Timeline for We already have Electronics and Robotics
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 3, 2017 at 8:40 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://discuss.area51.stackexchange.com/ with https://area51.meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| May 18, 2011 at 10:20 | comment | added | Kortuk | @AdamDavis, we are relatively laid back, if you look at our closed questions, which it seems you have, we really have very few closed and only maybe 1 that was a decent robotics question in the last 2-3 months but could not have been more outside of electronics. We mostly just close shopping and very very poorly written questions that there is no way to even guess what is being asked. | |
| May 18, 2011 at 9:50 | comment | added | Adam Davis | Looking over the recently closed questions, though, I'm not sure that it matters as a practical issue. And, of course, if I really wanted to have a hand in moving the site in the direction I think is best, I should spend more time on it. Anyway, something to consider when you are deciding whether to close a question or not. In the early stages it pays to be more inclusive, and then become more strict as the site gains in popularity. | |
| May 18, 2011 at 9:48 | comment | added | Adam Davis | Blindly adhering to the strictest interpretation of "electronics" will only push people away. It's appropriate for sites like SO that get thousands of questions a day, but for a low volume site that's still starting out it may be more appropriate to pull back on the moderating and let things play out a little bit, especially in areas where there's obvious cross over, and a good chance that experts and hobbyists we attract now will be more than happy to settle in a new place once it's opened for them. | |
| May 18, 2011 at 9:46 | comment | added | Adam Davis | @Kortuk I do not see things as so bleakly black and white. It's going to take time for the robotics site to gain enough followers, commitments, and launch. That's fine. The decision to redefine electronics needed to happen early enough that robotics could be defined as not a duplicate. That is also fine. There now remains a gap of time in between the two. I suggest one way to fill the gap, and you disagree, despite saying that you wish there was a place for them, and that you aren't sure the change was right. Guess what? There's a place for them right here, and they can be migrated. | |
| May 18, 2011 at 7:16 | comment | added | Kortuk | @Adam, The site has had a name change and we agreed to stop housing robotics. Honestly, without the professionals in robotics on the site most people ask questions that are just simply, "Tell me how to do this." More often, "Tell me how to use this software suite." | |
| May 18, 2011 at 6:40 | comment | added | Adam Davis | @Kortuk "For now I will continue closing the questions" That's too bad. | |
| May 10, 2011 at 0:49 | comment | added | Kortuk | @AdamDavis, they are already moved and the site has been changed. The way the site was going robotics experts were not joining up, as was noted. I think that unless the robotics community here had decided to come have a serious go at it we were stagnant. This community does not really have the number needed to build up a full site either. For now I will continue closing the questions, as I have made the point before. Consumer electronics questions do not have a home either, but we cannot keep them for that reason alone. We will end up building up hundreds of questions. | |
| May 10, 2011 at 0:41 | comment | added | Adam Davis | @Kortuk I wouldn't have closed the questions, since they have no place to go. I'd suggest that they be allowed and migrated when the robotics site starts up. If it doesn't start up, it's ok to have robotics questions on the electronics site long term, even though we've changed the name. | |
| May 10, 2011 at 0:09 | comment | added | Kortuk | @AdamDavis, well, I wish a site had formed from this. I keep closing pure robotics questions and people are frustrated they have nowhere to go. I am not sure removing robotics was a god choice, but life will continue. | |
| Apr 19, 2011 at 2:06 | comment | added | user36009 | Robotics today is almost to where the original Apple was in the 1970's. There needs to be a place for hobbyist to go. This group isn't going to be it so it should stay in the Electronic name too. | |
| Mar 16, 2011 at 12:53 | comment | added | Kortuk | This has been shared on the E&R site also. | |
| Mar 4, 2011 at 17:08 | history | edited | Adam Davis | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 190 characters in body
|
| Mar 4, 2011 at 16:51 | history | answered | Adam Davis | CC BY-SA 2.5 |