as a kid.)
@Zyera Wow. We'll have to agree to disagree on that then :-) LotR is hard to read at times, true, but so are a lot of literary 'classics'. It must be one of the great masterpieces in the history of fantasy, and surely (although this doesn't necessarily make it good, true) the most influential work in that genre.
It's funny how Agatha Christie uses fictional foreign countries in his detective books. I wonder if that serves some more useful purpose, or is just a nod to Doyle.
I recently flagged this comment. The comment reads:
Probably overreading. Plato's ideal-transcendence can't be reduced to a quantifiable dimension.
I flagged it because it was an answer posted as a comment. Stack Exchange policy could not be clearer about these comments: they should be remo...
