The description was originally:
Proposed Q&A site for genealogy enthusiasts, family historians, professional genealogists, and serious amateurs.
The description was changed to:
Proposed Q&A site for genealogists who study families by the tracing of their lineages and history.
Robert gave these reasons for changing the description:
During our 45% evaluation, we tighten up and finalize the description readying it for the FAQ and final launch. We often pull out these enumerations to lose the redundancy and wordiness (useful early on; not so much later). That list of audiences pretty much said "all genealogists". It's like saying "Programmers: A site for beginning programmers, expert programmers, hobbyist programmers, and anyone interested in programming." We typically tighten that all up for the opening FAQ.
I do appreciate that Robert and the other moderators are encouraged by our genealogical community's initiative in getting this Q&A site going, and have taken an interest to help us.
However, as I noted earlier in my comments, I feel this description change is in the wrong direction.
I looked through all the Stack Exchange descriptions, the launched descriptions and the Beta descriptions
The descriptions are either
Who it is for listing 1 to 6 groups of people. These are 85% of the descriptions
What it is for listing 1 to 3 different topics. These are 5% of the descriptions
A combination of who and what These are the remaining 10%.
Our old description was a (1) Who it is for.
Robert has created something new. He has made for us, a Who it is for combined with a How it is done
So what's wrong with this?
First, the who in Robert's description is "genealogists who study families". That's wrong because the site is for genealogists and family historians. It should not be restricted to genealogists. It should not then be further restricted to genealogists who study families. Genealogists do much more than study families. And family historians do much more than genealogists.
And there's no need to state that it is for genealogists and family historians because the site name is "Genealogy & Family History" and that tells you the "what it is for".
Second, the "how" in Robert's description is not only a rare thing to see in any Stack Exchange description, but it is restrictive and even wrong in its implication that genealogists do their genealogy "by the tracing of their lineages and their history".
The worst part of the new description is that there is nothing there that would attract me to the site or tell me it's the right site for me.
I much preferred our original. It stated explicitly that we want "genealogy enthusiasts" (hey, that's exciting!), family historians (important to make the point again, because this is a more inclusive category than just genealogists), professional genealogists (I really like this because the pros won't come unless they know they're welcome and invited and wanted), and serious amateurs (we want the amateurs to come as well. The word "serious" was debated in another discussion).
This was the description used on the original Genealogy proposal that didn't make it. When Justin created this new proposal, he used it (dropping the confusing words: "transitional" genealogists)
I think it's good. "Genealogy and Family History" says what the site's for, and I feel the description needs to say who it's for. It fits in with the descriptions of the other sites on Stack Exchange.
Originally, I didn't mind Tom's suggestion:
Q&A site for anyone interested in Genealogy or Family History.
but under this further analysis, it just says "For anyone interested" and repeats the title of the site. I do now think it is better to specify the wide range of people we want to include.
With no offence (and actual thanks to Robert for trying to help), I recommend we switch back to the original description.
I now don't really mind the "serious amateurs", but that's still open to debate.