45

I think it's interesting that Robert's post above focus so much on communities - the idea that a site proposal should be made with an existing community in mind is new to me, and none of the site launches I've been part of really had a true community before the site launched. Fundamentally this is a problem because nothing in Area 51 is set up to foster ...


39

This change is now live! I will be monitoring what proposals get removed to make sure things are working as intended.


35

Going through the proposal process quickly appears to be a good signal that a proposed site is viable (because failed proposals evaporate, I don't have statistics on how many failed in private beta after making the 4/4 deadline, but I don't recall there being very many). However, the opposite situation of taking a while to go through the process doesn't ...


25

My plans are to develop an open source Chrome Extension+Firefox addon+ UserScript, that make StackExchange works in Hebrew and other RTL languages. All what it is doing is to override the style and make it RTL. And also translate some basic buttons (Questions, Answers, Ask Question, etc'...) If the team of StackExchange will see the extension and like it. ...


23

I am now assuming the there is an OR statement between the two requirements? When I read the rule I had concluded that it was Bullet One AND Bullet Two. I see http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/87955/magic is still active with 5 followers and 2 questions I see http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/87795/home-ownership is still active with 3 ...


22

In short, this undermines anything other than technology sites. And perhaps that's the point, given the structure of how Stack Overflow currently makes money. The site offers a great opportunity to sciences. The collaborative structure, the protocol keeping questions and answers on topic and useful, and the efforts to circumvent elitism all foster ...


21

Translated to English, this proposal is saying "StackExchange doesn't want to participate in building new communities". The community needs to be ready and Area51 doesn't want to be the tool for people to build a new community. But this is not the way StackExchange flourished. It has successfully build a communities of people around various topics. I think ...


21

This is a reasonable policy to apply to Area51 (although it was done rather abruptly). But Stack Exchange should provide some other process or mechanism to create beta sites that have a good probability of turning into avid and active SE communities even though at the outset they lack a coherent community of at least 200 people to advance them through this ...


18

The "no activity" rule is bad. You're destroying information and contributing to link rot. For example, The Armory, facing imminent failure for spending a year in Definition, was a reboot of an earlier proposal, which also failed to pass Definition before expiration, but which is presently deleted (... which was itself an attempt to reincarnate a site that ...


15

Hopefully these changes will help, but I am skeptical. The real issue is addressed in https://stackoverflow.blog/2018/04/26/stack-overflow-isnt-very-welcoming-its-time-for-that-to-change/?cb=1. Most new proposals mean gaining non-SE users. For many, the benefits of SE's QA model do not outweigh the costs of learning a new platform (particularly for older ...


13

Hmm, just an observation, but it turns out my hypothetical scenario in the comments actually ended up being true. This proposal was closed for being just three commitments short of the required 200. Does this mean that the proposal is non-viable? Also, how did you choose the number four months, instead of, say, three or six? Just asking.


11

Looking at your reputation history, the problem is that you're making bad suggested questions, and suggesting questions on bad proposals. Don't do that.


11

Simply put, an entire Q&A site specifically for a pandemic is not a viable site. We do not create sites for such specific topics, especially one that will eventually pass and become somewhat obsolete in the future. A site only about COVID would never be accepted on our network, regardless of the community behind it. In general, epidemiology questions are ...


10

From Closing a Proposal After 4 Months in Definition or Commitment: Do you have a community ready to build your site? We generally expect proposal authors to have access to a community to help build your site. Area 51 cannot find that community FOR you. If so, then I think we should have a community wiki guideline for authors to find such community, ...


10

After two iterations in this subject space, we ultimately had to close TWO sites on this topic. We worked hard to keep the second site open with many initiatives to keep it going. During the second iteration, the bar for keeping the site open was extremely low: all they needed was a user or two to step up to check on flags and keep spam off the site (...


9

May 12 '15: standing up a new site doesn't take a lot of work. Jun 17 '15: each new site is an enormous undertaking What happened between May and June of 2015 that changed the situation so drastically? Do you need help?


9

Preliminary research suggests that it is too closely related to Ethereum to warrant a separate site, and statements from others suggest that developing in Harmony is almost exactly the same as developing in Ethereum. Based on this information, we are not willing to host a separate Q&A site for this community. We already made the mistake of splitting ...


6

The Scientology proposal was removed after four months of receiving only 8 followers and zero questions with more than 10 votes. See How long is a proposal published. Incidentally, recent automation of the Area 51 processes has allowed us to properly close a proposal for a period of time before it is eventually removed by the Area 51 process so you could ...


6

Deleted proposals are visible to high-rep users as per trusted user privilege (10k) and they're deleted because of inactivity or by different reasons (such as duplication with existing site, or other issues).


6

After a year in development, the proposal only got about 11 of the 40 example questions needed to continue, so it was closed as no longer viable. You might be able to see it with a direct link: https://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/103075/strategy … but generally no; old proposals which have been deleted are generally no longer visible. ...


6

In no particular order, things I can think of (I didn't notice this proposal til after it was closed): no well-defined audience would practically require multimedia (audio and/or video) to work can already look up pretty much any lyric with a quick web search all questions would end up either: having single, canonical answers, or would require frequent ...


4

Yes, otherwise we're thinking of Area 51 like some sort of contest where, if you can meet the minimum requirements, the prize is a site regardless of whether that site will work or not. For as infrequently as I’m able to improve the Area 51 process (due to dev resources), when I can determine that {criteria X} no longer results in a healthy site, launching ...


4

Before in the past anyone with 2,000+ reputations could of close or reopen a proposal, but now as of a change in 2014 only administrators can close or reopen proposal. (There are really no moderators for Area 51 Stack Exchange.) See Where did the 'close' link go?


4

We are absolutely not intested in supporting more layer 2 technologies in this area and further splintering communities using similar techs. While it is far off, we ultimately hope to start merging these sites into one as we do not view them as distinct, sustainable sites that warrant being separated. If these questions cannot be asked on Ethereum, then ...


3

Note that abandoned proposals that receive no activity for a period of 7 days may also be removed. This doesn't seem like a rule that should be followed to the letter. Bioacoustics had its last commitment on December 21 and was closed 11 days later. Given that a significant part of the English-speaking world hibernates for a week or more in late December, ...


3

I think there is a flaw in trying to form a cohesive community around a group of failed proposals simply by piling them together. When you start trying to connect disparage groups under on umbrella, I think you'll find there's little passion for the umbrella as a subject. For example, when someone lives and breathes "Marketing", they're not really looking ...


3

I wasn't here for the first iteration of Startup Business, but for Startups, it failed to attract a sustainable community. Instead, people would show up, ask a question, and leave once they got their answer. Meanwhile, the original group of users slowly left, and eventually it reached a point where there weren't enough people to keep the site cleaned up ...


3

It's not deleted yet, only closed. It'll be auto-deleted 30 days from its close date, at which point it will also disappear from your profile. Letting everyone go and uncommit because it's now closed would spoil useful information: knowing how far it got. We keep closed proposals around for a bit so people can potentially learn a little bit about what ...


2

As part of the routine maintenance of Area 51, proposals that have ABSOLUTELY NO ACTIVITY for a month are subject to deletion. That means absolutely NO activity; no new questions, no comments, no voting, nothing. It takes only a tiny, tiny fraction of the activity actually needed to create a site to keep the proposal alive. But no one has touched the ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible