Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Users Search
Help Dashboard Sign In Sign Up
Q&A Photo Contest Gear Recommendations Meta
Meta
Posts Tags Edits
Ask Question

Post History

30%
+2 −7
Meta Why was comment deleted?

Yesterday (I think), I wrote a comment to this question. I can't show the exact text of the comment since it's now gone, but it was basically about telling the asker that "Ursack" should be define...

1 answer  ·  posted 4y ago by Olin Lathrop‭  ·  edited 4y ago by Olin Lathrop‭

Question discussion
#4: Post edited by user avatar Olin Lathrop‭ · 2020-06-19T15:32:56Z (over 4 years ago)
  • Yesterday (I think), I wrote a comment to <a href="https://outdoors.codidact.com/questions/276186">this</a> question. I can't show the exact text of the comment since it's now gone, but it was basically about telling the asker that "Ursack" should be defined. I don't know what it is, and I've some some backpacking and quite a bit of hiking. Probably other people also don't know.
  • To me, such questions always seem a bit arrogant, and therefore off-putting. I realize some domain-specific jargon is acceptable, even necessary. But, especially for a site with such a broad topic as this, a sentence or two explaining something that many people won't know is prudent. You can then include a link to someplace that gives more info, but a very basic definition should be right in the question.
  • I'm not going to look up things like that just to understand the basics of the question.
  • I understand that the author may not agree with this point of view, and for some reason refuse to add the additional sentence. However, that doesn't explain why such a comment would be deleted. There are obviously different rules here about comments than what I'm used to on SE. Please explain.
  • I didn't vote on the question at all originally, giving the author a chance to improve it. Now I have downvoted it since I think it's a bad question for the reasons stated above. I don't see how adding a single sentence would detract from the question, but it's the author's choice what to write, and mine to judge it accordingly.
  • Yesterday (I think), I wrote a comment to <a href="https://outdoors.codidact.com/questions/276186">this</a> question. I can't show the exact text of the comment since it's now gone, but it was basically about telling the asker that "Ursack" should be defined. I don't know what it is, and I've some some backpacking and quite a bit of hiking. Probably other people also don't know.
  • To me, such questions always seem a bit arrogant, and therefore off-putting. I realize some domain-specific jargon is acceptable, even necessary. But, especially for a site with such a broad topic as this, a sentence or two explaining something that many people won't know is prudent. You can then include a link to someplace that gives more info, but a very basic definition should be right in the question.
  • I'm not going to look up things like that just to understand the basics of the question.
  • I understand that the author may not agree with this point of view, and for some reason refuse to add the additional sentence. However, that doesn't explain why such a comment would be deleted. There are obviously different rules here about comments than what I'm used to on SE. Please explain.
  • I didn't vote on the question at all originally, giving the author a chance to improve it. Now I have downvoted it since I think it's a bad question for the reasons stated above. I don't see how adding a single sentence would detract from the question, but it's the author's choice what to write, and mine to judge it accordingly.
  • <h2>Response to answer</h2>
  • <blockquote>The times where users who showed up and demanded that the OP explain things they weren't willing to expend any effort into researching always frustrated me, in this example I had to copy the answer into the question because the so-called experts were not willing to scroll down the page.</blockquote>
  • So it's a personal thing. I guess it's "your" site, so you get to run it your way. Personally, I think you're making a mistake.
  • Good questions are accessible to the typical audience of the site. People shouldn't have to "expend effort" to look up something obscure but central to the question. By expecting that, you are alienating the casual user.
  • A question is not only for those that will answer it. In fact, that's a small minority of those that read a question. Most people read questions and maybe peruse the answers if the topic is of interest. If they can't even tell whether the topic is of interest, then they are going to feel alienated. <i>"This is for the 'in' club only. Those who don't know our private jargon need not apply."</i> That's not a good message if you want to keep users engaged.
  • The question you linked to is another great example of this problem. Clearly most people aren't going to know what a "New Forest commoner" is. Note there wasn't even context of what the New Forest is, or even what part of the world it is in! It should have totally been the questioner's responsibility to add a simple sentence at least setting the context. That's not going to matter to those who could answer, but it would make a big difference to casual browsers, who are the majority of readers.
#3: Post edited by user avatar Olin Lathrop‭ · 2020-06-19T12:35:44Z (over 4 years ago)
  • Yesterday (I think), I wrote a comment to <a href="https://outdoors.codidact.com/questions/276186">this</a> question. I can't show the exact text of the comment since it's now gone, but it was basically about telling the asker that "Ursack" should be defined. I don't know what it is, and I've some some backpacking and quite a bit of hiking. Probably other people also don't know.
  • To me, such questions always seem a bit arrogant, and therefore off-putting. I realize some domain-specific jargon is acceptable, even necessary. But, especially for a site with such a broad topic as this, a sentence or two explaining something that many people won't know is prudent. You can then include a link to someplace that gives more info, but a very basic definition should be right in the question.
  • I'm not going to look up things like that ust to understand the basics of the question.
  • I understand that the author may not agree with this point of view, and for some reason refuse to add the additional sentence. However, that doesn't explain why such a comment would be deleted. There are obviously different rules here about comments than what I'm used to on SE. Please explain.
  • I didn't vote on the question at all originally, giving the author a chance to improve it. Now I have downvoted it since I think it's a bad question for the reasons stated above. I don't see how adding a single sentence would detract from the question, but it's the author's choice what to write, and mine to judge it accordingly.
  • Yesterday (I think), I wrote a comment to <a href="https://outdoors.codidact.com/questions/276186">this</a> question. I can't show the exact text of the comment since it's now gone, but it was basically about telling the asker that "Ursack" should be defined. I don't know what it is, and I've some some backpacking and quite a bit of hiking. Probably other people also don't know.
  • To me, such questions always seem a bit arrogant, and therefore off-putting. I realize some domain-specific jargon is acceptable, even necessary. But, especially for a site with such a broad topic as this, a sentence or two explaining something that many people won't know is prudent. You can then include a link to someplace that gives more info, but a very basic definition should be right in the question.
  • I'm not going to look up things like that just to understand the basics of the question.
  • I understand that the author may not agree with this point of view, and for some reason refuse to add the additional sentence. However, that doesn't explain why such a comment would be deleted. There are obviously different rules here about comments than what I'm used to on SE. Please explain.
  • I didn't vote on the question at all originally, giving the author a chance to improve it. Now I have downvoted it since I think it's a bad question for the reasons stated above. I don't see how adding a single sentence would detract from the question, but it's the author's choice what to write, and mine to judge it accordingly.
#2: Post edited by user avatar Olin Lathrop‭ · 2020-06-19T12:25:09Z (over 4 years ago)
  • Yesterday (I think), I wrote a comment to <a href="https://outdoors.codidact.com/questions/276186">this</a> question. I can't show the exact text of the comment since it's now gone, but it was basically about telling the asker that "Ursack" should be defined. I don't know what it is, and I've some some backpacking and quite a bit of hiking. Probably other people also don't know.
  • To me, such questions always seem a bit arrogant, and therefore off-putting. I realize some domain-specific jargon is acceptable, even necessary. But, especially for a site with such a broad topic as this, a sentence or two explaining something that many people won't know is prudent. You can then include a link to someplace that gives more info, but a very basic definition should be right in the question.
  • I'm not going to look things like that up just to understand the basics of the question.
  • I understand that the author may not agree with this point of view, and for some reason refuse to add the additional sentence. However, that doesn't explain why such a comment would be deleted. There are obviously different rules here about comments than what I'm used to on SE. Please explain.
  • I didn't vote on the question at all originally, giving the author a chance to improve it. Now I have downvoted it since I think it's a bad question for the reasons stated above. I don't see how adding a single sentence would detract from the question, but it's the author's choice what to write, and mine to judge it accordingly.
  • Yesterday (I think), I wrote a comment to <a href="https://outdoors.codidact.com/questions/276186">this</a> question. I can't show the exact text of the comment since it's now gone, but it was basically about telling the asker that "Ursack" should be defined. I don't know what it is, and I've some some backpacking and quite a bit of hiking. Probably other people also don't know.
  • To me, such questions always seem a bit arrogant, and therefore off-putting. I realize some domain-specific jargon is acceptable, even necessary. But, especially for a site with such a broad topic as this, a sentence or two explaining something that many people won't know is prudent. You can then include a link to someplace that gives more info, but a very basic definition should be right in the question.
  • I'm not going to look up things like that ust to understand the basics of the question.
  • I understand that the author may not agree with this point of view, and for some reason refuse to add the additional sentence. However, that doesn't explain why such a comment would be deleted. There are obviously different rules here about comments than what I'm used to on SE. Please explain.
  • I didn't vote on the question at all originally, giving the author a chance to improve it. Now I have downvoted it since I think it's a bad question for the reasons stated above. I don't see how adding a single sentence would detract from the question, but it's the author's choice what to write, and mine to judge it accordingly.
#1: Initial revision by user avatar Olin Lathrop‭ · 2020-06-19T12:23:40Z (over 4 years ago) 
Yesterday (I think), I wrote a comment to <a href="https://outdoors.codidact.com/questions/276186">this</a> question.  I can't show the exact text of the comment since it's now gone, but it was basically about telling the asker that "Ursack" should be defined.  I don't know what it is, and I've some some backpacking and quite a bit of hiking.  Probably other people also don't know.

To me, such questions always seem a bit arrogant, and therefore off-putting.  I realize some domain-specific jargon is acceptable, even necessary.  But, especially for a site with such a broad topic as this, a sentence or two explaining something that many people won't know is prudent.  You can then include a link to someplace that gives more info, but a very basic definition should be right in the question.

I'm not going to look things like that up just to understand the basics of the question.

I understand that the author may not agree with this point of view, and for some reason refuse to add the additional sentence.  However, that doesn't explain why such a comment would be deleted.  There are obviously different rules here about comments than what I'm used to on SE.  Please explain.

I didn't vote on the question at all originally, giving the author a chance to improve it.  Now I have downvoted it since I think it's a bad question for the reasons stated above.  I don't see how adding a single sentence would detract from the question, but it's the author's choice what to write, and mine to judge it accordingly.