5

Proposal: Sexuality

The description of the proposal is:

Proposed Q&A site for educators and professionals to discuss human sexuality.

However none of the questions I see as upvoted > 10 is one that would be of interest or use to those people. They're all too elementary:

  • Where actually is that G-Spot?
  • How can I succesfully deal with erectile dysfunction?
  • For how long can I continue to have sex when pregnant?
  • Will washing myself very carefully after sex protect me from STDs?
  • Is it possible for [a man to catch a woman's yeast infection]?
  • I forgot to put a condom on before my girlfriend and I had intercourse last night. Then I pulled out and put one on. Could she still get pregnant?
  • What are the nutrition facts of semen? (Girlfriend is on a diet)
  • I'm new to sex toys. What is a good vibrator to start with?
  • My penis is perfectly normal when erect, but when flaccid it can get embarrassingly tiny. Is this normal?

The description seems to imply that educators and professionals would be the ones asking questions, not laymen. Every one of these is easily answerable with 30 minutes of web search by laymen.

How do I know? Many of these are common knowledge at this point. Most of my friends could give a somewhat reasonable answer to each of these questions. Maybe an expert would give a better answer, but then the site wouldn't be for those experts - they'd just be here rendering their services.

2
  • I wish there were some measures of expert retention on the other sites that have left beta. Look at those who have committed, only 5.6% are academics or experts, and of that number how many have potentially overdeclared their status? I understand the philosophy of the 2.0 sites, and I agree that aiming high is necessary, but once it all boils down to it, are the experts in it for the duration?
    – jonsca
    Jan 9, 2012 at 19:44
  • related: discuss.area51.stackexchange.com/questions/3762/…
    – Verbeia
    Jan 12, 2012 at 5:26

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
7

It's not all that unusual to have a disconnect between the expertise level of the 'example questions' and the way the site itself will be conducted. But as long as the proposal sets some expectations about the scope of the site, that's fulfills a big part of its purpose. The rest can be worked out in the early beta.

The description is accurate though — You are building a site for experts. There are likely a lot of laymen building this site, and that's always a concern (see, No Artificial Intelligence in Area 51). Your concerns are a heavy endorsement for heavy moderation during the early beta. You can read about that justification in Asking the First Questions:

It has long been established that no question is too entry-level nor too basic. Everyone is welcome. But, in these earliest days, we are DESIGNING a site for experts. To attract experts, you need a site where people are asking very interesting and challenging questions, not the basic questions found on every other Q&A site. Remember, the pro sites WILL attract the enthusiasts, but not the other way around!

The earliest questions on a site will set the tone and topic of the site for a long time.

You must log in to answer this question.

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