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 ...
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. ...
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 ...
If you don't have a high level of professional/technical proficiency in any particular field of study, we also have many mainstream sites in subjects like
Movies & TV
The Great Outdoors
Board & Card Games
These communities ...
According to Matthew Read's answer in this discussion post, 10 posts must be made in order fulfill commitment:
You just need to make a total of 10 non-CW posts on the site
(Questions or Answers).
EDIT: Per my question in another thread, the site also needs to be out of private beta.
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. ...
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 ...
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 ...
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 ...
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 ...
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 ...
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?
The minimum number of people needed to build a site depends largely on how engaged your users are and how much participation they are willing to put into it. When you submit a proposal for a site, it is generally assumed you already have a community to build it. Area 51 cannot find that community for you.
Broadly speaking, you will need a community of at ...
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 ...
A proposal is essentially an "application" to create a site. If you have access to a healthy, enthusiastic community in need of a Stack Exchange public Q&A site, Area 51 is where you propose it.
But a proposal is not a Q&A site. Proposals do not have the features we use to flesh out complete problem statements (questions), and they do not have the ...
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, ...
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?
This is the standard set of reasons a proposal may be closed:
duplicate of proposal
This proposal covers the same ground as another proposal; it would tend to drain audience from another Stack Exchange site.
duplicate of site
This proposal would tend to drain audience from an existing Stack Exchange site.
This proposal does not ...
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.
No, participants should post real-world, actual questions they would like ask on the proposed site. This is how we gauge if you have a knowledgeable, avid community with intriguing problems from folks actually working in the subject being proposed.
Stack Exchange is designed to host communities with applied, practical problems one might encounter in their ...
You are correct that some of these questions may not technically be closed as an "exact duplicate" on the actual site — but for the purpose of presenting the strongest possible Definition for this proposal, the linked questions generally cover much the same topic space, even if they're not technically exact duplicates.
Why "Top Example Questions" ...
Question: What programming languages can I use to create a smart contract?
It's a list question, see: What is the definition of a list question?
These kind of questions are usually not constructive.
Question: What is the best language to learn for beginning developers that want to work with Hashgraph?
It's a subjective question, and ...
A proposal needs 60 followers to complete the definition phase.
Once a site's definition is complete, it needs 200 committers, at least 100 of which have 200+ rep on any other site, and a high enough commitment score, as explained here.
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, ...
As far as I know, the commit is fulfilled when you ask and(/or?) answer 5 (10?) questions. Not sure about exact figures, as you can see.
You also get the commit slot back when (if) the site leaves beta. No idea what happens in case the site gets deleted, but I guess you get it back too.
If you have no questions to ask nor knowledge to answer, it means you ...
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 ...
It is obviously sensible that there is no interface to write answers to example questions. However I think that answers in comments shouldn't necessarily be deleted, for a simple reason:
The quality and nature of an answer can shed light on the quality of the question.
Q: "What is 2 + 2?" A: "It's 4. Simple."
Lesson learned: The question is too ...