5

From what I see, Not Constructive isn't a valid close reason because meta is for debate.

On the other hand, we get many vague/incomplete/what-the-hell-is-the-OP-trying-to-tell-us questions like this one that probably need closing as NARQ. I see a couple such questions every week (there probably are many more). NC is used as a proxy to close these questions.

So, could we have NARQ on meta? It would be even better if NC was removed.

Note: The post initially asked for NC to be removed as well. On further thought, I've removed that bit.

Improve this question
11
  • 4
    Actually, Meta is about the only place where "Not constructive" actually means "not constructive".
    – Bart
    Commented May 17, 2013 at 17:54
  • 1) It seems like this is two requests, remove NC and add NARQ. Do they need to be done in conjunction? If not, they should probably be in two different posts. 2) Not constructive in MSO is generally not constructive in the general sense, whereas on SO it has a bit of a specialized definition. On MSO it's not for any subjective/polling question, it's for trolling or questions where the intent is clearly not to generate a helpful answer. That seems appropriate, and seems to be generally used appropriately (barring occasional exceptions).
    – Servy
    Commented May 17, 2013 at 17:55
  • @Bart: Well, that too. But IMO many of the times NC is used where the contstructiveness is debatable -- an objectively not constructive post is where there is no goal in sight but to malign a few users or the site.
    – Manishearth
    Commented May 17, 2013 at 17:56
  • Related btw: meta.stackexchange.com/questions/170984/…
    – Bart
    Commented May 17, 2013 at 17:57
  • @Servy: Well, the NC thing was an afterthought, mainly sprouting from my opinion that NARQ is much more useful than NC on meta.
    – Manishearth
    Commented May 17, 2013 at 17:57
  • Funny, I saw that exact link yesterday, and thought, "Where is the 'Not a Real Question' option when you need it?"
    – LittleBobbyTables - Au Revoir
    Commented May 17, 2013 at 18:00
  • Thinking about the Meta application of either close reason, I feel it's a bit "six of one, half a dozen of the other". Does it ultimately really matter?
    – Bart
    Commented May 17, 2013 at 18:11
  • @Bart: That too. Still, I don't like hitting people with an NC ("Not Constructive" is slightly insulting when the question is constructive) when the question is just hard to decipher.
    – Manishearth
    Commented May 17, 2013 at 18:13
  • @Manishearth If it's that hard to decipher then it's either NARQ or NC until it's fixed.
    – Dave Newton
    Commented May 17, 2013 at 18:26
  • @DaveNewton: Exactly. Preferably NARQ.
    – Manishearth
    Commented May 17, 2013 at 18:27
  • 1
    I don't know who voted to close this as a duplicate of the question I linked but, even though it's somewhat related, it is certainly not a duplicate.
    – Bart
    Commented May 17, 2013 at 20:50

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
2

Questions are "not constructive" for many reasons–there's the part before the conjunction, too:

We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or specific expertise [...]

IMO that doesn't imply that there's no possibility of debate. I think answerers on MSO try to use facts and references when applicable, and specific expertise about SO/MSO in general.

I'm somewhat sympathetic to your concern regarding the precise verbiage as it applies to MSO, but it's overridden by the "spirit of the law".

Improve this answer
3
  • Well, it's perfectly OK to have opinion-based (not fact-based) posts on MSO. I see what you mean, though..
    – Manishearth
    Commented May 17, 2013 at 18:05
  • @Manishearth Agreed, although I'd lump that under "specific expertise", where the expertise is meta in nature.
    – Dave Newton
    Commented May 17, 2013 at 18:06
  • Anyway, updated q to remove the NC bit.
    – Manishearth
    Commented May 17, 2013 at 18:11
1

I think because we include support questions. If a user asks something vague, doesn't research their question first, is just complaining, etc., we have more of an obligation to help them than if they ask on SO. It's a bit different of a culture for that reason.

In particular the "complaints" drive the point. We usually can tease out a legitimate concern and address it and even retain the user, even though the complaint started as obviously NARQ. Harder to do that if we close right away.

Improve this answer
2
  • Note that "not a real question" is available on other meta sites
    – ChrisF Mod
    Commented May 17, 2013 at 18:14
  • 1
    @ChrisF I have no idea why the inconsistency between this / other metas, then.
    – djechlin
    Commented May 17, 2013 at 18:16

You must log in to answer this question.

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