Timeline for What happened to the "You're Just Lazy" close vote reason?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 20, 2017 at 10:31 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.stackexchange.com/ with https://meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Apr 24, 2014 at 14:01 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Migration of MSO links to MSE links
|
|
| Feb 21, 2014 at 6:20 | comment | added | bjb568 | "I want you to code something with these requirements: A, B, C" That is too broad, because a good answer would explain what each thing command did, so the answer would be as long as a copy-paste of the entire manual and related resources. A question asked many times before: There are times when searching doesn't work, when you don't know the correct wording for example. And the alternate wording can be a very useful duplicate sign-post. | |
| Jan 21, 2014 at 1:43 | comment | added | PM 77-1 | @Shog9 - I have read your special post about the reasons behind these changes and I'm not convinced. At this time let's just agree to disagree. | |
| Jan 21, 2014 at 1:36 | comment | added | Hovercraft Full Of Eels | Like this guy here who has posted two same posts of the same homework assignment, neither showing any evidence of effort and both essentially asking for others to pass along some code. Ugh. | |
| Jan 20, 2014 at 23:28 | comment | added | itsjeyd | @PM77-1 "It, however, seems that SO community finds some benefit in becoming do my homework for me kind of place. What such benefit might actually be is beyond my comprehension." Well, for one thing, it's that delicious rep... | |
| Jan 20, 2014 at 0:36 | comment | added | Shog9 | Exactly. By their posts ye shall know them... So can we maybe just cut to the chase and focus on judging posts instead of people? | |
| Jan 19, 2014 at 23:42 | comment | added | PM 77-1 |
@Shog9 - In my view UserA and UserB wouldn't post their questions the sane way. One will post the question, results of some research, and, possibly, even an attempt to solve the problem. Another will (at best) just re-state his/her "TO DO"s with some pathetic explanations that, the answer is required immediately and, since they already spent more than a second of their precious time trying to work on it, would someone supply the solution.
|
|
| Jan 18, 2014 at 17:44 | comment | added | Shog9 | Assuming you can even do this reliably (which is a pretty good trick on its own, at least up until you've seen a few different questions from someone), what would you do with that information? A given question - and its answers - may be read and used by many, many more people who are doing the research, finding the question via Google - assuming the question (and answers) are useful to them, would you still remove it just to punish the asker? All else being equal, would you remove a question from UserA while permitting a question from UserB simply because of A's attitude toward learning? | |
| Jan 18, 2014 at 17:16 | comment | added | PM 77-1 | @Shog9 - My point was to differentiate between people who want to solve a problem but lack necessary knowledge and/or skills and those who just want the answer to satisfy some requirement and do not care about "how" and "why". | |
| Jan 18, 2014 at 17:07 | comment | added | Shog9 | "these people" are not an undifferentiated mass. Some of them are destroying SO; others are its future. If you find a harmful question and can't find a close reason that fits, bring it up for discussion here on meta - tag it discussion specific-question close-reasons. | |
| Jan 18, 2014 at 17:05 | history | edited | Shog9 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Still don't get folks' preoccupation with using code formatting for stuff that isn't in any way code. There's specialized markup available for other concepts if you *really* need to mark it up somehow.
|
| Jan 18, 2014 at 16:58 | history | edited | PM 77-1 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 25 characters in body
|
| Jan 18, 2014 at 16:32 | history | answered | PM 77-1 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |