The main challenge is making it clear to those who stumble across this that this isn't a "math education" place where students and teachers gather to work out homework problems.
Be more direct in identifying your audience.
This site should be called:
Proposed Q&A site for those involved in the field of teaching mathematics.
AI as a subject isn't likely to attract a community you can build a site around because it is a broad term that's been applied to everything from creating synthetic beings to creating more-sophisticated algorithms that make computers better at what they do. Once you get past a few dozen questions about what is AI? and how we live with it, you're into the ...
This will just fragment the community.
Very correct, and this is an important consideration.
That said, people have many, many issues with BioStars. I’ve personally put my view into words on Reddit:
… the [BioStars] software really sucks compared to Stack Exchange. I really dislike using it. Busy layout, chaotic comments, all leading to incredibly hard ...
My opinion is that we should leave it as "Analytics". We (OR/MS/IE people) do more than just prescriptive analytics -- for example, simulation is descriptive analytics, demand forecasting is predictive analytics, etc.
I also am taking a page from the INFORMS web site, which uses the phrase "Operations Research and Analytics" a number of times.
I do agree ...
When a proposal nears the end of its Definition, it undergoes a final review by the Community Team to see if and how it fits with the rest of the network. During the final review, any discussions and surrounding activities are considered, and the title and description are finalized in preparation for launch at 100% Commitment.
Yes, this site is slated to ...
Nice to meet you Martin! Before making this proposal, I tried to get in touch with you and orthocresol earlier this week on a chat room I made but wasn't able to grab your attention. One year ago we did talk, and you told me that Area51 is deadly. For the last 12 months I've done extensive research before making this proposal. A little bit of that research ...
I would encourage questions about mathematics pedagogy and teaching for all age groups (from toddlers to adults), all educational levels (pre-school to graduate), all settings (homeschool to traditional school), and even those with special needs (gifted, with disabilities, etc.).
I don't know if we will be able to attract participants interested in this ...
Viewing the top rated questions, and considering Academia is expressly open to questions about research in industry, government, etc. I'm inclined to agree - Open Science is a subset of the type of questions that are already accepted in Academia.SE, and I don't think either community will particularly benefit from splitting them off.
No, machine learning as far as implementation goes is not on topic for this site. We've had two previous failures in launching a site about AI (which already included machine learning) — and the resolution following those failures was to create a more-comprehensive site which included the development of AI, machine learning, statistical tools, big data,...
Update: And now I'm bringing good news! The site is up and running.
I'm the developer that launches new sites and unfortunately I come bearing some bad news.
The original date for the private beta launch got delayed due to a security incident that we had to resolve first.
The plan then was to launch this week, but we are hitting some issues with database ...
Mathematics Education is partly mathematics and partly education.
It seems that you consider Math Ed to be a subset of Mathematics, but I consider Math Ed to be a subset of Education.
If there was an Education Stack Exchange (containing a "mathematics" tag), I would understand someone who was against the creation of a Math Ed site. But, unfortunately, ...
IMHO they should.
They are already questions tagged open-access and open science, which are warmly welcomed.
Also, some of questions from Open Science may fit OpenData.SE.
I don't see a question that is a valid SE-question and does not fit any of above.
I think that an initialism might be the way to go here:
This has precedent at sites like dsp.stackexchange.com ("Digital Signal Processing"), gis.stackexchange.com (whatever "GIS" stands for...), ux.stackexchange.com ("User eXperience"), and ell.stackexchange.com ("English Language Learners"). In some of those cases (DSP, GIS, UX), ...
I would say yes.
Flight simulators rely on flight physics (aerodynamics, etc.), they can be used to design a new aircraft, test an existing aircraft, or even train pilots. They are involved at every step of the life of an aircraft. If you read the source code of such programs, you will find all the equations that govern how aircrafts fly and react to their ...
Edit on 2/1: For reference, here are all of the proposed names so far:
Mathematics Learning, Studying, and Education (the current name)
Mathematics Teaching and Learning
Mathematics Teaching and Pedagogy
Didactics of Mathematics
Pedagogy of Mathematics
Mathematics Pedagogy (which I am proposing ...
Questions about mathematics are already handled by the Mathematics and MathOverflow Stack Exchange sites. I believe that "do my homework for me" questions do not belong to this proposed mathematics education site.
A main reason this extra site seems desirable is that various questions in mathematics education are less clear cut than most mathematical question.
The sites math.SE and MO are thus not an optimal fit for many of them. For this site we will need to be less strict regarding 'subjective' questions than would be desirable for math.SE and MO. Put differently ...
Any kind of artificial voting, including refrain from voting after a question has reached 10 votes, will ultimately prove counterproductive for the proposal.People should upvote the questions they honestly feel are useful and interesting, and downvote those that aren't, regardless of their current score.
I understand that the Area 51 process sometimes is ...
Econometrics is a fundamental tool to any economist doing an empirical study. I see no reason why it shouldn't be on topic.
With that being said, why don't you just offer a couple of sample questions and see how people vote on them?
There is a degree of overlap in which questions will be on topic for each of the two sites. This is not necessarily a reason to combine them into one site. There are many SE sites that have overlap, or even where one could reasonably be a strict subset of the other.
What distinguishes a topic as being suitable for a separate SE site is its community. While ...
It should be both.
On a new site with technical questions only, most of the questions would be on-topic on the Data Science portal: https://datascience.stackexchange.com/
And I think with mostly theoretical questions the site would have not enough questions/visitors.
I think the focus of this site should be how specialists of the field deal with biological information using automation / computational tools. It should be about:
Specific formats used in the field, their history, their specifications, how they are to be understood, written, processed...
Specific programs used in the field, which one to use for what purpose,...
One education site for all levels and all subjects seems too broad and too heterogenous to be a good idea.
I could imagine (to participate) a general site on tertiary education, somewhat along the lines of Academia but on teaching, so including content-related questions plus general aspects (that might somewhat overlap with academia, in fact).
[Note: I ...
I think "Open Research" is just as clear and meaningful as "Open Science". Both clearly describe the focus of the site and neither seems the more obvious choice than the other. I would be very happy with either of these as the site name.
"Reproducible Research" does not make it clear that that research is open (it may be reproduced by members of a variety ...
Econophysics uses tools from physics to answer questions from economics. The first aspect can be supported by Physics SE, the second not really. Therefore questions about econophysics should be possible in an Economics SE.
No, we can't do that, as this is not a proposal for a site about the history of academics (not even remotely close).
That being said, if you are seriously interested in a site about the history of academics, you can propose one. I might even support it if I can see value in your vision. While I am not currently seeing it, I have an open mind and would look ...