Skip to main content
Meta Stack Exchange

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

47
  • 23
    Low Effort isn't a reason to close, it's a reason to downvote (and sometimes to attempt to find an appropriate close reason as well). Commented Jun 12, 2013 at 19:22
  • 29
    So too localized questions should be left open, @benisuǝqbackwards? It makes really, really no sense. Commented Jun 12, 2013 at 19:27
  • 19
    @Servy, no, I am not misusing the term. And those questions are definitely closeable, and that's what too localized was for. Commented Jun 12, 2013 at 19:41
  • 16
    @Griwes No, that's not the case. You were one of the people abusing the TL close reason, and that's why it has been removed. Such questions are ocasionally too localized, but in a large percentage of cases they were asking how to solve common problems faced by a lot of people. Since they're so often applicable to a wide audience, they aren't "too localized". Commented Jun 12, 2013 at 19:43
  • 15
    @Servy - That is your view. It doesn't seem to be the view of Jeff here I do not accept questions that are brief meta-descriptions of what the author wants to accomplish without demonstrating any actual attempt to solve their own problem or sharing the research they did on the topic. Commented Jun 12, 2013 at 19:43
  • 7
    @MartinSmith I don't see Jeff stating that such a question is too localized. People have been talking about "gimmie teh codez" questions for a long time. Pretty much everyone agrees they're bad and don't belong here. That doesn't make them too localized. You should downvote such questions. While a lot of them will meet some close criteria, many don't. I would have been much more shocked to ever see him say that gimmie the codez were appropriate. I'm not saying they are. I'm saying they're not [always] "too localized". Commented Jun 12, 2013 at 19:45
  • 8
    @Griwes How is it broken? Don't go around saying, "you're wrong, but you're so wrong that I'm not even going to explain why you're wrong". If it's really that wrong it should be easy to explain. Take an example question of, "How do I create a Linked List in Java?" Very common homework problem; lots of classes will ask that at some point. Clearly the answer to that question is applicable to a lot of people, even those not doing homework (knowing how it's implemented is useful for anyone). You're saying it's TL. That means your definition of TL has nothing to do with the close reason. Commented Jun 12, 2013 at 19:57
  • 35
    It's a sad illustration of how badly misunderstood the previous close reasons were that you would use "Too Localized" for these, when "Not a Real Question" explicitly called them out in its description ("incomplete"). When experienced users of the site don't even know what the close reasons are meant to be used for, there's a serious communications problem - we're hoping to fix that. Commented Jun 12, 2013 at 20:35
  • 55
    @shog9 how can you have "too broad" without a corresponding "too narrow"? Under these rules couldn't you ask a programming question that can't possibly help anyone but you, like Joel's mythical "there's a car parked outside my house" except "there's a recursive function parked outside my house"? Commented Jun 12, 2013 at 20:44
  • 8
    @Servy what should be done about those typo questions? They shouldn't be kept around to dilute the search results. Commented Jun 12, 2013 at 20:46
  • 8
    @Jeff: yup. In practice many sites will want their own rules to handle just this sort of scenario. TeX, for instance, will almost certainly want a "MWE required" rule (which they've been using TL+comments to enforce up to now), while I'm recommending that Stack Overflow focus on short, reproducible problem descriptions as a requirement. Commented Jun 12, 2013 at 20:51
  • 19
    If these homework copy-pastes get answered AND the answers won't get downvoted, you can pretty much expect stack overflow to be flooded with homework copy-pastes. These are not "low-hanging fruits". These are not "fruits fallen to the ground". These are "fruits fallen to the ground and thoroughly rotten, and the answerers are the worms". The worms will thrive. The place will stink. The worms might even be attracted to the smell (rep-whores seeking heavily-downvoted unclosed questions without answers). I believe these should be closed, especially since you cannot safely downvote the answers. Commented Jun 12, 2013 at 20:55
  • 14
    My current working draft has "Questions regarding assignments must demonstrate a minimal understanding of the problem being solved. Tell us what you've tried and why it didn't work. See also: Stack Overflow question checklist", @Jan. Commented Jun 12, 2013 at 21:10
  • 8
    I've found that Low effort questions that don't actually have other problems are rarely down-voted. The "low effort"-ness that people always refer to is a vague notion that the OP is asking for too much. Questions such as How do I declare default parameters in c# or What is the syntax for a literal array in java typically get upvotes if anything. Commented Jun 12, 2013 at 21:44
  • 30
    @shog9 why would that be limited to 'questions regarding assignments'. Why wouldn't all questions need to demonstrate a minimum understanding of what is being asked? Commented Jun 12, 2013 at 22:46