Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 158 Stack Exchange communities.

What is meta?
Here's how it works:
  1. Any Stack Exchange user can ask a question
  2. The community provides support, votes on ideas, and reports bugs
  3. Your voice helps shape the way Stack Exchange operates

Consider this question:

When i search, it is easy to find similar ones like:

At first glance, that all look duplicates, but on the other hand, previous two questions had been asked/answered/accepted about 2 years ago and might not be valid (answers/accepted answer) for todays' conditions. But they appear on upper parts of search results and keep taking attention.

  • Since top search results are (generally) old questions/answers, accepted or highly-voted answers do not help people anymore
  • Asking new questions (and do not closing them as duplicate) might cause confusion. Since duplicate is not a good way to go
  • Answering previous questions might not get proper attention since accepted/highly-voted answers are probably listed first (most people uses vote-ordering instead of new-ordering and new users might get confused.)

So,closing outdated questions (so removing them from search) and letting people asking the same question again to get newer answers might be a good approach, in my opinion. Too Localized might be used for that purpose (since they are not correct due to the time passed)

But, on the other hand, i can not be sure if doing this is the correct way to go. Is it right to report a such outdated question to a moderator?

share|improve this question
I don't like the Too Localized label for such questions, something like Time Sensitive would be better. – prusswan Sep 7 '12 at 13:47
One of the reasons of my question is that too @prusswan . Too Localized looks like that person asked something wrong. – FallenAngel Sep 7 '12 at 13:52
Looks to me like all of those questions are Not Constructive, so whether they should be marked as duplicates seems to be a moot point. – Servy Sep 7 '12 at 14:27
In my opinion they are constructive, because sometimes it is very useful to know existing problems about a new language release... especially from those who experienced them. – FallenAngel Sep 7 '12 at 19:07

I'm personally about to start a project, and I have decided its time to learn Python. So Im confronted with the problem "Python 2 vs 3", but SO has no real help.

There are tons of "Python 2 vs 3" questions, and they are quite highly voted, but most of them is both closed as not constructive AND probably outdated.

This is a problem, as the need for an up-to-date answer to this particular question is real. Since I never done any work in Python, and I dont know what libraries I might be needing, Id like to find out how severly limiting is the choice of Python 3. What "staple library in almost every project" libraries dont support it (Im thinking Twisted might be one of those libraries), what areas or types of project need some things that are not offered for Python 3 (ie. web dev seems to be OK with 3.x, since django has a 3.x version, but how about other uses? Typical admin scripting, desktop app development, some server apps?) etc. Id like to make an informed decision, or at least get some info to make myself an opinion on "is using Python 2 or 3 the better way to go for me and my needs".

I believe I could forge a question that could not be considerd "not constructive" or "unfit for QA format", but it would only serve to obscure the meaning, "game the faq" and make the question harder to google. Nobody googles "are there any/ what are the libraries crucial for [app type] development that are not supported by Python 3 but are supported by Python 2?". People just google "Should I use Python 2 or 3?"

My point is, "Python 2 vs 3" is a valid and usefull question, but due to some formalisms it always gets closed in its most natural form. It shouldnt. We should have an open, working question that would be up-to-date due to being constatnly edited and improved. An upvoted answer, once outdated, will get downvoted, and the new, up-to-date one will get upvoted. I will be able to make an informed decision. Right now we just have a big stack of questions closed as duplicates/not being constructive, none of them actually having an up-to-date, reasonably detailed answer.

Python 2 or Python 3? - this question is a perfect example. There IS need for the answer, and the qeustion quite clearly states its points and shows why an answer would be useful. Yet it was almost immediately closed, is low on answers and votes. It should be open and upvoted up till its popularity makes it a top google search result!

share|improve this answer
I am strongly against the idea of upvoting an answer and downvoting it later on after it has become outdated. – Antony Apr 3 '13 at 7:13
Why? Because of the reputation loss for the answerer? Well, that may be negative, but the positive is that the top voted answer will be the best answer - kind of the point of SE mechanics... But TBH I dont really care on how it will be achieved - I just want good and easily googleable answers for the question :) – K.L. Apr 3 '13 at 7:15
I would rather close that type of questions. Googlability is not the sole reason for upvoting question or answer. Keeping everything on topic and coherent is the ultimate reason why people keep coming back to a site. – Antony Apr 3 '13 at 7:18
The closing is the problem! Why would you want to close the question? Didnt I just prove that it is a real problem and it could have a usefull, objective answer? For example, an answer containing a link to this site: and a quotation from it with a brief explanation of which of those libraries are widely spread or handle problems I will most probably encounter in a project of [project type]. It is objective, it is usefull. Why close it? – K.L. Apr 3 '13 at 7:23
The main reason for upvoting etc is providing solutions for peoples problems and answers for their reasonable questions. The "Python 2 vs 3" IS a problem and IS a valid, usefull question (unless we agree on this premise, there is no point in further argument) – K.L. Apr 3 '13 at 7:26

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .