What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 127 Stack Exchange communities.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe SO needs to revisit its policy concerning how moderators can act. In the past few months I've noticed that nearly half of the very useful, very relevant questions I've come across via Google search have been closed for being "irrelevant," "not constructive," etc., etc.

Here's a question for you: if a question is closed for being "Not constructive," then why do so many people find it in Google and flock to it for answers?

Here's an excellent example: Cross-browser jquery ajax history with window.history.pushState and fallback

A very useful, well-constructed question with a couple great answers and excellent examples that I'll be using once I'm done with this rant. Yet it is closed as "not constructive."

How is a question that deals with exactly the problem I'm trying to solve today, and has answers that have exposed me to techniques I wasn't aware of, "not constructive"?

EDIT:

Here's another example: STORM Cloud Servers — Anybody Used Them? Any Reviews and/or Advice?

I asked that question previous to being aware that ServerFault existed. Now, aware that any questions about infrastructure should be posted to SeverFault, I can see why this question is 'off-topic' for SO. But, rather than move the question to SF, or even post a comment about the correct course of action, it's closed with no useful explanation.

This doesn't prevent the question from being found via Google though, which makes me wonder what the point of 'closing' questions is in the first place, it simply sends an ambigous message to the OP that they've done something 'off-topic'.

Perhaps that problem isn't so much zealotry amongst the ranks of the mods as much as the moderation procedure, as it currently exists, is not constructive due to the fact that it provides no useful error messages.

share|improve this question

closed as not constructive by Ben Brocka, hims056, Austin Henley, Lucifer, Diago Apr 11 '13 at 7:08

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

20  
If you think there is a general problem with moderation, post about that (and include more than just one example). If you just want this question to be opened, post about that, and focus on the merits of the question. All the anger / ranting / accusation just distracts from your point. –  jadarnel27 Apr 10 '13 at 21:08
9  
Stack Overflow is not really the place to get "exposed to techniques you weren't aware of", it's a place to get solutions to specific programming problems. If that also exposes you to techniques you weren't aware of, that's great, but it's not the site's primary goal. –  Yannis Apr 10 '13 at 21:11
6  
Everyone flocks to Youtube to watch silly videos and leave inane, bigoted comments that have turned the internet into a cesspool. Clearly this is because Youtube is the most productive use of their time. –  Asad Apr 10 '13 at 21:11
8  
1) Can you give more than one example of this, so we can figure out exactly what your problem is? 2) The question you linked was closed nearly a year ago, and the person who closed it isn't even a moderator anymore, so perhaps a more current example would be useful? 3) Moderators are humans--we can make mistakes. If you find a question you think was closed by mistake, you can always flag it for moderator attention and explain. –  WendiKidd Apr 10 '13 at 21:12
10  
On the flip side, this is a question that's obviously received a huge number of views (though not a huge number of upvotes) and is barely readable. If it's going to attract that degree of traffic, perhaps someone should edit it so that you can read the thing (I'd do it myself, but I don't trust my own ability to understand what's being said). –  Ben Barden Apr 10 '13 at 21:17
2  
The team knows that "not constructive" is not ideal wording for what they mean to express, and changes are in the works. The short answer for you is that the close reason might better be written as "this is not necessarily a bad question, but it doesn't align with our site's philosophy." –  Pops Apr 10 '13 at 21:17
7  
@AJB I can't imagine where you got the idea that SO is for exposing you to new techniques. It's for helping people with their programming problems; that part isn't really in dispute –  Michael Mrozek Apr 10 '13 at 21:22
3  
@RobertHarvey oh, sure. I'm just trying to explain the logic - "It's been viewed a whole bunch of times" => "It's helped a whole bunch of people (including the OP" => "It's obviously an awesome question" => "Why has it been closed?" => "Obviously there is something wrong with the mods". I personally find some of the connections a bit tenuous, but I can see where the thought comes from. –  Ben Barden Apr 10 '13 at 21:22
1  
Ben Barden: Yes, the question is very popular. I don't why you feel that it's 'unreadable'. I read it just fine. And it was exactly the same problem I was trying to solve today. This is common occurance on SO anymore. I literally don't have the time to sort through every SO question I've come across that falls into this same cateogry. –  AJB Apr 10 '13 at 21:22
1  
@Asad that's certainly a lot more readable - though I'm certainly not the one to tell you if you got it right. –  Ben Barden Apr 10 '13 at 21:25
10  
@AJB but you do have time to come here and call for a general overhaul of the mod system based on a single, outdated example? Also, I believe that this is the community as a whole following your initial request, and correcting you. –  Ben Barden Apr 10 '13 at 21:36
8  
The point, of course, being that the closure in no way prevented you from getting help. –  Robert Harvey Apr 10 '13 at 21:45
6  
I'm reopening this question with minor edits for constructiveness. This isn't about Lasse or any other moderator or close-voting user, and it's certainly not about the USSR. –  Anna Lear Apr 10 '13 at 22:05
4  
The Stack Exchange network of sites do not exist to expose you, @AJB, to new ideas. These sites are not about you. Get over yourself. –  Jack Maney Apr 10 '13 at 22:14
5  
@AJB - People who wish to ask useful, well-researched questions and who want to give detailed, useful answers to those questions ("useful" as per the FAQ). Notice that this list of people does not solely consist of you. –  Jack Maney Apr 10 '13 at 22:16
show 21 more comments

3 Answers

That question received five moderator flags on four link-only answers that moderators subsequently deleted. I imagine that contributed to the decision to close it as Not Constructive. We can't babysit these things forever, you know.

As to the justification for the closure, the OP is asking for examples, automatically making the question "List All the Things." A classic example of Not Constructive.

In any case, some community members have graciously taken a bit of time out of their day to edit the question to make it more constructive, so I cast a reopen vote, put the "insufficient explanation" banner on it, and protected it so that only users with 10 reputation or more can post new answers.


OK, I saw the new example you posted, and it seems pretty clear that you have a basic misunderstanding of what Stack Exchange is all about.

There are any number of sites where people can go to discuss shopping recommendations. Stack Exchange is not one of those places. In an effort to improve the signal-to-noise ratio and do our small part to improve the Internet, we've decided, as a community, to exclude whole categories of popular, but unproductive practices. We've chosen to give our sites a singular focus, and require all contributors to do the same. If that means that some material is excluded to further that end, then so be it.

The new question you linked is neither constructive, nor on-topic for Stack Overflow. It was closed accordingly.

The close reasons that are placed onto closed questions are deliberately somewhat ambiguous. We don't want to, nor should we have to, write a detailed explanation every time a question is closed. There is ample information, both here and on the main site, for users to quickly become productive without running afoul of the rules.

share|improve this answer
    
Answer updated, in response to your edit. –  Robert Harvey Apr 10 '13 at 22:53
    
Why would I go to Amazon.com to seek reliable advice on one of their competitors? Why wouldn't I use a service that I already know is overflowing with reliable, expert opinions? Also, I don't believe I've ever posted anything about how much beer I've consumed or turtles. I can understand you deal with this day-in, day-out, but perhaps you should try to keep your own posts a little more 'on-topic'. –  AJB Apr 10 '13 at 23:41
1  
Edited to satisfy your objections. To find out more about why shopping recommendations are not allowed, please read QA is Hard, Let's Go Shopping! –  Robert Harvey Apr 10 '13 at 23:42
    
And, I really can't help it but, the last paragraph of your post, about 'users quickly becoming productive without running afoul of the rules.' Not gonna lie to you, that really doesn't read so well. I think you might want to start thinking about your users as the only reason your business exists rather than an inconvenience that needs to be trained. –  AJB Apr 10 '13 at 23:43
9  
There's nothing objectionable in the last paragraph. There is no training; new users either figure it out, or they wash out. That's not inconvenient, unfair or cruel; it's just the way it is. Stack Overflow has far too many visitors for us to individually hand-hold each person. –  Robert Harvey Apr 10 '13 at 23:45
1  
+1 for the last paragraph alone. And not only do new users either figure it out or wash out, but if they wash out, there are plenty of other new users to take their place. –  Jack Maney Apr 11 '13 at 0:32
    
@Robertharvey: Wow. I didn't realise that I had to join the Marines to get help with my Javascript problem. Anyhow, this is exhausting. You're right. I've successfully had a poor experience on StackOverflow. You win. –  AJB Apr 11 '13 at 2:07
add comment

“Are there any examples of …” is a bit of a red flag on Stack Exchange. Stack Exchange is not a discussion forum or a link collection, it's a questions and answers site. The question had attracted many answers of the form: “yes, there's an example at URL”. These pseudo-answers are not useful: you have to go off-site and fish for content (they all point to large libraries, not even to a specific hunk of code that actually solves the problem).

On the other hand, the question is a fundamentally good one at the core: it has a precise goal and even an attempt at a solution. I've edited it to fit more into the Stack Exchange way of doing things, and voted to reopen.

Keep in minds that moderators on Stack Overflow handle hundreds of flags per day. They don't have time to babysit each and every post. Anyone on the Internet could have edited the question like I did — yes, even you. (I don't even know anything about the subject matter — I hope I didn't mangle anything.) If you see a poor or ill-fitting but salvageable question, edit it. It's far more useful all around than just complaining about it.

Whatever you think of moderators' actions, there's no call for insults. Keep civil. Be nice.

share|improve this answer
    
Hi @Gilles, I see your point, and I understand why there needs to be some structure. But anymore it seems as though almost every question is "a bit of a red flag on [StackOverflow]". –  AJB Apr 10 '13 at 21:41
7  
@AJB Since there are many questions asked here daily that remain open and obtain useful answers, I disagree with that assessment. Asking for tutorials and examples is outside the site scope, and most questions of this sort are closed. Fortunately, this wasn't a "Tutorial please" question per se, only phrased as one, so it was edited and reopened. –  Asad Apr 10 '13 at 21:45
add comment

Agreed.

There should be more help in the way of regurgitating these questions into a queue where they can be deleted and thus stop future users coming in with false expectations or views askew of what questions should be left open.

That no other user has wanted to fix up the question into a manner less inclined invariably leads other users to complain about the question being closed instead of spending a minute or two fixing it up into something that isn't just asking for a grab bag of whatchadongs.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .
http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/176045/stack-overflow-moderators-are-making-so-a-pain-to-use/176053
meta.stackexchange.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2014-23
106326
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:MD3J3QFUE2IEUF36UEY6RMECW7CNZJA3
<urn:uuid:70988423-a23f-4a6d-9a60-9066c3c52c83>
2014-07-12T20:48:25Z
198.252.206.16
sha1:5LN72X6675Y2H42LTKDFDTD7Z2O4YDO7
<urn:uuid:d5614612-808f-4dc9-aa93-ccbc0b68f746>
http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/176045/stack-overflow-moderators-are-making-so-a-pain-to-use/176053
response
<urn:uuid:4c359580-7b83-44a9-a8e4-fe44aba693b9>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-180-212-248.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2014-23
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web with URLs provided by Blekko for July 2014
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf