Sign Up Sign In

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.

Codidact is a Q&A platform or a teaching community?


The following is an excerpt from this community staff's answer:

I definitely didn't thought of the CoC-version of "Not Constructive" when I added the "Not Constructive"-close reason. The intention was to catch posts, which aren't helpful to anyone (What's 1+1? rather than How to add two numbers?), because answers to them will not teach the asker something new and the answerers won't really learn something new or exciting and the answers are not helpful to other visitors because they are only applicable in the specific use case of the asker.

I conclude from the above quote that some Codidact policy does not allow users to post questions which cannot have any exciting or enlightening answer. Is Codidact a Q&A platform or a teaching community?! (I personally dislike the problem statement questions in which the questioners only want to know the final answer. I do not want to argue against such a policy in this post; however, it is worth noting that such a policy has not been successful on some communities such as Math.SE)

However, in my opinion, such a kind of policies should not be considered as a default for each community; any specific community can determine the required policies by itself.

Why should this post be closed?


1 answer


Allow me to go out somewhat on a limb.

I get the feeling from your post, and your posts in general, that you're thinking "Codidact this" and "Codidact that". Here's a friendly piece of advice: Beyond issues of technical capabilities, don't.

Instead, think of Codidact as a software platform and service provider that hosts a set of communities.

Short of some overarching aspects such as the (fairly minimal) Codidact Code of Conduct, and the fact that they all run on the same software, those communities decide for themselves what acceptable standards are in various areas. For example, what makes a good question.

What makes a good question on, say, Scientific Speculation or Electrical Engineering might not make a good question on Judaism or Software Development -- and the other way around. Standards can even be different per category; for example, Scientific Speculation's Rigorous Science category imposes stricter requirements than its general Q&A category.

And that's all fine!

It's been said numerous times; Codidact is about the communities. For example, here, here (and in several other answers to that same question, which I see now was even asked by you) and less directly here.

I don't know to what extent close reasons can be customized on a per-site basis, but I very strongly suspect that if a community sees a need for such customization, if it isn't already implemented, then such functionality can be implemented relatively easily.

Heck, if you don't want a community to operate under the Codidact Code of Conduct, nothing actually prevents you from downloading the source code for the software from the Github repository and setting up an instance of your own, completely unencumbered by anything but the AGPL-3.0 license that the software itself is offered under. Heck, the license even specifically states that you don't even need to accept the license to have or run a copy of the software (sections 2 and 9).


Close reasons can be fully customized, including renaming, editing, adding new and deactivating old. ‭luap42 is a ghost 👻 ‭ 26 days ago

@luap42 Well then, that pretty well settles that part at least. ‭Canina‭ 26 days ago

Sign up to answer this question »