4 added 46 characters in body
source | link

I don't think there is a better name for "Unclear what you are asking." The close reason is general in nature, and is meant to cover a number of specific problems that questions can have. Changing a few words isn't going to produce instant enlightenment for anyone.

If you want to provide specific guidance to the OP regarding your close vote, you will now have to post a comment with your rationalization. I argue that this is better than any boilerplate verbiage you might provide in a close reason title.

I do agree that it was convenient to stamp questions with "Must demonstrate a minimal understanding." But consider this:

  1. The "must demonstrate minimal understanding" close reason was widely mis-interpreted to mean "must demonstrate minimal effort," which is not the same thing at all.

  2. Most questions never got rehabilitated, even with the specific close reasons. The OP often spent more time and effort arguing with you than they spent on making their question better.

  3. There is now plenty of excellent guidance in the help center on how to write good questions, and it is linked from both "Unclear what you are asking" and "Too Broad." Directing new users into the Help Center is a good thing.

  4. If the OP genuinely wants specific guidance on how to make their question better, they can always ask, either in the comments or on meta. They almost always get good feedback if they don't rant.

  5. The vast majority of vague, underspecified, lazy questions fall neatly into the "Unclear What you are Asking" or "Too Broad" categories anyway.

In short, those who think changing four words in a close reason (or bolding certain words for emphasis) willisn't going to solve closing problems are barking up, no matter how good the wrong treewords are. It's more about respecting people'sbetter to direct folks to a comprehensive resource for writing better questions, and providing specific guidance when needed. This respects peoples time, and guiding (willing) folks to the resources that they need to makefocuses their questions betterattention on the folks who genuinely want help.

I don't think there is a better name for "Unclear what you are asking." The close reason is general in nature, and is meant to cover a number of specific problems that questions can have. Changing a few words isn't going to produce instant enlightenment for anyone.

If you want to provide specific guidance to the OP regarding your close vote, you will now have to post a comment with your rationalization. I argue that this is better than any boilerplate verbiage you might provide in a close reason title.

I do agree that it was convenient to stamp questions with "Must demonstrate a minimal understanding." But consider this:

  1. The "must demonstrate minimal understanding" close reason was widely mis-interpreted to mean "must demonstrate minimal effort," which is not the same thing at all.

  2. Most questions never got rehabilitated, even with the specific close reasons. The OP often spent more time and effort arguing with you than they spent on making their question better.

  3. There is now plenty of excellent guidance in the help center on how to write good questions, and it is linked from both "Unclear what you are asking" and "Too Broad." Directing new users into the Help Center is a good thing.

  4. If the OP genuinely wants specific guidance on how to make their question better, they can always ask, either in the comments or on meta. They almost always get good feedback if they don't rant.

  5. The vast majority of vague, underspecified, lazy questions fall neatly into the "Unclear What you are Asking" or "Too Broad" categories anyway.

In short, those who think changing four words in a close reason (or bolding certain words for emphasis) will solve closing problems are barking up the wrong tree. It's more about respecting people's time, and guiding (willing) folks to the resources that they need to make their questions better.

I don't think there is a better name for "Unclear what you are asking." The close reason is general in nature, and is meant to cover a number of specific problems that questions can have. Changing a few words isn't going to produce instant enlightenment for anyone.

If you want to provide specific guidance to the OP regarding your close vote, you will now have to post a comment with your rationalization. I argue that this is better than any boilerplate verbiage you might provide in a close reason title.

I do agree that it was convenient to stamp questions with "Must demonstrate a minimal understanding." But consider this:

  1. The "must demonstrate minimal understanding" close reason was widely mis-interpreted to mean "must demonstrate minimal effort," which is not the same thing at all.

  2. Most questions never got rehabilitated, even with the specific close reasons. The OP often spent more time and effort arguing with you than they spent on making their question better.

  3. There is now plenty of excellent guidance in the help center on how to write good questions, and it is linked from both "Unclear what you are asking" and "Too Broad." Directing new users into the Help Center is a good thing.

  4. If the OP genuinely wants specific guidance on how to make their question better, they can always ask, either in the comments or on meta. They almost always get good feedback if they don't rant.

  5. The vast majority of vague, underspecified, lazy questions fall neatly into the "Unclear What you are Asking" or "Too Broad" categories anyway.

In short, changing four words in a close reason isn't going to solve closing problems, no matter how good the words are. It's better to direct folks to a comprehensive resource for writing better questions, and providing specific guidance when needed. This respects peoples time, and focuses their attention on the folks who genuinely want help.

3 added 148 characters in body
source | link

I don't think there is a better name for "Unclear what you are asking." The close reason is general in nature, and is meant to cover a number of specific problems withthat questions can have. Changing a few words isn't going to produce instant enlightenment for anyone.

If you want to provide specific guidance to the OP regarding your close vote, you will now have to post a comment with your rationalization. I argue that this is better than any boilerplate verbiage you might provide in a close reason title.

I do agree that it was convenient to stamp questions with "Must demonstrate a minimal understanding." But consider this:

  1. Most questions never got rehabilitated, even with the specific close reasons. The OP often spent more time and effort arguing with you than they spent on making their question better.

  2. There is now plenty of excellent guidance in the help center on how to write good questions, and it is linked from both "Unclear what you are asking" and "Too Broad." Directing new users into the Help Center is a good thing.

  3. If the OP genuinely wants specific guidance on how to make their question better, they can always ask, either in the comments or on meta. They almost always get good feedback if they don't rant.

  4. The vast majority of vague, underspecified, lazy questions fall neatly into the "Unclear What you are Asking" or "Too Broad" categories anyway.

  1. The "must demonstrate minimal understanding" close reason was widely mis-interpreted to mean "must demonstrate minimal effort," which is not the same thing at all.

  2. Most questions never got rehabilitated, even with the specific close reasons. The OP often spent more time and effort arguing with you than they spent on making their question better.

  3. There is now plenty of excellent guidance in the help center on how to write good questions, and it is linked from both "Unclear what you are asking" and "Too Broad." Directing new users into the Help Center is a good thing.

  4. If the OP genuinely wants specific guidance on how to make their question better, they can always ask, either in the comments or on meta. They almost always get good feedback if they don't rant.

  5. The vast majority of vague, underspecified, lazy questions fall neatly into the "Unclear What you are Asking" or "Too Broad" categories anyway.

In short, those who think changing four words in a close reason (or bolding certain words for emphasis) will solve closing problems are barking up the wrong tree. It's more about respecting people's time, and guiding (willing) folks to the resources that they need to make their questions better.

I don't think there is a better name for "Unclear what you are asking." The close reason is general in nature, and is meant to cover a number of problems with questions. Changing a few words isn't going to produce instant enlightenment.

If you want to provide specific guidance to the OP regarding your close vote, you will now have to post a comment with your rationalization. I argue that this is better than any boilerplate verbiage you might provide in a close reason title.

I do agree that it was convenient to stamp questions with "Must demonstrate a minimal understanding." But consider this:

  1. Most questions never got rehabilitated, even with the specific close reasons. The OP often spent more time and effort arguing with you than they spent on making their question better.

  2. There is now plenty of excellent guidance in the help center on how to write good questions, and it is linked from both "Unclear what you are asking" and "Too Broad." Directing new users into the Help Center is a good thing.

  3. If the OP genuinely wants specific guidance on how to make their question better, they can always ask, either in the comments or on meta. They almost always get good feedback if they don't rant.

  4. The vast majority of vague, underspecified, lazy questions fall neatly into the "Unclear What you are Asking" or "Too Broad" categories anyway.

I don't think there is a better name for "Unclear what you are asking." The close reason is general in nature, and is meant to cover a number of specific problems that questions can have. Changing a few words isn't going to produce instant enlightenment for anyone.

If you want to provide specific guidance to the OP regarding your close vote, you will now have to post a comment with your rationalization. I argue that this is better than any boilerplate verbiage you might provide in a close reason title.

I do agree that it was convenient to stamp questions with "Must demonstrate a minimal understanding." But consider this:

  1. The "must demonstrate minimal understanding" close reason was widely mis-interpreted to mean "must demonstrate minimal effort," which is not the same thing at all.

  2. Most questions never got rehabilitated, even with the specific close reasons. The OP often spent more time and effort arguing with you than they spent on making their question better.

  3. There is now plenty of excellent guidance in the help center on how to write good questions, and it is linked from both "Unclear what you are asking" and "Too Broad." Directing new users into the Help Center is a good thing.

  4. If the OP genuinely wants specific guidance on how to make their question better, they can always ask, either in the comments or on meta. They almost always get good feedback if they don't rant.

  5. The vast majority of vague, underspecified, lazy questions fall neatly into the "Unclear What you are Asking" or "Too Broad" categories anyway.

In short, those who think changing four words in a close reason (or bolding certain words for emphasis) will solve closing problems are barking up the wrong tree. It's more about respecting people's time, and guiding (willing) folks to the resources that they need to make their questions better.

2 added 148 characters in body
source | link

I don't think there is a better name for "Unclear what you are asking." The close reason is general in nature, and is meant to cover a number of problems with questions. Changing a few words isn't going to produce instant enlightenment.

If you want to provide specific guidance to the OP regarding your close vote, you will now have to post a comment with your rationalization. I argue that this is better than any boilerplate verbiage you might provide in a close reason title.

I do agree that it was convenient to stamp questions with "Must demonstrate a minimal understanding." But consider this:

  1. Most questions never got rehabilitated, even with the specific close reasons. The OP often spent more time and effort arguing with you than they spent on making their question better.

  2. There is now plenty of excellent guidance in the help center on how to write good questions, and it is linked from both "Unclear what you are asking" and "Too Broad." Directing new users into the Help Center is a good thing.

  3. If the OP genuinely wants specific guidance on how to make their question better, they can always ask, either in the comments or on meta. They almost always get good feedback if they don't rant.

  4. The vast majority of vague, underspecified, lazy questions fall neatly into the "Unclear What you are Asking" or "Too Broad" categories anyway.

If you want to provide specific guidance to the OP regarding your close vote, you will now have to post a comment with your rationalization.

I do agree that it was convenient to stamp questions with "Must demonstrate a minimal understanding." But consider this:

  1. Most questions never got rehabilitated, even with the specific close reasons. The OP often spent more time and effort arguing with you than they spent on making their question better.

  2. There is now plenty of excellent guidance in the help center on how to write good questions, and it is linked from both "Unclear what you are asking" and "Too Broad." Directing new users into the Help Center is a good thing.

  3. If the OP genuinely wants specific guidance on how to make their question better, they can always ask, either in the comments or on meta. They almost always get good feedback if they don't rant.

  4. The vast majority of vague, underspecified, lazy questions fall neatly into the "Unclear What you are Asking" or "Too Broad" categories anyway.

I don't think there is a better name for "Unclear what you are asking." The close reason is general in nature, and is meant to cover a number of problems with questions. Changing a few words isn't going to produce instant enlightenment.

If you want to provide specific guidance to the OP regarding your close vote, you will now have to post a comment with your rationalization. I argue that this is better than any boilerplate verbiage you might provide in a close reason title.

I do agree that it was convenient to stamp questions with "Must demonstrate a minimal understanding." But consider this:

  1. Most questions never got rehabilitated, even with the specific close reasons. The OP often spent more time and effort arguing with you than they spent on making their question better.

  2. There is now plenty of excellent guidance in the help center on how to write good questions, and it is linked from both "Unclear what you are asking" and "Too Broad." Directing new users into the Help Center is a good thing.

  3. If the OP genuinely wants specific guidance on how to make their question better, they can always ask, either in the comments or on meta. They almost always get good feedback if they don't rant.

  4. The vast majority of vague, underspecified, lazy questions fall neatly into the "Unclear What you are Asking" or "Too Broad" categories anyway.

1
source | link