What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 131 Stack Exchange communities.

I'm talking about questions like http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3642654/asp-vs-c-comparison and http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3635054/simple-asp-net-website (full disclosure: I answered both of them).

I completely agree that questions of this kind are "ambiguous, vague, incomplete, or rhetorical," but on the other hand, I'm pretty sure answering these questions helped the people who asked them. Doesn't that count? Why not let them have answers, even if there isn't much added value for the community as a whole?

Edit: I realize you guys are experienced with this kind of user, but take a look, for example, at my first link. The poster left two (kind) comments after asking the question. Couldn't it be that the vagueness of her question came simply from not knowing? There isn't a real "answer" to what I'm asking, I just think you should be more tolerant.

Edit 2: You seem to agree that answering these questions is a mistake. I on the other hand, am quite sure closing, downvoting and cynically commenting these questions, just scare off newcomers. I believe answering kindly will make those posters want to come again, and in time they'll get the atmosphere and the manners people here share. Obviously there are questions that cross the line, and maybe we should only be extra tolerant with newcomers because they're new. Just reconsider please.

share|improve this question
    
related: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/62191/… –  malach Sep 4 '10 at 15:15
    
also related: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10890/… –  malach Sep 4 '10 at 15:16
    
    
The simple-asp-net-website question sucked, since the user just wanted everything done for him (though I liked your answer)(don't be afraid to answer and vote-to-close). The other question was just way too broad. –  Lance Roberts Sep 7 '10 at 20:06

6 Answers 6

up vote 2 down vote accepted

It depends on who is reading the question first. Many community users will edit the question and/or make it community instead of voting to close.

My opinion is that not doing so is the real lazyness.

Too much people here answer to get reputation, not to help sincerely.

share|improve this answer
    
++ Nice to hear a different opinion –  Oren A Sep 7 '10 at 19:41
1  
In general, if I can edit the question to make it clearer, to make a good question out of it without losing the original meaning, I will. That rarely happens. If an unacceptably vague question is asked, I'll note it and see if the OP provides the necessary information. Only if they've had a reasonable chance but failed will I vote to close. Should I edit to create an acceptable question, even if I don't know if it's what the OP wanted? –  David Thornley Sep 7 '10 at 19:58
    
Only the original poster or a moderator should be changing the status to Community Wiki. –  Lance Roberts Sep 7 '10 at 20:04
    
@Lance - I don't think regular users even can make it CW without ganging up to do multiple edits. –  Martin Smith Sep 7 '10 at 21:42
    
Then moderators work hard ;) –  user150926 Sep 8 '10 at 18:18

When I think these not-good-at-all questions have been written by a beginner or someone who is struggling with English, I try to leave a comment to the effect that the question is being closed because we can't understand it, and the closure can be reversed if the question is adequately clarified.

Sadly, not one poster in ten makes a good faith effort to fix them up.

This experience has convinced that most of these questions are posted by the very lazy.


My general rule is that questions that should be closed should be closed as fast as possible.

The flip side side is that questions that should be reopened should be reopened as fast as possible.

Both of these call for 3k users to be alert and use their judgment and especially for 10k users to check in with the tools from time to time to find things that need action and may have slipped down the active list.

share|improve this answer

answering these questions did help the persons who asked them

You achieved the exact opposite. Because you gave the questioner no incentive to get off his duff for that question. And the next one. Getting a good answer to a lazy question is merely an accident. A good answer requires a good question.

share|improve this answer
    
Good point 4321 –  Oren A Jul 21 '12 at 10:57

I'm pretty sure answering these questions did help the persons who asked them.

maybe - but due to their ambiguity, the questions are impossible to answer correctly, and worthless for anybody else having the same question / problem.

I say they were both lazy questions, asked with zero effort, and rightly closed.

share|improve this answer

I could ask a question about how to fix the fan belt in my car, and someone answering it would help me. Does that mean it shouldn't be closed? You can't make an exception that helps one person at the cost of a slightly worse question base, because then it turns into everyone doing that and nobody wants to read through the list of new questions anymore

share|improve this answer

If I had seen that question a little earlier, I would have voted to close it.

That didn't stop me from upvoting a good answer, and downvoting a bad answer that talked about ASP.NET using C# as its codebehind language.

share|improve this answer
    
:-) That's a bit funny.. And so is the debate that is going on there –  Oren A Sep 4 '10 at 21:15

You must log in to answer this question.

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