12

Yes, we are for real. We also expect people asking questions to do some research before they ask their questions, and to share the results of that research when they ask their questions. When this doesn’t happen, people can waste time composing answers that the OP already knows. We have another user who went through the same thing you did: asking scant ...


10

Let's take a look at the following question: What is the meaning of "will fulfill a prophecy by bringing balance to the Force"? Here's the content of your question, formatted slightly to allow more natural block quoting: Title: What is the meaning of “will fulfill a prophecy by bringing balance to the Force”? Source Qui-Gon senses ...


9

I think we need to waive the "opinion-based" rule for questions of this sort. As you say, OP got a number of useful responses in the Comments, and it's arguable that leaving matters there would satisfy both our responsibility to the questioner and the SE Canons of Answerability. But closing the question without an answer means eventually it's going to ...


8

It's not a very well-written question. I found it to be a little hard to follow. I think the most troublesome part of your question is this: the so-called problem of perception is not generated by perception itself but by an irrelevant way of thinking about it. For people who have not been studying the problem to the degree you have, that's confusing....


7

You have asked too many questions about your paragraph. That makes the issue too localized to your case. In Stack Exchange, we often try to build a library of information that will aid future learners who stumble upon that question. That changes the site's purpose from a normal helpdesk, where you'd be able to get one-on-one help from an expert. Thus, we ...


6

I refer you to my answer to a previous Meta question of yours, where I wrote In the specific question at hand, for instance, [the examiners] ask what inferences you can draw from what the author has written. These are not matters of linguistic analysis but of logical and rhetorical analysis. They are not suited to this site. The same is true of this ...


5

Hilariously, the question was closed as "Too Broad" after someone had identified an existing question that was functionally identical to it (and which has to date never attracted even a single close vote). I'm gonna hazard a guess that this was simple carelessness, a case of voters reading the question as a request for an exhaustive list of exceptions ...


4

From the OP's profile page I see a lot of questions that share the same characteristic: lack of details. The verb "equate" in mathematical sense The question although clear consists of just a single sentence. How writie "several millijoules" in shortened form? "several mJs" or "several mJ's"? The question ...


4

As one of the original close voters, I'd like to know what the rationale behind the reopening was. From what I can see, this is clearly off-topic, and far too broad for the SE format. In particular, from off-topic: Your questions should be reasonably scoped. If you can imagine an entire book that answers your question, you’re asking too much. Not only ...


4

The reason this question was closed (which is also the reason so many people object to so many of the law-test questions you ask) is that it is not a question about language. Language questions—the sort of questions we can answer here—concern the form of an utterance: the particular words and syntax the utterance employs. Now it is quite true that such ...


4

With the recent changes to the closing system, closure isn't the "death sentence" for questions that it used to be. Now questions are put "on hold" for 5 days, during which period they automatically enter the reopen queue if the OP edits them. Questions are no longer simply closed and left to rot in the wasteland of lost questions regardless of whether they ...


3

All questions need to have at least one tag; edits can never leave a question with zero tags. untagged is automatically created when necessary when a system action would otherwise leave zero tags, then automatically destroyed again when there are no remaining questions with it. There are a few ways to handle untagged questions: If it's a lousy question, ...


3

There's a difference between English Language Learning, and Reading Comprehension Assistance. Just because you are asking about an English test question doesn't mean your question "concerns English." The onus is on you to make sure these questions are directly pertinent to language, and not just reading comprehension. As an aside, please try to avoid ...


2

My own practice is not consistent, and in fact I generally avoid questions of this sort unless the specific matter asked about is itself "interesting" - which to me means that it prompts an answer which rests on some more general principle which will be of use beyond the specific context. In this case that might be a brief discussion of where adverbials of ...


2

To begin my answer to this, I'd like to start by quoting a portion of an answer I wrote on another meta question (where the OP asked if Proofreading questions were on-topic): Unfortunately questions which are strictly proofreading are Off Topic here on ELL. If you did have a specific question about the sentence [...] the question would be appropriate. But ...


1

I'll answer your "unilaterally" part.... I was one sentence away from completing my answer when the fifth close vote came in. That put me in an odd spot. Were I a "normal" ELL contributor, I would've cast a reopen vote, and hoped for four more, but I'm unable to do that. As a moderator, my vote to reopen reopens the question. I wrestled with what to do ...


1

Although I understand your concerns, I think the all-important part is the activity of the asker. If I see a question that is utterly unclear, I will first ask for clarification in a comment. Sometimes, more than once. If the asker does not even bother to give any feedback on that in what I consider a reasonable amount of time, or if the feedback consists ...


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