Welcome to Codidact Meta!
Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.
Comments on Is it okay to ask a question because you're too lazy/bored to figure it out yourself?
Parent
Is it okay to ask a question because you're too lazy/bored to figure it out yourself?
It is generally considered good practice to try and do your own research to find the answer to a question before you post it.
There are some questions where the asker is just not capable of finding the answer on their own, no matter how much research they do on their own. As a contrived example, let's say that color of traffic lights in Elbonia is not documented anywhere, and Elbonia has currently closed all borders. A person wondering what color the traffic lights are in Elbonia cannot find it no matter what they do. Their only hope is to ask here, and perhaps a kind Elbonian will volunteer the facts.
A second class is questions where the asker could in theory figure it out, but it would be very burdensome. For example, perhaps the answer requires advanced degrees and a decades of reading literature, whereas the asker is an illiterate child. If the asker tried to answer it their own, they would have to dedicate a lifetime to it, and might easily still fail.
Then we have the spectrum going all the way down to questions where the answer could be easily found with "a basic 5 second google", or even questions where the answer is obvious by simply reading the question back.
I'm asking about questions where:
- The answer is readily available and can be found with "a 5 second google"
- The asker knows that it is readily available
- A quick skim of these answer(s) elsewhere would immediately tell you exactly what the answer is, if you are proficient in the subject matter
- The asker is not proficient, and finds the material hard to understand or difficult to read. Perhaps they have spent some reasonable, short amount of time trying to read it (like 30 minutes), failed to comprehend it, and decided that figuring it out would likely take considerable effort (hours or days). Besides mere effort, the asker may also find the material too boring to attempt to get through (don't laugh - people ask sometimes about laws and standards!).
The asker is basically asking the community to summarize/ELI5 a topic, because they themselves feel like it would be too much work to go through it.
- Is it generally discouraged to ask questions on Codidact if an answer can be found elsewhere on the internet or in a book?
- Is there some minimum level of effort the asker must make, and if so, what is it?
- Is it bad to "use the community as a resource" in this way?
I specifically draw the line at minutes vs. hours because I think this is the useful place to draw it in practice. Asking a question already takes a few minutes, so it is a natural baseline for measuring effort.
I want to question the premise of this question. In the title, you wrote: > Is it okay to ask a question because y …
7mo ago
Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day. Then tomorrow, he'll ask for another fish. And you give it to him then too, …
7mo ago
Regarding the "5 second google" part: We did discuss this very thing at some point over at Software Development Quest …
7mo ago
Users vs. questions Personally, I don't care much, if at all, about the motivation behind a question - as long as it …
7mo ago
My answers would be that: It's okay to ask here even if the answer is readily available elsewhere There is no mini …
7mo ago
Post
My answers would be that:
- It's okay to ask here even if the answer is readily available elsewhere
- There is no minimum level of research, beyond ensuring it's clear what's being asked
- It is not bad to use the community as a resource, that is what the community exists for
Of course this is just my take. I don't claim to speak for the community. I do sometimes ask such questions, but I don't want this to be seen as an attempt to carve out an exception for myself. If the community ends up deciding that such questions are not okay, that's fine (although, as a member of the community, I would dissent). I'll attempt to write from the perspective of answerer or lurker only.
I have never encountered a situation where the same question returned search hits from both Codidact (or Stack sites) and other sources, and I wished it didn't. I have heard rumors that sometimes a low quality Stack question with no real answer becomes a top hit, itself impeding attempts to find a good answer, but never personally experienced it. I have seen cases where the top Google result is a Stack question with commenters berating the asker about how if they had only Googled it, the answer would have been a top result. When a specific question is answered directly on both a QA site like here or on Stack, and some other resource, I almost always prefer the QA site because it is usually higher quality, niftier (built in comparison of alternate answers, indicators of being up to date, ability to ask for clarification), more focused and much faster to consume (thus less of a detour). I'm shameless about being a "StackOverflow programmer" and encourage others to do so.
I don't mind answering such questions either. Sometimes I enjoy it, because even though the answer is obvious, it's fun to see how well you can phrase it. It's kind of like code golf but for answers. I personally believe brevity is the soul of wit, as well as quality answers, so ideally an answer should be <4 paragraphs, which doesn't take that long to type. Sometimes I don't enjoy it, but don't hate it either, so I answer anyway and call it my good deed for the day. Sometimes I feel like answering such a basic question would be a chore, so I simply don't answer and ignore the question.
It never sat right with me to see people complain such questions:
- What's obvious to an expert is not obvious to a lay person or newbie.
- The time differential can be considerable - you can spend hours or days going in circles in an unfamiliar topic, while an expert would know the answer immediately.
- Search engines tend to be much more cooperative if you already know what sort of result you are looking for.
- A lot of reference material elsewhere is just not well structured. If you are trying to skim through a long text to answer the one point, you often find that the text is really not written in a way that's conducive to it. Many (not all) experts also seem to engage in obscurantism, perhaps to fortify the value of their expertise.
- Not everyone has the same appetite for learning every subject, sometimes you just want to get a quick answer and otherwise avoid the topic. It doesn't seem fair to restrict knowledge to only those who are passionate about a domain - should only lawyers know what the law says?
- Saving other people time seems to me a noble goal with strong precedent in areas such as the open source software movement. Asking such questions is conducive to this goal.
There's a line of thought that it's unfair to expect volunteers to do the work for you when you can't be bothered yourself. But besides the appeal of work being subjective, as a volunteer here I am free to stop volunteering and start again whenever I like, and I have almost full control of the nature of my volunteer work, so I don't see much pretext for demanding that askers respect my personal preferences.
Another objection could be that such basic questions are not interesting to experts. I don't personally feel that true experts should be the focus of site policy, however. In my experience with top experts, they often don't have the time nor interest in online discussion communities like QA sites. For example, most answerers of StackOverflow are programmers of middling skill, not the top talents of our time (with a handful of exceptions). Such semi-experts can serve a valuable function of bridging the gap between inaccessible expert material and average members of the public, and I think this is the most interesting user segment for a QA site. Also, top experts themselves are often interested in outreach to people of very low expertise, rather those who are slightly less expert than themselves (perhaps because experts have their own professional venues where they already satisfy their need to interact with people of similar expertise).
0 comment threads