40

I understand your eagerness to get these questions answered. But part of building a Stack Exchange site is to make sure the participants can properly build a reliable canon of knowledge. The core reason we created Stack Exchange was to assure that information posted on the Internet is widely vetted, edited, and improved by a thriving community of peers. ...


25

I agree this is a major problem when it happens — but it does have a solution pending, sort of. I've designed a "circuit breaker" which addresses this exact issue; unfortunately, I don't think it will get implemented for quite some time (at least months, but probably closer to next year if ever). In the interest of transparency — I've ...


22

Yes the up votes and down vote limits per proposal on Area 51 should match. This related question from Jan 2014 (I just found it) seems to indicate that those expressing a preference, prefer to match limits. The argument is made at the related question, that matching these would deviate from the standards at Stack Exchange. I disagree, on Stack Exchange ...


17

We (Stack Exchange) do not believe in the adage "if you build it, they will come." Every time we tried that, the site has failed utterly. The Definition phase does more than just define the scope of the proposal. This phase helps determine if there is a sufficient depth of questions to keep the site interesting, while measuring if there is enough ...


14

I'd went even further and suggest, that the limit of the downvotes should equal the number of used upvotes. Voting on example questions has other purpose as voting on the launched sites. Here I use votes to say, which question I'd like to see on the site, and which I wouldn't like to see. Saying what I'd like to see is more important, so the upvotes should ...


9

The purpose of the example questions is that they help define what is supposed to be on-topic for the site. Answers would simply be noise; they're not supposed to be answered yet. Even worse, if you could answer them, people would start to treat it as a functioning site.


3

answering questions is indeed distracting from the very purpose of the definition phase. I made the mistake myself, I'm used to think ahead a little. However, I agree with the proposal to store the answers that get censored though. once decision on the kind of questions being acceptable is finalized, the kind of answers that are on-topic and possible tags ...


3

The issue is moot. We are not currently accepting proposals for non-English sites — See Internationalization 'State of the Stack'. But each phase also measures if there is enough interest and support to actually build a site. We would not side-step that process; it never ends well.


2

It would be nice if the proposals could just progress into the commitment phase with what they have. I am sure many people are very excited to see these proposals start moving onto to betas. However, the definition phase is there for that very purpose... to define the proposal. Coffee has many questions yet it needs more followers. In the past, the Coffee ...


2

The term “Internet of Things” (IoT) was first used in 1999 by British technology pioneer Kevin Ashton to describe a system in which objects in the physical world could be connected to the Internet by sensors.12 Ashton coined the term to illustrate the power of connecting Radio-Frequency Identification (RFID) tags13 used in corporate supply chains to the ...


1

What is the advantage of a SE over a traditional forum? SE's are more easily searchable, common questions are more easily resolved, and the best answers are shown before all the other answers. Using an SE is more efficient, faster, and better than a forum (for solving problems). For non problems, like debate/discussion, or advertising projects, forums do a ...


1

No, it's a bad idea If there aren't enough people using the language, then it wouldn't be a thriving and therefore useful site. This is why it goes through the regular phases of becoming a site--to show that there is sufficient interest.


1

Nope, that is not right. Not sure if the related comments are still around, but previous comments by SE Staff indicate they just don't care enough to address it. Most believe it is not significant, In theory it will be corrected in Area 52 which is currently not under development I am over simplifying and being slightly down cast in my wording, because ...


1

I think this makes a lot of sense. Area 51 proposals are not stackexchange questions. The "asker" is not neccessary biased towards their question as they are towards their answers on other sites. Area 51 encourages you to have good and bad examples of questions. Right now I would fear that someone would mistake my planned-bad question for a good one, and it ...


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