Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Meta

Post History

50%
+3 −3
#3: Post edited by user avatar r~~‭ · 2021-09-02T16:56:55Z (about 3 years ago)
  • We have a user who keeps posting questions of the form, ‘How would you [tortured synonym for “know”] to [do the next step in a proof]?’ Leaving aside the various other reasons that these posts are bad^[I don't want those other issues to be a distraction from the central question here. I'm only mentioning them so that people can consider what these posts might look like if they were otherwise written to be exemplary questions: if they showed understanding of or engagement with the surrounding context (well-researched), if they rewrote the central points in their own words instead of (or perhaps in addition to) posting large screenshots of the source material, if they were written using a vocabulary that wasn't needlessly obtuse and distracting (good English), and if they were questions about mathematical concepts instead of questions about understanding the non-mathematical parts of what an author is communicating (basic reading comprehension).], my question is whether the question is intrinsically bad based on its form alone. (If so, I would assume that the policy should be to close any such question, as no amount of editing to solve the other problems would save it.)
  • We have a user who keeps posting questions of the form, ‘How would you [tortured synonym for “know”] to [do the next step in a proof]?’ Leaving aside the various other reasons that these posts are bad^[I don't want those other issues to be a distraction from the central question here. I'm only mentioning them so that people can consider what these posts might look like if they were otherwise written to be exemplary questions: if they showed understanding of or engagement with the surrounding context (well-researched), if they rewrote the central concepts in their own words instead of (or perhaps in addition to) posting large screenshots of the source material, if they were written using a vocabulary that wasn't needlessly obtuse and distracting (good English), and if they were questions about mathematical concepts instead of questions about understanding the non-mathematical parts of what an author is communicating (basic reading comprehension).], my question is whether the question is intrinsically bad based on its form alone. (If so, I would assume that the policy should be to close any such question, as no amount of editing to solve the other problems would save it.)
#2: Post edited by user avatar r~~‭ · 2021-09-02T16:12:26Z (about 3 years ago)
Demote the importance of the other issues with these particular posts
  • We have a user who keeps posting questions of the form, ‘How would you [tortured synonym for “know”] to [do the next step in a proof]?’ Leaving aside the various other reasons that these posts are bad (under-researched, overuse of images, bad English, basic failures of reading comprehension... really, it tends to be a painfully long list), my question is whether the question is intrinsically bad based on its form alone. (If so, I would assume that the policy should be to close any such question, as no amount of editing to solve the other problems would save it.)
  • We have a user who keeps posting questions of the form, ‘How would you [tortured synonym for “know”] to [do the next step in a proof]?’ Leaving aside the various other reasons that these posts are bad^[I don't want those other issues to be a distraction from the central question here. I'm only mentioning them so that people can consider what these posts might look like if they were otherwise written to be exemplary questions: if they showed understanding of or engagement with the surrounding context (well-researched), if they rewrote the central points in their own words instead of (or perhaps in addition to) posting large screenshots of the source material, if they were written using a vocabulary that wasn't needlessly obtuse and distracting (good English), and if they were questions about mathematical concepts instead of questions about understanding the non-mathematical parts of what an author is communicating (basic reading comprehension).], my question is whether the question is intrinsically bad based on its form alone. (If so, I would assume that the policy should be to close any such question, as no amount of editing to solve the other problems would save it.)
#1: Initial revision by user avatar r~~‭ · 2021-09-01T17:48:40Z (about 3 years ago)
Is ‘How would you know to do the next step?’ always a bad question?
We have a user who keeps posting questions of the form, ‘How would you [tortured synonym for “know”] to [do the next step in a proof]?’ Leaving aside the various other reasons that these posts are bad (under-researched, overuse of images, bad English, basic failures of reading comprehension... really, it tends to be a painfully long list), my question is whether the question is intrinsically bad based on its form alone. (If so, I would assume that the policy should be to close any such question, as no amount of editing to solve the other problems would save it.)