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 »
Users Search
Help Dashboard Sign In Sign Up
Q&A Blog
Q&A
Posts Tags Edits
Ask Question

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.

Post History

71%
+3 −0
Q&A My opinion about why there should be two medical sciences websites in the network

Honestly, if you want Medical Sciences CD a reality, then perhaps make it a one-site community. Take for example my proposal on Videogames CD, where it contains 2 completely different categories: ...

posted 3y ago by General Sebast1an‭  ·  edited 3y ago by General Sebast1an‭

Answer
#3: Post edited by user avatar General Sebast1an‭ · 2021-07-11T13:58:06Z (over 3 years ago)
  • Honestly, if you want Medical Sciences CD a reality, then perhaps make it a one-site community. Take for example [my proposal on Videogames CD](https://meta.codidact.com/posts/282240), where it contains 2 completely different categories:
  • - **Videogames**, where questions would take the form about instructions on doing something (per-se Minecraft redstone tutorials) or Q&As of facts about those games.
  • - **Game Development**, where questions are all about the creation and design of making games, not exactly on par with the Videogames topic. There's also more topics that are also found in [Game Development SE](https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic) which will be added in the scope in Videogames CD if it were to exist.
  • They both represent videogames, but 2 completely different topics, so it's best if we separate them via categories. For example, [Software Development CD](https://software.codidact.com/) has 2 categories apart from Meta:
  • - **Q&A**, mostly relating to questions about creating software and Q&A on tutorials of programming, especially how functions work and what to look for.
  • - **Code Reviews**, unlike Q&A, depends on reviewing code that already works as how you want it to be. The purpose for Code Reviews is to improve code you wrote.
  • Just like my proposal, this now-existing site represents software development, but 2 different topics. That's what the categories are for. In your case, it might fit to simply have **Q&A** in Medical Sciences CD since they're basically the same topic. It doesn't really matter if it has to be invasive or not, or maybe you can set those as tags. Who knows?
  • Honestly, if you want Medical Sciences CD a reality, then perhaps make it a one-site community. Take for example [my proposal on Videogames CD](https://meta.codidact.com/posts/282240), where it contains 2 completely different categories:
  • - **Q&A (Videogames)**, where questions would take the form about instructions on doing something (per-se Minecraft redstone tutorials) or Q&As of facts about those games.
  • - **Game Development**, where questions are all about the creation and design of making games, not exactly on par with the Videogames topic. There's also more topics that are also found in [Game Development SE](https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic) which will be added in the scope in Videogames CD if it were to exist.
  • They both represent videogames, but 2 completely different topics, so it's best if we separate them via categories. For example, [Software Development CD](https://software.codidact.com/) has 2 categories apart from Meta:
  • - **Q&A**, mostly relating to questions about creating software and Q&A on tutorials of programming, especially how functions work and what to look for.
  • - **Code Reviews**, unlike Q&A, depends on reviewing code that already works as how you want it to be. The purpose for Code Reviews is to improve code you wrote.
  • Just like my proposal, this now-existing site represents software development, but 2 different topics. That's what the categories are for. In your case, it might fit to simply have **Q&A** in Medical Sciences CD since they're basically the same topic. It doesn't really matter if it has to be invasive or not, or maybe you can set those as tags. Who knows?
#2: Post edited by user avatar General Sebast1an‭ · 2021-06-23T05:39:06Z (over 3 years ago)
  • Honestly, if you want Medical Sciences CD a reality, then perhaps make it a one-site community. Take for example [my proposal on Videogames CD](https://meta.codidact.com/posts/282240), where it contains 2 completely different categories:
  • - **Videogames**, where questions would take the form about instructions on doing something (per-se Minecraft redstone tutorials) or Q&As of facts about those games.
  • - **Game Development**, where questions are all about the creation and design of making games, not exactly on par with the Videogames topic. There's also more topics that are also found in [Game Development SE](https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic) which will be added in the scope in Videogames CD if it were to exist.
  • They both represent videogames, but 2 completely different topics, so it's best if we separate them via categories. For example, [Software Development CD](https://software.codidact.com/) has 2 categories apart from Meta:
  • - **Q&A**, mostly relating to questions about creating software and Q&A on tutorials of programming, especially how functions work and what to look for.
  • - **Code Reviews**, unlike Q&A, depends on reviewing code that already works as how you want it to be. The purpose for Code Reviews is to improve code you wrote.
  • Just like my proposal, this now-existing site represents software development, but 2 different topics. That's what the categories are for. In your case, it might fit to simply have **Q&A** in Medical Sciences CD since they're basically the same topics. It doesn't really matter if it has to be invasive or not, or maybe you can set those as tags. Who knows?
  • Honestly, if you want Medical Sciences CD a reality, then perhaps make it a one-site community. Take for example [my proposal on Videogames CD](https://meta.codidact.com/posts/282240), where it contains 2 completely different categories:
  • - **Videogames**, where questions would take the form about instructions on doing something (per-se Minecraft redstone tutorials) or Q&As of facts about those games.
  • - **Game Development**, where questions are all about the creation and design of making games, not exactly on par with the Videogames topic. There's also more topics that are also found in [Game Development SE](https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic) which will be added in the scope in Videogames CD if it were to exist.
  • They both represent videogames, but 2 completely different topics, so it's best if we separate them via categories. For example, [Software Development CD](https://software.codidact.com/) has 2 categories apart from Meta:
  • - **Q&A**, mostly relating to questions about creating software and Q&A on tutorials of programming, especially how functions work and what to look for.
  • - **Code Reviews**, unlike Q&A, depends on reviewing code that already works as how you want it to be. The purpose for Code Reviews is to improve code you wrote.
  • Just like my proposal, this now-existing site represents software development, but 2 different topics. That's what the categories are for. In your case, it might fit to simply have **Q&A** in Medical Sciences CD since they're basically the same topic. It doesn't really matter if it has to be invasive or not, or maybe you can set those as tags. Who knows?
#1: Initial revision by user avatar General Sebast1an‭ · 2021-06-23T05:37:45Z (over 3 years ago) 
Honestly, if you want Medical Sciences CD a reality, then perhaps make it a one-site community. Take for example [my proposal on Videogames CD](https://meta.codidact.com/posts/282240), where it contains 2 completely different categories:

- **Videogames**, where questions would take the form about instructions on doing something (per-se Minecraft redstone tutorials) or Q&As of facts about those games.
- **Game Development**, where questions are all about the creation and design of making games, not exactly on par with the Videogames topic. There's also more topics that are also found in [Game Development SE](https://gamedev.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic) which will be added in the scope in Videogames CD if it were to exist.

They both represent videogames, but 2 completely different topics, so it's best if we separate them via categories. For example, [Software Development CD](https://software.codidact.com/) has 2 categories apart from Meta:

- **Q&A**, mostly relating to questions about creating software and Q&A on tutorials of programming, especially how functions work and what to look for.
- **Code Reviews**, unlike Q&A, depends on reviewing code that already works as how you want it to be. The purpose for Code Reviews is to improve code you wrote.

Just like my proposal, this now-existing site represents software development, but 2 different topics. That's what the categories are for. In your case, it might fit to simply have **Q&A** in Medical Sciences CD since they're basically the same topics. It doesn't really matter if it has to be invasive or not, or maybe you can set those as tags. Who knows?