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
I think the basic question is: Would future readers of the question want to see it? The main way to use a Q&A site is not to ask or answer questions, but to view existing posts. A post ma...
Answer
#9: Post edited
by
matthewsnyder
·
2023-10-20T15:23:25Z (7 months ago)
- I think the basic question is:
- >Would future readers of the question want to see it?
- The main way to use a Q&A site is not to ask or answer questions, but to view existing posts. A post may have 1 person asking, and 5-10 answering, but it could easily have thousands of people reading it in the years after.
- Reading questions after is also one of the main reasons people use QA sites over forums, chats and blogs. Stack Overflow became popular, in part, because people were tired of Googling something and finding a Forum thread ending with a pithy "never mind, I figured it out".
- So to answer the questions in OP:
- 1. We should remove fluff if, and only if, future readers would not care for it; we should leave it in if future readers are unlikely to object to it.
- 2. Jokes may or may not fall under point 1, depending on the joke. Greetings, thanks and supplications (like please) should almost always be removed. These are social rituals between asker and answerer, because some people know the answer but refuse to help unless sufficiently supplicated. Emojis IMO are a special case and should be asked as a separate question.
3. We should remove *all* "bad" fluff, not rewrite it.- 4. The general rule in point 1 should apply everywhere. How this is judged may depend on the community.
- 5. When giving feedback, you should always think back to the first time on a Q&A site that you got yelled at for breaking a minor rule you didn't know about - then give feedback the way that you would have liked to receive it then.
- I think the basic question is:
- >Would future readers of the question want to see it?
- The main way to use a Q&A site is not to ask or answer questions, but to view existing posts. A post may have 1 person asking, and 5-10 answering, but it could easily have thousands of people reading it in the years after.
- Reading questions after is also one of the main reasons people use QA sites over forums, chats and blogs. Stack Overflow became popular, in part, because people were tired of Googling something and finding a Forum thread ending with a pithy "never mind, I figured it out".
- So to answer the questions in OP:
- 1. We should remove fluff if, and only if, future readers would not care for it; we should leave it in if future readers are unlikely to object to it.
- 2. Jokes may or may not fall under point 1, depending on the joke. Greetings, thanks and supplications (like please) should almost always be removed. These are social rituals between asker and answerer, because some people know the answer but refuse to help unless sufficiently supplicated. Emojis IMO are a special case and should be asked as a separate question.
- 3. We should remove *all* fluff that falls under point 1, not rewrite it.
- 4. The general rule in point 1 should apply everywhere. How this is judged may depend on the community.
- 5. When giving feedback, you should always think back to the first time on a Q&A site that you got yelled at for breaking a minor rule you didn't know about - then give feedback the way that you would have liked to receive it then.
#8: Post edited
by
matthewsnyder
·
2023-10-20T15:22:41Z (7 months ago)
- I think the basic question is:
- >Would future readers of the question want to see it?
- The main way to use a Q&A site is not to ask or answer questions, but to view existing posts. A post may have 1 person asking, and 5-10 answering, but it could easily have thousands of people reading it in the years after.
- Reading questions after is also one of the main reasons people use QA sites over forums, chats and blogs. Stack Overflow became popular, in part, because people were tired of Googling something and finding a Forum thread ending with a pithy "never mind, I figured it out".
- So to answer the questions in OP:
- 1. We should remove fluff if, and only if, future readers would not care for it; we should leave it in if future readers are unlikely to object to it.
2. Jokes may or may not qualify, depending on the joke. Greetings, thanks and supplications (like please) should almost always be removed. These are social rituals between asker and answerer, because some people know the answer but refuse to help unless sufficiently supplicated. Emojis IMO are a special case and should be asked as a separate question.- 3. We should remove *all* "bad" fluff, not rewrite it.
- 4. The general rule in point 1 should apply everywhere. How this is judged may depend on the community.
- 5. When giving feedback, you should always think back to the first time on a Q&A site that you got yelled at for breaking a minor rule you didn't know about - then give feedback the way that you would have liked to receive it then.
- I think the basic question is:
- >Would future readers of the question want to see it?
- The main way to use a Q&A site is not to ask or answer questions, but to view existing posts. A post may have 1 person asking, and 5-10 answering, but it could easily have thousands of people reading it in the years after.
- Reading questions after is also one of the main reasons people use QA sites over forums, chats and blogs. Stack Overflow became popular, in part, because people were tired of Googling something and finding a Forum thread ending with a pithy "never mind, I figured it out".
- So to answer the questions in OP:
- 1. We should remove fluff if, and only if, future readers would not care for it; we should leave it in if future readers are unlikely to object to it.
- 2. Jokes may or may not fall under point 1, depending on the joke. Greetings, thanks and supplications (like please) should almost always be removed. These are social rituals between asker and answerer, because some people know the answer but refuse to help unless sufficiently supplicated. Emojis IMO are a special case and should be asked as a separate question.
- 3. We should remove *all* "bad" fluff, not rewrite it.
- 4. The general rule in point 1 should apply everywhere. How this is judged may depend on the community.
- 5. When giving feedback, you should always think back to the first time on a Q&A site that you got yelled at for breaking a minor rule you didn't know about - then give feedback the way that you would have liked to receive it then.
#7: Post edited
by
matthewsnyder
·
2023-10-20T15:22:18Z (7 months ago)
- I think the basic question is:
- >Would future readers of the question want to see it?
- The main way to use a Q&A site is not to ask or answer questions, but to view existing posts. A post may have 1 person asking, and 5-10 answering, but it could easily have thousands of people reading it in the years after.
The reading questions after is also one of the main reasons people use QA sites over forums, chats and blogs. Stack Overflow became popular, in part, because people were tired of Googling something and finding a Forum thread ending with a pithy "never mind, I figured it out".- So to answer the questions in OP:
1. We should remove fluff if, and only if, future readers would not care about it; we should leave it in if future readers are unlikely to object to it.- 2. Jokes may or may not qualify, depending on the joke. Greetings, thanks and supplications (like please) should almost always be removed. These are social rituals between asker and answerer, because some people know the answer but refuse to help unless sufficiently supplicated. Emojis IMO are a special case and should be asked as a separate question.
- 3. We should remove *all* "bad" fluff, not rewrite it.
- 4. The general rule in point 1 should apply everywhere. How this is judged may depend on the community.
- 5. When giving feedback, you should always think back to the first time on a Q&A site that you got yelled at for breaking a minor rule you didn't know about - then give feedback the way that you would have liked to receive it then.
- I think the basic question is:
- >Would future readers of the question want to see it?
- The main way to use a Q&A site is not to ask or answer questions, but to view existing posts. A post may have 1 person asking, and 5-10 answering, but it could easily have thousands of people reading it in the years after.
- Reading questions after is also one of the main reasons people use QA sites over forums, chats and blogs. Stack Overflow became popular, in part, because people were tired of Googling something and finding a Forum thread ending with a pithy "never mind, I figured it out".
- So to answer the questions in OP:
- 1. We should remove fluff if, and only if, future readers would not care for it; we should leave it in if future readers are unlikely to object to it.
- 2. Jokes may or may not qualify, depending on the joke. Greetings, thanks and supplications (like please) should almost always be removed. These are social rituals between asker and answerer, because some people know the answer but refuse to help unless sufficiently supplicated. Emojis IMO are a special case and should be asked as a separate question.
- 3. We should remove *all* "bad" fluff, not rewrite it.
- 4. The general rule in point 1 should apply everywhere. How this is judged may depend on the community.
- 5. When giving feedback, you should always think back to the first time on a Q&A site that you got yelled at for breaking a minor rule you didn't know about - then give feedback the way that you would have liked to receive it then.
#6: Post edited
by
Karl Knechtel
·
2023-10-19T21:17:18Z (7 months ago)
Misc copyediting for grammar and to improve clarity
- I think the basic question is:
- >Would future readers of the question want to see it?
The main way to use a QA site is not to ask or answer questions, but to view existing posts. A post may have 1 person asking, and 5-10 answering, but it could easily have 1000s of people reading it in the years after.The reading questions after is also one of the main reasons people use QA sites over forums, chats and blogs. StackOverflow became popular, in part, because people were tired of Googling something and finding a Forum thread ending with a pithy "nevermind, figured it out".- So to answer the questions in OP:
1. We should only remove fluff iff future readers would not care about it, but leave it in if future readers are unlikely to object to it.2. Jokes may or may not qualify, it depends on the joke. Greetings, thanks and supplications (like please) will almost always something to be removed. These are social ritual between asker and answerer, because some people know the answer but refuse to help unless sufficiently supplicated. Emojis IMO are a special case and should be asked as a separate question.- 3. We should remove *all* "bad" fluff, not rewrite it.
4. The general rule that fluff is removed iff future readers would not like to see it should apply everywhere. How this is judged may depend on the community.5. When giving feedback, you should always think back to the first time on a QA site that you got yelled at for breaking a minor rule you didn't know about. And give feedback in such a way as you would have liked to receive it then.
- I think the basic question is:
- >Would future readers of the question want to see it?
- The main way to use a Q&A site is not to ask or answer questions, but to view existing posts. A post may have 1 person asking, and 5-10 answering, but it could easily have thousands of people reading it in the years after.
- The reading questions after is also one of the main reasons people use QA sites over forums, chats and blogs. Stack Overflow became popular, in part, because people were tired of Googling something and finding a Forum thread ending with a pithy "never mind, I figured it out".
- So to answer the questions in OP:
- 1. We should remove fluff if, and only if, future readers would not care about it; we should leave it in if future readers are unlikely to object to it.
- 2. Jokes may or may not qualify, depending on the joke. Greetings, thanks and supplications (like please) should almost always be removed. These are social rituals between asker and answerer, because some people know the answer but refuse to help unless sufficiently supplicated. Emojis IMO are a special case and should be asked as a separate question.
- 3. We should remove *all* "bad" fluff, not rewrite it.
- 4. The general rule in point 1 should apply everywhere. How this is judged may depend on the community.
- 5. When giving feedback, you should always think back to the first time on a Q&A site that you got yelled at for breaking a minor rule you didn't know about - then give feedback the way that you would have liked to receive it then.
#5: Post edited
by
matthewsnyder
·
2023-10-17T19:26:24Z (7 months ago)
The basic question is, is it useful for readers of the question?The most important stakeholder of *question quality* is actually not the asker, not even the answerers. It's the people who will read it long after. The primary usage of a QA site is not to ask or answer questions, but to search through and read existing questions.Obviously 1 asker or answerer carries more weight than 1 future reader. But a post can easily be viewed by 1000 people - those clearly outweigh the OP and should be the focus of feedback. Meanwhile, there is almost always 1 asker, and usually no more than 5-10 answerers.Things like greetings, thanks and pleasantries are a transaction between asker and answerer. The purpose is for the asker to use deference and politeness to motivate some answerers to make the effort to answer, because some people might know the answer but refuse to help without sufficient social ritual. Once an answer has been given, these no longer matter. They are irrelevant to someone reading the exchange a year later because they have the same problem. They are not harmless, because they distract from the main point - what exactly the question is, and what exactly the answer is. Clarity of those two points is the main reason people use QA sites like this rather than miscellaneous forums, chats and blogs. We should not compromise on them.This doesn't mean that questions should be required to be absolutely sterile. Sometimes, a joke or remark can be on-point and help illustrate what's being asked. Even if it's strictly a tangent, if it makes the question more fun and interesting, then it is not detracting from the experience of future readers. They will appreciate the joke just the same. The value of adding levity to make text less dry should not be disregarded.Therefore, **in sum:**- 1. We should only remove fluff iff future readers would not care about it, but leave it in if future readers are unlikely to object to it.
2. Jokes may or may not qualify, it depends on the joke. Greetings, thanks and supplications (like please) will almost always something to be removed. I think emojis are a special case and should be asked as a separate question.3. We should remove all "bad" fluff. If there is a single paragraph of endless please's and thank you's, it should be cut entirely instead of condensing it to a shorter and equally pointless statement. Answerers should assume the asker promises to be grateful, and gratitude can be shown with comments, votes and reactions.- 4. The general rule that fluff is removed iff future readers would not like to see it should apply everywhere. How this is judged may depend on the community.
- 5. When giving feedback, you should always think back to the first time on a QA site that you got yelled at for breaking a minor rule you didn't know about. And give feedback in such a way as you would have liked to receive it then.
- I think the basic question is:
- >Would future readers of the question want to see it?
- The main way to use a QA site is not to ask or answer questions, but to view existing posts. A post may have 1 person asking, and 5-10 answering, but it could easily have 1000s of people reading it in the years after.
- The reading questions after is also one of the main reasons people use QA sites over forums, chats and blogs. StackOverflow became popular, in part, because people were tired of Googling something and finding a Forum thread ending with a pithy "nevermind, figured it out".
- So to answer the questions in OP:
- 1. We should only remove fluff iff future readers would not care about it, but leave it in if future readers are unlikely to object to it.
- 2. Jokes may or may not qualify, it depends on the joke. Greetings, thanks and supplications (like please) will almost always something to be removed. These are social ritual between asker and answerer, because some people know the answer but refuse to help unless sufficiently supplicated. Emojis IMO are a special case and should be asked as a separate question.
- 3. We should remove *all* "bad" fluff, not rewrite it.
- 4. The general rule that fluff is removed iff future readers would not like to see it should apply everywhere. How this is judged may depend on the community.
- 5. When giving feedback, you should always think back to the first time on a QA site that you got yelled at for breaking a minor rule you didn't know about. And give feedback in such a way as you would have liked to receive it then.
#4: Post edited
by
matthewsnyder
·
2023-10-17T19:18:09Z (7 months ago)
- The basic question is, is it useful for readers of the question?
- The most important stakeholder of *question quality* is actually not the asker, not even the answerers. It's the people who will read it long after. The primary usage of a QA site is not to ask or answer questions, but to search through and read existing questions.
- Obviously 1 asker or answerer carries more weight than 1 future reader. But a post can easily be viewed by 1000 people - those clearly outweigh the OP and should be the focus of feedback. Meanwhile, there is almost always 1 asker, and usually no more than 5-10 answerers.
- Things like greetings, thanks and pleasantries are a transaction between asker and answerer. The purpose is for the asker to use deference and politeness to motivate some answerers to make the effort to answer, because some people might know the answer but refuse to help without sufficient social ritual. Once an answer has been given, these no longer matter. They are irrelevant to someone reading the exchange a year later because they have the same problem. They are not harmless, because they distract from the main point - what exactly the question is, and what exactly the answer is. Clarity of those two points is the main reason people use QA sites like this rather than miscellaneous forums, chats and blogs. We should not compromise on them.
- This doesn't mean that questions should be required to be absolutely sterile. Sometimes, a joke or remark can be on-point and help illustrate what's being asked. Even if it's strictly a tangent, if it makes the question more fun and interesting, then it is not detracting from the experience of future readers. They will appreciate the joke just the same. The value of adding levity to make text less dry should not be disregarded.
Therefore, we should only remove fluff iff future readers would not care about it. Jokes may or may not qualify, it depends on the joke. Greetings, thanks and supplications (like please) will almost always something to be removed.
- The basic question is, is it useful for readers of the question?
- The most important stakeholder of *question quality* is actually not the asker, not even the answerers. It's the people who will read it long after. The primary usage of a QA site is not to ask or answer questions, but to search through and read existing questions.
- Obviously 1 asker or answerer carries more weight than 1 future reader. But a post can easily be viewed by 1000 people - those clearly outweigh the OP and should be the focus of feedback. Meanwhile, there is almost always 1 asker, and usually no more than 5-10 answerers.
- Things like greetings, thanks and pleasantries are a transaction between asker and answerer. The purpose is for the asker to use deference and politeness to motivate some answerers to make the effort to answer, because some people might know the answer but refuse to help without sufficient social ritual. Once an answer has been given, these no longer matter. They are irrelevant to someone reading the exchange a year later because they have the same problem. They are not harmless, because they distract from the main point - what exactly the question is, and what exactly the answer is. Clarity of those two points is the main reason people use QA sites like this rather than miscellaneous forums, chats and blogs. We should not compromise on them.
- This doesn't mean that questions should be required to be absolutely sterile. Sometimes, a joke or remark can be on-point and help illustrate what's being asked. Even if it's strictly a tangent, if it makes the question more fun and interesting, then it is not detracting from the experience of future readers. They will appreciate the joke just the same. The value of adding levity to make text less dry should not be disregarded.
- Therefore, **in sum:**
- 1. We should only remove fluff iff future readers would not care about it, but leave it in if future readers are unlikely to object to it.
- 2. Jokes may or may not qualify, it depends on the joke. Greetings, thanks and supplications (like please) will almost always something to be removed. I think emojis are a special case and should be asked as a separate question.
- 3. We should remove all "bad" fluff. If there is a single paragraph of endless please's and thank you's, it should be cut entirely instead of condensing it to a shorter and equally pointless statement. Answerers should assume the asker promises to be grateful, and gratitude can be shown with comments, votes and reactions.
- 4. The general rule that fluff is removed iff future readers would not like to see it should apply everywhere. How this is judged may depend on the community.
- 5. When giving feedback, you should always think back to the first time on a QA site that you got yelled at for breaking a minor rule you didn't know about. And give feedback in such a way as you would have liked to receive it then.
#3: Post edited
by
matthewsnyder
·
2023-10-17T19:08:11Z (7 months ago)
- The basic question is, is it useful for readers of the question?
- The most important stakeholder of *question quality* is actually not the asker, not even the answerers. It's the people who will read it long after. The primary usage of a QA site is not to ask or answer questions, but to search through and read existing questions.
- Obviously 1 asker or answerer carries more weight than 1 future reader. But a post can easily be viewed by 1000 people - those clearly outweigh the OP and should be the focus of feedback. Meanwhile, there is almost always 1 asker, and usually no more than 5-10 answerers.
Things like greetings, thanks and pleasantries are a transaction between asker and answerer. The purpose is for the asker to use deference and politeness to motivate some answerers to make the effort to answer. Once an answer has been given, these no longer matter. They are irrelevant to someone reading the exchange a year later because they have the same problem. They are not harmless, because they distract from the main point - what exactly the question is, and what exactly the answer is. Clarity of those two points is the main reason people use QA sites like this rather than miscellaneous forums, chats and blogs. We should not compromise on them.This doesn't mean that questions should be required to be absolutely sterile. Sometimes, a joke or remark can be on-point and help illustrate what's being asked. Even if it's strictly a tangent, if it makes the question read more fun and interesting, then it is not detracting from the experience of future readers. They will appreciate the joke just the same as. The value of adding levity to make text less dry should not be disregarded.- Therefore, we should only remove fluff iff future readers would not care about it. Jokes may or may not qualify, it depends on the joke. Greetings, thanks and supplications (like please) will almost always something to be removed.
- The basic question is, is it useful for readers of the question?
- The most important stakeholder of *question quality* is actually not the asker, not even the answerers. It's the people who will read it long after. The primary usage of a QA site is not to ask or answer questions, but to search through and read existing questions.
- Obviously 1 asker or answerer carries more weight than 1 future reader. But a post can easily be viewed by 1000 people - those clearly outweigh the OP and should be the focus of feedback. Meanwhile, there is almost always 1 asker, and usually no more than 5-10 answerers.
- Things like greetings, thanks and pleasantries are a transaction between asker and answerer. The purpose is for the asker to use deference and politeness to motivate some answerers to make the effort to answer, because some people might know the answer but refuse to help without sufficient social ritual. Once an answer has been given, these no longer matter. They are irrelevant to someone reading the exchange a year later because they have the same problem. They are not harmless, because they distract from the main point - what exactly the question is, and what exactly the answer is. Clarity of those two points is the main reason people use QA sites like this rather than miscellaneous forums, chats and blogs. We should not compromise on them.
- This doesn't mean that questions should be required to be absolutely sterile. Sometimes, a joke or remark can be on-point and help illustrate what's being asked. Even if it's strictly a tangent, if it makes the question more fun and interesting, then it is not detracting from the experience of future readers. They will appreciate the joke just the same. The value of adding levity to make text less dry should not be disregarded.
- Therefore, we should only remove fluff iff future readers would not care about it. Jokes may or may not qualify, it depends on the joke. Greetings, thanks and supplications (like please) will almost always something to be removed.
#2: Post edited
by
matthewsnyder
·
2023-10-17T19:00:59Z (7 months ago)
- The basic question is, is it useful for readers of the question?
The most important stakeholder of *question quality* is actually not the asker, not even the answerers. It's the people who will read it long after. The primary usage of a QA is not to ask or answer questions, but to search through and read existing questions.- Obviously 1 asker or answerer carries more weight than 1 future reader. But a post can easily be viewed by 1000 people - those clearly outweigh the OP and should be the focus of feedback. Meanwhile, there is almost always 1 asker, and usually no more than 5-10 answerers.
- Things like greetings, thanks and pleasantries are a transaction between asker and answerer. The purpose is for the asker to use deference and politeness to motivate some answerers to make the effort to answer. Once an answer has been given, these no longer matter. They are irrelevant to someone reading the exchange a year later because they have the same problem. They are not harmless, because they distract from the main point - what exactly the question is, and what exactly the answer is. Clarity of those two points is the main reason people use QA sites like this rather than miscellaneous forums, chats and blogs. We should not compromise on them.
- This doesn't mean that questions should be required to be absolutely sterile. Sometimes, a joke or remark can be on-point and help illustrate what's being asked. Even if it's strictly a tangent, if it makes the question read more fun and interesting, then it is not detracting from the experience of future readers. They will appreciate the joke just the same as. The value of adding levity to make text less dry should not be disregarded.
- Therefore, we should only remove fluff iff future readers would not care about it. Jokes may or may not qualify, it depends on the joke. Greetings, thanks and supplications (like please) will almost always something to be removed.
- The basic question is, is it useful for readers of the question?
- The most important stakeholder of *question quality* is actually not the asker, not even the answerers. It's the people who will read it long after. The primary usage of a QA site is not to ask or answer questions, but to search through and read existing questions.
- Obviously 1 asker or answerer carries more weight than 1 future reader. But a post can easily be viewed by 1000 people - those clearly outweigh the OP and should be the focus of feedback. Meanwhile, there is almost always 1 asker, and usually no more than 5-10 answerers.
- Things like greetings, thanks and pleasantries are a transaction between asker and answerer. The purpose is for the asker to use deference and politeness to motivate some answerers to make the effort to answer. Once an answer has been given, these no longer matter. They are irrelevant to someone reading the exchange a year later because they have the same problem. They are not harmless, because they distract from the main point - what exactly the question is, and what exactly the answer is. Clarity of those two points is the main reason people use QA sites like this rather than miscellaneous forums, chats and blogs. We should not compromise on them.
- This doesn't mean that questions should be required to be absolutely sterile. Sometimes, a joke or remark can be on-point and help illustrate what's being asked. Even if it's strictly a tangent, if it makes the question read more fun and interesting, then it is not detracting from the experience of future readers. They will appreciate the joke just the same as. The value of adding levity to make text less dry should not be disregarded.
- Therefore, we should only remove fluff iff future readers would not care about it. Jokes may or may not qualify, it depends on the joke. Greetings, thanks and supplications (like please) will almost always something to be removed.
#1: Initial revision
by
matthewsnyder
·
2023-10-17T18:50:59Z (7 months ago)
The basic question is, is it useful for readers of the question? The most important stakeholder of *question quality* is actually not the asker, not even the answerers. It's the people who will read it long after. The primary usage of a QA is not to ask or answer questions, but to search through and read existing questions. Obviously 1 asker or answerer carries more weight than 1 future reader. But a post can easily be viewed by 1000 people - those clearly outweigh the OP and should be the focus of feedback. Meanwhile, there is almost always 1 asker, and usually no more than 5-10 answerers. Things like greetings, thanks and pleasantries are a transaction between asker and answerer. The purpose is for the asker to use deference and politeness to motivate some answerers to make the effort to answer. Once an answer has been given, these no longer matter. They are irrelevant to someone reading the exchange a year later because they have the same problem. They are not harmless, because they distract from the main point - what exactly the question is, and what exactly the answer is. Clarity of those two points is the main reason people use QA sites like this rather than miscellaneous forums, chats and blogs. We should not compromise on them. This doesn't mean that questions should be required to be absolutely sterile. Sometimes, a joke or remark can be on-point and help illustrate what's being asked. Even if it's strictly a tangent, if it makes the question read more fun and interesting, then it is not detracting from the experience of future readers. They will appreciate the joke just the same as. The value of adding levity to make text less dry should not be disregarded. Therefore, we should only remove fluff iff future readers would not care about it. Jokes may or may not qualify, it depends on the joke. Greetings, thanks and supplications (like please) will almost always something to be removed.