14

No, we should not reduce the speed at which we close questions. Closing a question is not a punishment to the person who asked, nor is it meant to be a negative interaction at all. The reason we close questions is that there are certain types of questions that (for various reasons) are not a good fit for the site. This is equally true whether the asker has ...


7

I'm going to vote against this because the majority of the time, users shouldn't need this. If you choose to use any website (even outside of Stack Exchange), it's on you to read the rules. In fact, you should probably already have a general idea of how a website works because you have decided to actively participate in it by studying it and deciding it ...


6

TL;DR: While we could write a FAQ post on questions that are on-hold, I don't think we should make a canonical meta post with the contents you describe here, with the terminology you use here and use it for the reasons you describe here. On this site, we get a lot of users who ask questions that are considered too subjective under our model. see revision ...


4

I think an additional version of the FAQ will just add more noise on meta, and won't make people any more likely to read it. I strongly suspect that the majority of users visiting from HNQ who leave chatty comments or write answers without backup do so because they just happened upon our site and jumped into participating. (Would be great to get data on ...


3

No, another FAQ isn't what IPS needs As Ælis pointed out in their comment, we already have an FAQ along with guidelines for good questions and good answers. We link users to those pages quite often, and get (what I would consider) mediocre results at best. I've seen many users complain about being linked to these posts, and far fewer have actually used them ...


1

As the site traffic drastically dropped since HNQ removal, closing questions is slower than before. I chose to use this at my advantage to advise new contributors on what they should do to improve their questions. Here's how I chose to approach the issue described in the question: If I see an off-topic questions with a bunch of close votes cast and with no ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible