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

If a question has a title like:

I hate how XXX does YYY. Alternatives?

and corresponding text:

I don’t like how XXX does YYY because of ZZZ. I would like XXX to do WWW, just like VVV would. Is it possible?

should the question title and text be edited so that the rant is removed and the question reads more neutral? Something like title:

Is it possible for XXX to do WWW?

and text:

XXX does YYY. However, ZZZ. Can XXX do WWW just like VVV?

share|improve this question
Can you link to live case? I always prefer something real to hold into even when dealing with the theory.. – Shadow Wizard May 11 '11 at 7:21
@Shadow… – Bavarious May 11 '11 at 7:25
based on that case, definitely – Jeff Atwood May 11 '11 at 7:37
@Jeff I’d rather have one of The Elders edit it and learn by example. :-) – Bavarious May 11 '11 at 7:45
I second Jeff too, and guess this apply to all questions with similar attitude. Go ahead and edit, by all means. No need for Elders, it's not like you change the meaning of what he wrote, just making it look better. :) – Shadow Wizard May 11 '11 at 7:49
up vote 8 down vote accepted

That's a very good question.

I'd call it a judgement call. With your example, for instance, I wouldn't edit the question body at all (to me it's not a rant), but the question title should be more like "Can I make XXX do WWW like VVV (or similar)?" because that more usefully asks the question.

And as always, a softly-softly approach tends to be best.

Outright rants should probably be downvoted or closed (in keeping with the FAQ), but people expressing unhappiness with XXX and wanting alternatives aren't (usually) ranting...

share|improve this answer
"aren't (usually) ranting" agreed, they may just be explaining what prompted their question, It can give an answerer insight. As you say, outright rants should be close voted and/or commented on to give the user a chance to self edit – clairesuzy May 11 '11 at 7:21
I see. Maybe ‘I hate…’ or ‘I don’t like…’ aren’t rants per se and the community is okay with them. That’s why I’m trying to understand. – Bavarious May 11 '11 at 7:23
@Bavarious: For me, "I hate" is rant-ish (depending), but "I don't like" followed by "and would like to do this, is it possible?" isn't so much. It just totally depends on the context, and it's a judgement call (we could each have different opinions, yet neither be wrong). :-) – T.J. Crowder May 11 '11 at 7:25
I've seen the line drawn that for an OP to hate themselves for something, let it slide, but hating on another or something that is a product or a tool or a concept seems worth an edit as a general rule. Especially hating in the title – bmike Aug 13 '11 at 14:53

You must log in to answer this question.

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