This question already has an answer here:

I just spent ten minutes adjusting this question trying to discover why it was triggering "This question does not meet our quality standards."

It turned out to be the title, which I had to make longer first and then edit back to what I wanted.

I've come across this a lot lately. The "fixes" turned out to be silly things such as making the question longer.

  1. There error message gave me no hint as to what to fix.
  2. The title is fine. It doesn't need fixing. The quality checker is too strict.
  3. If I can get around it by making silly "fixes", there is no point.

Let's remove this until it works. At a minimum the error message should describe the problem.

(I know some people here wouldn't classify this as a "bug" but there is no "utterly broken" tag.)

Here is a constructive idea: dubious questions should be put to humans to approve, much as edits are for new users.

marked as duplicate by kiamlaluno, hims056, Martijn Pieters, Hugo Dozois, Azik Oct 1 '13 at 13:51

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • 8
    Sure the quality filter might trip up every now and then on valid posts... But what about all the times it works correctly and blocks low quality stuff? Disabling it is a bad idea... – Lix May 5 '13 at 12:33
  • 4
    I believe it is better to be strict than to be tolerable. See this answer to a faq question. – Alvin Wong May 5 '13 at 12:37
  • @Yannis Originally as it is now: "strerror_r has no effect". Short and descriptive, seems fine to me. – spraff May 5 '13 at 12:41
  • @Lix it happens to me a LOT, and I'm pretty confident I'm not posting crap. – spraff May 5 '13 at 12:41
  • 1
    I wonder if the quality filter has been taught about giving a big penalty to questions tagged [C] with a lump of C++ code in them. (/snark). – Mat May 5 '13 at 12:48
  • 2
    I'm not saying you're posting crap... But you should be aware that a filter is working on preventing what it perceives to be low quality... I would have titled that post as "Why does strerror_r have no effect?". – Lix May 5 '13 at 12:48
  • 1
    You might but I don't and there is nothing wrong with that. You can't require people to have a certain rigid style, you can require people to have a clear and meaningful style. The filter fails at this. – spraff May 5 '13 at 13:00
  • @Mat the question is about a C API -- who cares if other languages slip in for secondary reasons? The tag is accurate for the relevant part of the post. – spraff May 5 '13 at 13:02
  • @spraff: I'm not the one asking for help about an API. You want the best help possible - make your question as precise as possible. (I agree the point is moot in this particular case - it's neither standard C nor C++ anyway.) – Mat May 5 '13 at 13:11
  • 2
    I've never had this problem in several years of posting. Since titles cannot contain backticks, I'd have titled it Function 'strerror_r' has no effect or similar, so that there's an initial cap to the question. I'd be in favour of better errors though, but I think that's a deliberate design decision. – halfer May 5 '13 at 13:50

I have posted a lot of answers and questions on Stack Exchange sites and never ran into this problem. Perhaps if you are hitting it a lot, you should consider... improving the overall quality of your content?

In this case, the original title strerror_r has no effect does not communicate what the question is about. How is someone searching for a similar error going to find it? Also, it's not even titled as a question.

Keep in mind questions here are not exclusively intended for just the asker to get an answer to but also the rest of the world to be able to find.

From the About page for StackOveflow:

With your help, we're working together to build a library of detailed answers to every question about programming.

  • 2
    strerror_r has no effect communicates EXACTLY what the question is about. Why should it be titled as a question? Someone searching for strerror_r will come across it, and the search engine looks into the body for clarifying detail. I reject the premise. – spraff May 5 '13 at 13:40
  • 7
    @spraff from your posted code and output it seems much more accurate to say, strerror_r does not return any value when passed 0 rather than "no effect." Is the method not being called at all? Is the method being called and exiting early? Is the method being called incorrectly? "No effect" can mean a loooot of different things, which is why it is to me a pretty poor title. – enderland May 5 '13 at 13:44
  • 1
    @spr - searching for only strerror_r will return a lot of results. It's an extremely broad search term. Searching for just the name of a function or utility will usually give documentation results and not specifically errors or troubleshooting options... For that you'd have to specify a little bit more in your search terms... Simply having the relevant function/util name in the title is just not enough... – Lix May 5 '13 at 14:08
  • 4
    @spr- Also, as you are entitled to your opinions - so are we. Your tone is getting a little harsh and I fear this "discussion" will start having more and more bolded and CAPITAL LETTERS... You posted this issue on meta to get feedback from other users - you might not like their opinions - but they are a result of your posting here. No one is attacking you personally or claiming that you are posting junk on the site... – Lix May 5 '13 at 14:10
  • 9
    @spraff "Why should it be titled as a question?"...you've clicked a button entitled "Ask Question", on a Question & Answer site, as you have a question that you would like answered; why should it not be titled as a question? – Clive May 5 '13 at 14:13
  • 1
    Titles don't need to be questions. The body needs to contain a question; the title describes the subject of that question. Starting every title with interrogative words uses up space in search results and decreases readability. See also Would the Stack Exchange network be better if titles contained complete grammatical questions? @Clive – Josh Caswell May 5 '13 at 19:46
  • @Josh Looks like opinion is fairly split on the matter from that linked post. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the title of a question on a Q+A site to be an actual question, but yes, it doesn't look like it's been set in stone anywhere either way – Clive May 5 '13 at 20:26
  • 2
    @JoshCaswell this might be true, but, considering people are going to browse titles to determine what the question is and whether to answer it, it makes sense to make their lives easier than forcing them to open up completely ambiguous "questions" to see what the question is actually about given the title not being descriptive at all. – enderland May 6 '13 at 12:19
  • @enderland it has nothing to do with zero, that would be misleading. Everyone else except Josh: if we could understand the issue from the title, we wouldn't need a body -- the title only needs to (and only ought to) indicate the problem roughly. Terse titles are good, they're there to be scanned (to ask oneself "do I know anything about this, is it worth reading more?") – spraff May 6 '13 at 20:36
  • And @Lix, from the responses and downvotes I do feel under attack. It's as if speaking against the status quo is an unwelcome act. Makes me wonder what the point of Meta is. – spraff May 6 '13 at 20:38
  • @spraff downvotes on meta mean "I disagree" rather than anything else. Your post receiving downvotes means lots of people disagree with this suggestion. – enderland May 6 '13 at 21:33
  • @spr - I can't see this linked anywhere in this post - perhaps it will shed some light on the mystery that is meta. – Lix May 6 '13 at 22:03
  • @enderland So I will get low rep unless I pander to the established community? This seems like a perverse incentive system, diametrically opposed to the purpose of meta. – spraff May 7 '13 at 8:19
  • @spraff I don't know if you realize this but for you to lose reputation on a post you need more than 5x as many downvotes as upvotes (for answers) and 2.5x as many for questions. Your suggestion here was obviously disagreed with (currently at -13) yet only resulted in -14 reputation. – enderland May 7 '13 at 11:32
  • The quantity of rep doesn't matter much, I think. The message this system sends out is counter-productive. The impression I get is: "if you don't agree with us, bugger off" any my reaction is: "why am I bothering?" – spraff May 7 '13 at 15:56

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