Datasets:

ChuGyouk

/

StackExchange-Medical

like 1

[ { "answer_id": 1942, "author": "jakebeal", "author_id": 22733, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>To suggest migration to another site, you have to add a custom comment. I was confused by this myself at first, but apparently this is a deliberate choice by design due to the very large number of SE sites that now exist (see <a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/96205/more-options-when-flagging-for-migration/110996#110996\">this meta question</a> for some history).</p>\n\n<p>I would recommend adding a comment manually, and then using the \"Blatantly off-topic\" flagging reason.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 1943, "author": "Wrzlprmft", "author_id": 7734, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734", "pm_score": 4, "selected": true, "text": "<p>There are two ways for migration:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li><p><strong>(Flagging →) Closing → Off-Topic → Migration</strong> – This is only available for frequent migration targets. Academia has only its own Meta as target as this is activated by default.</p>\n\n<p>Adding new migration targets here is possible in theory, but as far as I can tell, there is no site to which we are migrating very often. Most questions we get that are on-topic on another site are still closeworthy there (due to being unclear, opinion-based or similar) and thus they should not be migrated. Also such a target should only be established if close voters can be expected to have a clear idea as to what is on-topic on the target site, which does not hold here in my opinion.</p>\n\n<p>Also note that if you flag for closure (and do not have the close privilege), the only effect closure has is that the close voters see this and may thus need less time to find out what shall be wrong with the question.</p></li>\n<li><p><strong>Migration by moderator</strong> – If you are sure that a post needs at most minor tweaks to be a good fit for another site, you can use a custom flag to alert a moderator to migrate it.</p>\n\n<p>In this case, you can also flag to close. While custom close reasons exist for users with the <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/close-questions\">close privilege</a>, they are not available to flaggers (see <a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/185873/255554\">here</a>). So, all you can do is flag as <em>blatantly off-topic,</em> leave an explaining comment.</p></li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>Two side notes:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>If you think a question is generally a good fit for another site, but has issues, advise the asker to improve these issues and read the other site’s guidelines.</li>\n<li>If you are not sure whether a question is a good fit for another site, state this in your comments and advise the asker to check the other site’s guidelines (or do so yourself). A considerable amount of users get frustrated because they are recommended other sites when their question does not actually fit there (we have this problem ourselves, see <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1860/7734\">here</a>).</li>\n</ul>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1941", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/40592/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 1951, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I think it could work. There is definitely a need for it. There is definitely enough teachers in the world. I think the issue is bringing in teachers t the network. There have been a couple of proposals over the years for both K-12 teaching, undergraduate education, and e-learning sites. They have all failed in the early stages of area 51.</p>\n\n<p>I think a motivated individual who is willing to promote the proposal and knows how the system works, stands a chance of getting one off the ground.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 1961, "author": "Stephan Kolassa", "author_id": 4140, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/4140", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>My qualifications to answer this consist of two kids who just finished their second week of elementary school. So don't take me too seriously.</p>\n\n<p>As <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1951/4140\">StrongBad writes</a>, we have had quite a few K-12 focused site proposals, none of which got off the ground. (If my kids' teachers are representative, I understand that. None of them are tech-affine.) So I'm very skeptical that a site that doesn't even focus on K-12 education as such, but a <em>sub-aspect</em> of K-12 education (namely, technology) would be viable.</p>\n\n<p>I'd rather have a working K-12 education SE site which explicitly includes technology in its on-topic list.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 1970, "author": "Marxos", "author_id": 19703, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/19703", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I think it would be far easier to have a teacher's mailing list. These probably accomplish 90% of what educators need, with half the technical challenges, and 10% of the work it takes to administer a complex site like SE.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 1974, "author": "PatW", "author_id": 7357, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7357", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>If we consider Moodle, Google Classrooms, or any other Learning Management System, I find it quite restrictive to target the site only for K-12 teachers, as these tools are also used in higher education by teachers that may not be tech-savvy. </p>\n\n<p>On another aspect, if the objective of the proposal is to <em>only</em> provide help on how to use, implement or adapt said LMS, I feel like the questions better be directly asked to the support teams whose job is to actually answer these kinds of questions.</p>\n\n<p>The problem you have identified is a very classical one in the field of technology-enhanced learning: teachers' acceptance of technologies. Just put this sentence in <a href=\"https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=teacher%20acceptance%20technology%20classroom\" rel=\"nofollow\">Google Scholar's search box</a> and you will find plenty of studies. What some of these studies tell is that, basically, teachers will continue to use technologies that they perceive useful and easy to use. Since LMS are designed for educational purposes, I can only hope teachers find them useful. Improving the user experience is another issue though, and I am afraid we cannot do much about it on a website like StackExchange.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1950", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/254/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 1953, "author": "jakebeal", "author_id": 22733, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Academia.SE is a question and answer site. Quite a bit of cross-fertilization occurs here, given the breadth of disciplines represented. There is also a lot of discovery and refinement of thinking about academia as a side-effect of the question and answer process---I know that I've learned a lot here, and I have heard others make similar remarks.</p>\n\n<p>However, it is not (in general) a place for debate and discussion---for that, you want to find an forum, blog, or other such medium. Likewise, the community has developed fairly strong expectations regarding \"collegial\" interactions, which are generally expected to be civil, courteous, on point, and lacking in ad hominem attacks. </p>\n\n<p>It seems that you have been finding that things that you consider \"keeping in PhDs in line\" and \"pushing each other\" do not fit with the standards of the community. Most moderation on this site is done by the community, following the general principles of the Stack Overflow system as laid out in <a href=\"https://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/05/a-theory-of-moderation/\">\"A Theory of Moderation\"</a>, so if you're having problems, it's not that you are being singled out, but that members of the community are flagging your behavior as problematic in various ways.</p>\n\n<p>It's hard to say more since you've declined to provide any specifics in your original post, but if you cared to point to a specific post or incident, it is likely that people will be able to provide a more precise and informative response.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 1972, "author": "Marxos", "author_id": 19703, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/19703", "pm_score": -1, "selected": true, "text": "<p>I figured out what's happening. The SE Badge system here at 500pts makes users into cops -- nitpicking everything that's going on <strong><em>regardless of their personal expertise on the topics or interest</em></strong>.</p>\n\n<p>When users are checking out everything from a priveleged position like that, they tend to use the power. It's exactly like what happened in the Stanford prison experiment (c.1971) where students were given power to monitor and affect everything other students were doing. In that experiment it ended up traumatizing many of the students, <em>so take heed</em>. (There's even a documentary about it.)</p>\n\n<p>SE really needs to change this. It will help the site tremendously and reduce moderator abuses. (One could never tell how many good users have been turned away from SE, could they?)</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1952", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/19703/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 1959, "author": "Wrzlprmft", "author_id": 7734, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<blockquote>\n <p>The first thing it does is throwing a professor title in front of TheDoctor. I find it a highly questionable behavior. Is the argument here \"aeismail is correct because he is a professor\"?</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>I am pretty certain, the argument here is <em>only</em> that Aeismail should not be called <em>young padawan learner</em> because he is a professor.</p>\n\n<p>By the way, I think that nobody on this site should be called <em>young padawan learner</em> because using this term is either patronising or irony; and irony is not very well communicable over the Internet. Moreover, the term is very young in everyday conversations and has yet to find its position. Due to this, people across the world may interprete it differently and are more likely to fail to see any irony.</p>\n\n<p>On the other hand, when I say that nobody should use this term, I do not consider it “outrageous”, “highly uncivil” or sufficiently offensive to flag as such – if I would, I would have to flag a lot. Also, I do not consider think that the addressee’s rank plays into this.</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Then Pete L. Clark puts on a moderator hat (without being one -- I don't see a black lozenge next to his name) and threatens TheDoctor with a suspension. This puzzles me, too. We have appointed moderators; acting like one without being one promotes vigilante behavior.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Depending on how to interprete your first <em>and,</em> we may have the same opinion here, but let me write it with my own words: Stack Exchange lives from community moderation and in this includes that non-diamonds address borderline behaviour in a respectful way. This does not, however, include the capacity to utter officially seeming warnings (”You have been warned...again.“). Suspensions are entirely at the liberty of diamond moderators and are usually not discussed in public. Moreover, even diamond moderators are urged not to threaten with suspension or similar.</p>\n\n<hr>\n\n<p>As a sidenote, I suggest to delete all three comments, as they have at the very least been made obsolete by the existing answers.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 1960, "author": "Fomite", "author_id": 118, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/118", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<blockquote>\n <p>I am a bit puzzled by the way the discussion has evolved. In my view, aeismail's comment is sloppy, since it just claims that this is not \"correct usage\", without backing up the claim with a reference. It is basically equivalent to writing \"you are wrong\". This is not how a polite discussion should start.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>It is, perhaps, not the best comment aeismail has ever written. There are however infinitely many ways to respond to that without being condescending. For that matter, the original answer doesn't actually have any reference either.</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>TheDoctor's answer, albeit sarcastic, aims to point this out this in a\n playful way: what does \"correct\" mean? Who are you to be able to say\n what is correct and what is not? I don't find it out line at all (no\n more than the first comment, anyway). In fact, when confronted with a\n real argument against his suggested practice (rpattiso's comment),\n TheDoctor acknowledges it and answers like a sensible person.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>It's well beyond sarcastic and into condescending. Asking on what basis aeismail made that argument would have been appropriate. Speaking down to them isn't.</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>I have some issues also with the following comment by Pete L. Clark.\n The first thing it does is throwing a professor title in front of\n TheDoctor. I find it a highly questionable behavior. Is the argument\n here \"aeismail is correct because he is a professor\"? That is the\n exact opposite of science, and in my view academia should frown upon\n these appeals to authority as a general practice. I have rarely seen\n people pointing out each other's title in the university world.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>If you say \"Just who do you think you are?\" in a condescending tone, one should probably expect to have the person's credentials thrown back at them. If a poster doesn't want an argument by authority, they shouldn't help feed one.</p>\n\n<p>As for rarely pointing out each other's title in the university world - I'd suggest your experience is not necessarily generalizable. </p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Then Pete L. Clark puts on a moderator hat (without being one -- I\n don't see a black lozenge next to his name) and threatens TheDoctor\n with a suspension. This puzzles me, too. We have appointed moderators;\n acting like one without being one promotes vigilante behavior. Pete L.\n Clark is a valued member of this community, as his reputation proves,\n but I really feel like he is the one acting out of line here.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>He threatened no such thing. He noted that last time TheDoctor posted something like this, Pete gave him a warning (not in the formal sanction sense of the word but the actual, real English sense) that he was likely treading on thin ice, and that warning proved accurate. He's giving him the same warning again, perhaps in hopes that his advice will be heeded this time. There is more to building a community than black diamonds by someone's names, and \"Hey buddy, this didn't go well for you last time...\" is, on occasion, part of that.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 1964, "author": "Pete L. Clark", "author_id": 938, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/938", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p>@Fomite's answer explains my perspective very well. But let me amplify a bit:</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li><p>My dealings with this user are based on a pattern of behavior beyond any one posting. I think this is only rational. When someone behaves badly enough on a forum to be censured, then comes back and starts evincing the same behavior again, it would be strange not to keep the past behavior in mind.</p></li>\n<li><p>This user is across the board disrespectful of academia and academics. I won't try to hide that this really bothers me. In the last few days alone this user has been ridiculously dismissive of other users....and then most recently he blamed academia for the worst terrorist incident in American history. (That is way too stupid to really anger me, but when someone says something that nuttily contrarian, I think it would be irrational not to start thinking in terms of correcting the behavior or extricating them from the situation.) In another deleted answer this user made a comment saying that one of the brilliant, benevolent veteran mathematicians who frequents this site just didn't understand mathematics as deeply as he did...this was in an answer explaining that there is no such thing as \"theoretical mathematics\". </p>\n\n<p>My memories of what this user said before his suspension are slightly vague: it is in the nature of the deletion process that the worst stuff goes away, and therefore someone who did not read and remember can have a different reaction to new content posted by a formerly problematic user than someone who did. But the bottom line is that by no means do I interpret the \"young padawan\" comment as being playful. I view the comment as someone who has, apparently, no experience whatsoever in peer-reviewed science articles taking a gratuitous swipe at an established scientist. </p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Is the argument here \"aeismail is correct because he is a professor\"? That is the exact opposite of science, and in my view academia should frown upon these appeals to authority as a general practice. I have rarely seen people pointing out each other's title in the university world.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>No, the argument is that because aeismail is a professor, the belittling comment is manifestly inappropriate. It wouldn't be a kind thing to say to anyone you don't know personally, but if someone actually does have more expertise and seniority than someone else then they do get to call attention to that if they want to. Aeismail is correct because....well, I don't know what the \"cause\" is, but he manifestly is correct. I agree that his answer would be better if it were sourced, and if someone for whom I could reasonably assume good faith responded to his answer by challenging it, then I would certainly not have reacted in the same way.</p></li>\n<li><p>I didn't threaten anyone with a suspension. As has been pointed out, I don't have the power to do that. However I told the user that he is repeating past behavior that led to a suspension before. I think it is productive and healthy for users of this site to interact with each other directly as much as possible. Moderators have some responsibility to stay \"above the fray\" to the extent that they may not respond as directly to individual attacks as other users. Also I think it's better for a non-moderator to come to the defense of a moderator precisely because it's <em>less threatening</em>.</p></li>\n</ol>\n\n<p>Having said all that: I really think it's time for the moderators to have a conversation with this user. It just doesn't seem plausible that this user's future behavior will become constructive, or even not problematically negative and a big waste of everyone's time and energy, without course correction. If this seems in doubt we could discuss it in a separate meta question...but is it actually in doubt?</p>\n\n<p><b>Added</b>: As a sign of recognition that my comment was not ideally worded, I have deleted it. I think there's a good chance the answer itself will get deleted, so really why not...</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1954", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/958/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 1963, "author": "aeismail", "author_id": 53, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/53", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Your question also includes the statement:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>I know this will depend on kind of research you and your rivals are doing but still is there any commonality ?</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>which already indicates that the question is likely to be considered \"too broad\" (and indeed, the answer could vary greatly from field to field).</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 1965, "author": "jakebeal", "author_id": 22733, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>There are simply so <em>many</em> types of information and so many different fields. I would suggest narrowing your question to a specific field (e.g., \"In theological studies, what types of information...\") or a specific class of information (e.g., \"When is it a good idea to share anonymized experimental subject databases?\").</p>\n\n<p>If you have multiple areas that you would like to ask about, you can ask multiple questions (though I would not suggest asking too many all at once---you will likely get better quality answers if you ask a few at a time).</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 1966, "author": "Fomite", "author_id": 118, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/118", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Even with your edited question Dexter, it's going to be difficult if not impossible to answer. For example, does your work come from a specialized data set that would be hard to replicate? Is it work in progress, or near its final form? Is the manuscript ready for submission? Is your group powerful another that someone running off with a conference result of yours would blow back on them?</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 1973, "author": "Marxos", "author_id": 19703, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/19703", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I think it might mean that there are moderators that want their peeps to answer the question rather than the general public.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1962", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/41246/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 1971, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I agree with the comments that there are multiple topics in the proposed question. In this case, I think this is not only fine, but actually desirable.</p>\n\n<p>Because this question will deviate from our general \"policies\" in a number of ways, that is why having a meta discussion first is helpful. There is nothing wrong with breaking our own rules when we as a group want.</p>\n\n<p>People will always point to exceptions and use it to justify why their question is a good fit. Hopefully we will be able to steer then to meta posts that will explain how things work.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 1977, "author": "410 gone", "author_id": 96, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/96", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Put them as three separate questions. Put links in each, to the others.</p>\n\n<p>Then go through old, related questions, and where appropriate ruthlessly close them as duplicates of the new canonical questions.</p>\n\n<p>Creating a triple-question in one would create a broken window. It would linger and create problems from then on, until we relented and broke it up into separate questions. So let's just start with separate questions in the first place, and cut out all of the intervening nonsense.</p>\n\n<p>No amount of disclaimers about \"special questions\" or \"unique exemptions\" will prevent a multi-question question from being cited by others as a precedent. And they'd be absolutely right to do so: a precedent is exactly what it would be.</p>\n\n<p>We already frequently get multiple questions in one. Let's not encourage it, and let's not justify it.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 1985, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I am also in favor of separate questions with links to one another, as suggested by Energy Numbers, but for a different reason.</p>\n\n<p>I think pointing a user to a canonical question whose answer is very long, with many parts, is confusing for users. It's a little bit like if a student asks me a question about the Fourier transform, and in answer, I hand them the signal processing textbook. I would prefer to hand them a copy of just the relevant chapter, possibly with an additional comment noting the most relevant subsection...</p>\n\n<p>I always feel a little bad pointing a user with a very focused graduate admissions question to the lengthy canonical \"admissions process\" question, for this reason.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 1995, "author": "Wrzlprmft", "author_id": 7734, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734", "pm_score": 4, "selected": true, "text": "<p>I created the question and an answer as proposed:<br>\n<a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/55665/7734\">What does the typical workflow of a journal look like?</a></p>\n\n<p>I think that this actual realisation demonstrates that splitting this question would not be beneficial as it does not increase the additional information on alternative names and durations do not diminish the readability and can be easily skipped by readers who are not interested in them.</p>\n\n<p>Please contribute by improving question and answer and in particular by filling the list of alternative names of steps in the journal workflow.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1967", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 1976, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>If the \"beginner\" questions are within the scope of the site as defined in the <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic\">help center</a> and also are consistent with the general guidelines on <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask\">what not to ask</a> then yes, this is a good place for them.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 1978, "author": "xLeitix", "author_id": 10094, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/10094", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I am extremely confused by this question, but here goes.</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Is this a good place for beginners</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Yes, definitely. I would say most of our questions are asked by relatively junior academics (assuming that this is what you mean with \"beginners\" - if you mean beginner in another sense, you should clarify).</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>to seek information as they learn</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Isn't that what most questions are about? Of course, as per Stack Exchange standard rules, you will need to do some basic research on the topic yourself first, the question needs to be generalizable to others, it needs to be in scope topic-wise, and it cannot be a duplicate of an existing question.</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>or is that type of discussion completely (or mostly) discouraged?</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p><em>All</em> \"discussions\" are discouraged here. This isn't a forum. It is not supposed to be a back-and-forth between the OP and the community.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1975", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/41882/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 1982, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>If I am following the <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/admin/posts/timeline/55376#flag_41652\">timeline</a> correctly, there were 6 flags raised against the question and a reviewer recommendation of not an answer before the question was deleted. One of the flags was autogenerated, but at least 6 community members asked for mod intervention. All the flags were handled by the same mod.</p>\n\n<p>The mod did not delete the answer until there were two comments left to the poster, one by another mod and one by an active user. I think the comments could have been nicer and more welcoming, but I think the community was pretty clearly saying (1) we do not want this answer and (2) we do not want to be nice.</p>\n\n<p>I think it is reasonable for a mod to delete a repeatly flagged low quality answer when there are two comments explaining the situation. I am not even sure if it is nicer to add a 3rd comment about why the answer is inappropriate.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 1983, "author": "eykanal", "author_id": 73, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/73", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<ul>\n<li><p>As the moderator who deleted the comment, StrongBad's answer was exactly my thought; there were a few comments left immediately after the answer was posted suggesting improvement, which received no response. Even more so, there are numerous prompts to new users indicating that this is not the type of answer we are looking for. When a user ignores all that and leaves an answer of that type anyways, and then ignores comments suggesting improvement, there's really not much we can do.</p></li>\n<li><p>I would not convert something like this to a comment, because that type of comment would likely simply get \"too chatty\" flags or \"not constructive\" flags by itself.</p></li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>Answers like that are typically from users who read a popular question, post their first thought without reading any FAQ, warnings, or even necessarily the entirety of the question itself, and then never return to the forum.¹ I'm basing this on the global experience of the StackOverflow moderation team, who sees answers like this very frequently. If there was any evidence that the new user was interested in joining the forum, I would definitely act differently, but in this case I simply see someone leaving a reddit- or 4chan-style comment and moving on with their life.</p>\n\n<p>_{¹ Case in point: the user in question has yet returned to the site since posting that answer.}</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 1984, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I initially commented on the answer mostly as a notice of <em>why</em> I was going to delete it - I fully intended to delete it, then got distracted by something else. (Comments left by a moderator on a post just before post deletion still appear in the user's inbox.)</p>\n\n<p>I don't really understand the \"too fast\" thing. </p>\n\n<p>Clearly the answer was not suitable in its current form - I don't think anybody disagrees with this - so it should be removed as quickly as possible. Leaving unsuitable answers up just encourages more unsuitable answers, especially on popular questions.</p>\n\n<p>If a user chooses to come back and improve a deleted answer later, they can flag for a moderator to undelete. The edit will also bump the question to the top of the \"active questions\" list (even for deleted posts), so high-rep users who can see the answer can also flag for a moderator to undelete.</p>\n\n<p>I also don't see why this post should have been a comment. I mainly use the \"convert answer to comment\" tool in the following scenario: User posts question with unregistered account, user registers account, user doesn't see any way to respond to answers to his/her question (since it's not owned by the registered account), user posts responses to other answer as an answer. </p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1981", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 2000, "author": "jakebeal", "author_id": 22733, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733", "pm_score": 4, "selected": true, "text": "<p>I think you might as well ask: \"What causes occasional outbursts of pro-Americanism on this site?\" A number of the answers on that question also indulge in poorly justified American exceptionalism (e.g., invoking \"American spirit\") or rank speculation. Basically, it's an inherently highly polarizing question and humans tend to have fairly parochial views on such things. I don't think it has anything to do with anti-Americanism per se.</p>\n\n<p>Mix that with <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_disinhibition_effect\" rel=\"nofollow\">online disinhibition effect</a>, and personally I'm quite happy at the degree of civility that's being maintained. </p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2003, "author": "Massimo Ortolano", "author_id": 20058, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/20058", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<blockquote>\n <p>I'm struck by the willingness of some contributors to this site to\n express, either consciously or unconsciously, views about the U.S.\n higher educational system that are little more than thinly vailed anti-American rants.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>In general, I think that the regular users of Academia.SE are quite respectful of each other. The problem is that we work in several different educational systems that might value different qualities in their students or in their research, or they might be different in the paths chosen to reach their objectives. Sometimes, we simply don't understand or accept these differences, and sometimes we fall into the trap of trying to convince others that our system is better than theirs.</p>\n\n<p>Let me make a totally unrelated example. It's 1998, and I am a PhD student at his second trip to the US. A colleague of mine and I land in New York. Since we are both hungry, we decide to head for the nearest place to the hotel where we can get food: it's a McDonald. We look at the menus, and we find that something is missing. So from the middle of the queue, I ask loudly to one of the clerks: \"Hey, do you have beer?\". The room falls dead silent and everyone stare at us in disgust. The answer of the clerk is a sharp no, as though he can't even imagine how we dared asking such a thing (in many European countries you can buy beer in McDonalds). A few days later, we received the same look when in a supermarket we had asked where they kept the beers (then, we got the hint ;-) ).</p>\n\n<p>So, it is clear that Europeans and North-Americans do not understand each other when it comes to buying alcohol: for most of Europeans it's quite normal to drink beer while eating a hamburger, or to buy beer, wine, whisky etc. in a supermarket, but for many North-Americans this sounds shocking.</p>\n\n<p>In the same way, I think that there are things that we don't understand of our respective educational systems, and, sometimes, we find it difficult to accept.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1998", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/20825/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 2015, "author": "Stephan Kolassa", "author_id": 4140, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/4140", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>The consensus on StackExchange seems to be that <a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/64068/256777\">you shouldn't cross-post questions, even if they are on-topic for both sites</a>.</p>\n\n<p>In this particular case, the question is certainly more general than for math alone. (Note that most answers are not specific to math.) Thus, I'd strongly support closing it on Math Educators and leaving it open on Academia. (Unfortunately, I can't vote over there.)</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2016, "author": "quid", "author_id": 42813, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/42813", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I closed the question on MESE (I am a moderator there) and migrated it here. In addition I <em>flagged it for moderator attention</em> here so that they can be merged. </p>\n\n<p>By contrast, no-one raised any moderator-attention flag on MESE (while for a migration a moderator is needed regardless). The situation would have been handled quite a bit earlier had there been a flag (or other information via dedicate channels) instead of several comments. </p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2014", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/529/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 2018, "author": "Wrzlprmft", "author_id": 7734, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I draw the line for this close reason as follows:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Can answers to this question be expected to significantly go beyond saying “it depends” or “ask your supervisor, university, employer, etc.”? If no, vote to close.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>For example:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li><p>If somebody asks about how to write a certain aspect of a thesis, the best answers should almost always include “ask your supervisor and check your university’s regulations”, but often we can give general advice on how to choose if those source do not dictate a choice. If we can’t, then the question should be closed.</p></li>\n<li><p>The <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/51635/7734\">highest voted answer</a> on <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/51631/7734\">How to ask dumb questions</a> essentially says “it depends”, but it details <strong>how</strong> it depends. Such answers being conceivable makes the question on-topic.</p></li>\n<li><p>The answers to <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/16367/7734\">Why do American colleges and universities have sports teams?</a> do not list the motivation of each individual university to have a sports team, but give general motivations that can be expected to cover the motivations of most, if not all, such universities. If the motivations were indeed vastly inhomogeneous across universities, the question would be closeworthy with the above close reason.</p></li>\n<li><p>I voted to close <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/57676/7734\">your question</a> because I could not conceive an answer going significantly beyond “ask the employer“. And in fact <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/57676/how-to-deal-with-gpa-related-questions-in-standardized-job-application-forms-if#comment135040_57676\">a comment</a> and the first sentence in the answer you received (in the grace period after closing) say exactly this.</p>\n\n<p>While the answer’s second paragraph does add something beyond this, it does not feel like what the question has been looking for to me (I guess you could have thought of that yourself). The answer’s third paragraph is rather a comment on the question and would not make for a standalone answer.</p></li>\n</ul>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2040, "author": "Fomite", "author_id": 118, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/118", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "<p>As with Wrzlprmft, given I was one of the people who voted to close the question, it's probably worth be talking about why I voted that way. And essentially, it's because the answer I'd write in my head is either \"It depends\" or \"Ask them\".</p>\n\n<p>A couple factors that influence this:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>Is there a screening criteria based on GPA, or is this just because someone without a PhD did up the form. Will putting something like '99' cause my application to be round-filed? Is there a threshold GPA I need?</li>\n<li>Is your \"Pass/Fail\" GPA convertible to a numeric GPA? For example, I have been at an institution that <em>did</em> have a conversion system for this, and one that didn't. Does the employer have such a system?</li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>These are things we can't necessarily answer. I vote to close questions (among other reasons) if I don't think there's the possibility of giving an answer besides \"Well did you ask?\" where the answerer can be comfortable of the utility of their answer absent other information.</p>\n\n<p>I'll note that in my mind, jakebeal's answer falls in this category - it essentially boils down to \"Ask, and go from there\", which while perfectly correct is both very broad and not particularly actionable.</p>\n\n<p>To address a comment you made in one of the other answers, since this one largely mirrors it:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>With the same rationale I'd say half of the questions here on Academia.SE would fall into the same category as the answers essentially boil down to \"talk to your supervisor\"</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Somewhat (but only somewhat) flippantly, if I had infinite power over Stack Exchange, \"Have You Asked Your Supervisor?\" would be a mandatory popup before submitting a question on Academia.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2017", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/5674/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 2026, "author": "gnometorule", "author_id": 4384, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/4384", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>The voting model of the stack exchange system is entirely subjective. A user believing a question should be up-, or downvoted is free to act based on their personal philosophy. This will result in posts where you might wonder how the net vote score ended up being what it is; but, by definition, there are no <em>wrong</em> scores. If you feel that the underlying question, answer, or comment violates one of the site's stated restrictions (e.g., bigotry), flag for moderator attention. Other than that, any score is perfectly in line with the site's rules and philosophy. </p>\n\n<p>On the other hand, the site has a <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice\">rule to be nice</a>. Examples for discouraged behavior include to avoid \"belittling language\" and \"name-calling,\" and users are asked to \"assume good intentions.\" I would thus argue that your question, as currently stated, is counter to the site's spirit. </p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2027, "author": "Massimo Ortolano", "author_id": 20058, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/20058", "pm_score": 4, "selected": true, "text": "<blockquote>\n <p>Can someone please explain the philosophy of stackoverflow and why such questions get upvotes?</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Whatever the philosophy, questions and answers are upvoted and downvoted by whoever wish to do so, for whatever reason they fancy. I can upvote a question just because I like the way it is written; or simply because the poster is new to the website and I can give them a few reputation points so that they can comment; or because they made a joke that made me laugh; or because, however stupid it is, their problem had been my problem many years ago; or because I think that, anyhow, the poster might be a kind person because he or she wants to be courteous to their teacher; or ... yes, we can go on forever.</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Is it appreciated that people shutdown their brains and get totally paralyzed until someone tells them how to do thing?</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Random thoughts below:</p>\n\n<p>When I was a student at high-school, we used to assemble tube circuits powered from 500 V supply voltages on unisolated bread boards, so that every now and then a student could get the thrill of an electric shock.</p>\n\n<p>When I was a student at the university there weren't (almost) any university policies. It was just student against professor. If a professor wished to fail you because you, guy, were wearing an earring, there wasn't anything you could do; a professor could throw chalks to you because you were chit-chatting during a lesson; or they could take pictures of the class just to see at the exam if you skipped a few lessons; and the fact that a professor used to yell at students was, well, taken as normal.</p>\n\n<p>It can't be denied that proceeding, or barely surviving, in such an environment required students to turn on their brain. However, modern safety rules (what about the \"it's hot\" band around the coffee cups? what about the \"don't put the cat in the washing machine\" warning?) and university policies forbid all the above niceties to protect people from electric shock, harassment, discrimination etc. Do you consider this a bad thing?</p>\n\n<p>The price to pay -- of course there's always a price to pay -- is that people nowadays has become more cautious about doing things that can possibly break a rule. And so, yes, with the fear of doing something wrong, people sometimes ask questions whose answer seems pretty obvious to others.</p>\n\n<p>That said, as <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/52509/should-i-let-my-professor-know-that-i-cited-a-text-written-by-him-that-i-pira#comment121696_52509\">my most voted comment</a> highlights, sometimes I'm puzzled too.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2028, "author": "jakebeal", "author_id": 22733, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>In contrast with the other answers, I think there's often actually a good reason that \"bad\" questions get voted up. I tend to vote for a question when I think that the answers are likely to be interesting or useful, whether or not the question appears to come from a bizarre or foolish place.</p>\n\n<p>It's very easy for us, looking back from many years distance, to forget some of the confusion and anxiety that can be experienced by people who aren't as experienced---not just in academia but in dealing with people in general.</p>\n\n<p>For example, I have up-voted both of the questions that you link. My reasons were:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>For <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/57903/22733\">the question on missing class</a>, students---even early graduate students---often have a remarkable degree of anxiety tied to perfectionism and rule-following. This question of how to balance conflicting needs is thus likely to be be helpful to others in the same situation, and drew a number of careful answers.</li>\n<li>For <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/56543/22733\">the question on purchasing an essay and regretting it</a>, I thought it was actually an interesting question how exactly one draws the the boundary, which could be useful not just for students but for professors thinking about some of the screwy situations that students present them with. The answers ended up taking a number of different perspectives and making very interesting reading.</li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>In short, I try to remember that a vote on a <em>question</em> is not the same as voting on the <em>questioner</em>.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2025", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/14662/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 2036, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 6, "selected": true, "text": "<p>See <a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/200177/a-site-or-scraper-is-copying-content-from-stack-exchange-what-do-i-do\">A site (or scraper) is copying content from Stack Exchange. What do I do?</a>. This post details:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>When to report such sites,</li>\n<li>When not to report such sites,</li>\n<li>How to report such sites</li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>The site you have given as an example does not meet the attribution requirements, so you should report it.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2074, "author": "Nemo", "author_id": 32575, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/32575", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>You can easily find on their website <a href=\"https://web.archive.org/web/20151128220425/http://newtips.co/academia/questions/58128/student-wants-to-show-everybody-how-much-he-knows.html\" rel=\"nofollow\">an answer of yours</a> which has</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>no link whatsoever back to your post,</li>\n<li>no mention of your username or name,</li>\n<li>no mention of the license, even less a link to it.</li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>This is an egregious copyright violation and you, as an author, can and should send a DMCA takedown notice to defend the commons. Follow the <a href=\"https://godaddy.com/agreements/showdoc.aspx?pageid=TRADMARK_COPY\" rel=\"nofollow\">DMCA instructions of the registrar</a>, which is based in USA and can shut down the domain.\nStackExchange has less power than you in this matter, though it's nice to notify them with the general procedure linked above.</p>\n\n<p><strong>Update</strong>: newtips.co is responsive to DMCA notices, they removed a post of mine; pcusernet.com is still up; bighow.org is still up, I now sent a notice to their host ramnode.com as they are in violation of <a href=\"https://clientarea.ramnode.com/aup.php\" rel=\"nofollow\">AUP</a>.</p>\n\n<p><strong>Update 2</strong>: pcusernet.com is blocked on Firefox and Chromium as malware site, bighow.org continues business as usual but has removed my post. Do send complaints for every plagiarism of your own posts, eventually they'll give up!</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2035", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/4384/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 2057, "author": "Wrzlprmft", "author_id": 7734, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Some ideas that come to mind:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li><p>Replace the second sentence of the tag-wiki excerpt with:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Do not use this tag for questions about lecturing.</p>\n</blockquote></li>\n<li><p>Install a <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1886/7734\">tag warning</a>.</p></li>\n<li><p>Remove all wrong uses of the tag and regularly monitor it for new mistagged questions, hoping to better exemplify the usage of this tag. I have did this for some time with <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/research\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;research&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">research</a> and had the feeling that the number of new mistagged questions was reduced (but I have no solid numbers on this). However, I guess that this effect was only due to people seeing this tag less often on the front page.</p></li>\n</ul>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2069, "author": "Ébe Isaac", "author_id": 40592, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/40592", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "<p>In my view, it would be better to include a \"lecturing\" tag as suggested by @jakebeal. </p>\n\n<p>As discussed, this would be different from the sense of the <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/teaching\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;teaching&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">teaching</a> tag in the sense that it covers only the classroom lecturing aspect, while the description of the tag states</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>This tag is related to the role and duties of a teacher, an academic instructor, tutor or a teaching assistant. </p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Although the description of a \"lecturing\" tag may be a subset of the <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/teaching\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;teaching&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">teaching</a> tag, it would have a more specific aspect rather than a synonym. </p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2073, "author": "Peter Taylor", "author_id": 22995, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22995", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<blockquote>\n <p>The lecturer tag is supposed to be for questions about the job of lecturer, a specific academic job title that exists in some parts of the world.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Does it even make sense to have a tag for a specific job title when the meaning of the job title varies from country to country? I suggest that renaming the tag to <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/junior-faculty\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;junior-faculty&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">junior-faculty</a> would give it a more cohesive identity (i.e. one which is more likely to interpreted uniformly by people from different academic cultures) as well as removing the ambiguity.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2055", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 2057, "author": "Wrzlprmft", "author_id": 7734, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Some ideas that come to mind:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li><p>Replace the second sentence of the tag-wiki excerpt with:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Do not use this tag for questions about lecturing.</p>\n</blockquote></li>\n<li><p>Install a <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1886/7734\">tag warning</a>.</p></li>\n<li><p>Remove all wrong uses of the tag and regularly monitor it for new mistagged questions, hoping to better exemplify the usage of this tag. I have did this for some time with <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/research\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;research&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">research</a> and had the feeling that the number of new mistagged questions was reduced (but I have no solid numbers on this). However, I guess that this effect was only due to people seeing this tag less often on the front page.</p></li>\n</ul>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2069, "author": "Ébe Isaac", "author_id": 40592, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/40592", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "<p>In my view, it would be better to include a \"lecturing\" tag as suggested by @jakebeal. </p>\n\n<p>As discussed, this would be different from the sense of the <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/teaching\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;teaching&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">teaching</a> tag in the sense that it covers only the classroom lecturing aspect, while the description of the tag states</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>This tag is related to the role and duties of a teacher, an academic instructor, tutor or a teaching assistant. </p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Although the description of a \"lecturing\" tag may be a subset of the <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/teaching\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;teaching&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">teaching</a> tag, it would have a more specific aspect rather than a synonym. </p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2073, "author": "Peter Taylor", "author_id": 22995, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22995", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<blockquote>\n <p>The lecturer tag is supposed to be for questions about the job of lecturer, a specific academic job title that exists in some parts of the world.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Does it even make sense to have a tag for a specific job title when the meaning of the job title varies from country to country? I suggest that renaming the tag to <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/junior-faculty\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;junior-faculty&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">junior-faculty</a> would give it a more cohesive identity (i.e. one which is more likely to interpreted uniformly by people from different academic cultures) as well as removing the ambiguity.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2058", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 2066, "author": "jakebeal", "author_id": 22733, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I have no idea why it's picking up down votes: I thought it was a pretty good question and so I voted it up and answered it.</p>\n\n<p>I will note, however, that somebody flagged it for possible closure as \"primarily opinion based\", so it may be that some people are thinking it might be too much of a personal choice. From my answer, however, you will see that I think there <em>is</em> a fairly general approach that can be taken to this sort of question.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2072, "author": "410 gone", "author_id": 96, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/96", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I think the line \"people won't see my nips anyway\" is just the sort of throwaway line that doesn't add to the post, and is just the sort of thing we've seen from previous posters who just posted silliness in order to prompt any kind of reaction.</p>\n\n<p>If you don't want to be mistaken for one of those type of posters, don't write like them</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2065", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/43665/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 2076, "author": "jakebeal", "author_id": 22733, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I feel like these are fairly rare cases, and that each tends to be unique---they're just very perceptually prominent to us right now because we happened to get two in close succession. As such, I think that the current system (identify as off-topic, migrate if well-formed) is fine for dealing with them.</p>\n\n<p>Complementarily, I would worry that a scaring off people who have a <em>good</em> question to ask on topics like law and health, since many times there is sufficient practical expertise to handle these questions, as can be seen when browsing those tags.</p>\n\n<p>In many cases, in fact, I believe that the highly technical questions of these types are <a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem\">XY problems</a>. For example, <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/42196/do-i-have-the-legal-right-to-demand-information-on-plagiarism-of-my-work-from-an\">this question on legal rights to demand information from a university</a> drew many strong answers that pointed out that the legal approach was not the right way to approach the problem and suggested better ones instead.</p>\n\n<p>In short: let's leave them be and see if they accumulate enough that it's actually a critical mass demanding action.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2077, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Just because we cannot answer them, does not make them off topic. I think we should leave them open. I think we should also help get them answered, possibly by posting in another SE site's chat or even someplace like REDDIT. If they remain unanswered for a while, we could offer bounties to try and help get an answer.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2078, "author": "Pete L. Clark", "author_id": 938, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/938", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>In general, I think an on-topic question on this site should at least have a significant component which can be answered by those with expertise in academia. While abstractly it need not be so, in reality this site is populated by a relatively temporary community of questioners and a relatively permanent community of answerers (I would like it better if there were more give and take, by the way, but the SE model seems to push things in this direction). If the answerers, as a group, answer most questions well (as I think we do) then over time the site itself acquires a reputation of legitimacy and expertise in certain areas.</p>\n\n<p>When we get asked questions which are <em>set in academia</em> but academics are unqualified to answer, I think everything is set up for much worse answers. SE is designed precisely to condition people to participate more, rather than less, and so such questions are very likely to attract answers anyway...just with the absence of expertise. When the locus of expertise is too remote, it becomes difficult even for the community to evaluate answers, which is a key step of the process. When it comes to, say, legal and medical advice, it is hard for me to tell the difference between someone with knowledge and someone who googled the keywords and is reporting the search results.</p>\n\n<p>I think that these issues should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, and it is the serious users of the site who should determine what is on-topic. (I strongly doubt that most users determine what questions they should be asking using the help center, but let met not digress.) For the two sample questions above, the first one looks like it requires both academic and legal expertise, and moreover academic experts -- enough of us, anyway -- should have some level of professional expertise in the law as it pertains to academic publication. I think the second sample question is a clear mismatch for our site. I <em>don't</em> think it is about student life in an essential way: the way a graduate student goes about determining if he has a learning disability is the way any other educated adult goes about determining if he has a learning disability...right? By the way, I don't really know: as a lifelong academic I have <strong>precisely zero training</strong> in diagnosing learning disabilities in myself and others. Rather I have been trained not to pretend that I know how to do this but rather to refer interested parties to the appropriate resource centers on my university campus. I think we serve our clientele well by making a similar referral rather than taking a shot at answering questions like this.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2079, "author": "Wrzlprmft", "author_id": 7734, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Half in response to a <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2075/should-we-specify-that-questions-where-expert-answers-are-from-experts-outside#comment8188_2076\">comment</a>:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>It seems a little unfair to me that we close these questions without saying anywhere in the help center that they're off topic. That is what I perceive as the &quot;gap&quot; in the current system.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>You cannot specify a site’s scope so precisely that you list everything that is off-topic somewhere. What we do list in the <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic\">help centre</a> is (boldface mine):</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>If you have a question <strong>about</strong>...</p>\n<ul>\n<li>Life as a graduate student, postdoctoral researcher, university professor</li>\n<li>Transitioning from undergraduate to graduate researcher</li>\n<li>Inner workings of research departments</li>\n<li>Requirements and expectations of academicians</li>\n<li>University-level pedagogy</li>\n</ul>\n<p>... then you're in the right place!</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>The argument for closing the example questions (whether you agree with it or not), is essentially, that they are not <strong>about</strong> any of the above but about crafting a copyright policy or psychiatric assessment, respectively. With other words: Boat academia.</p>\n<p>Of course, drawing a clear line between on-topicness and off-topicness here is impossible, as the questions are not entirely not about academia. But this would be the case with your proposed extension as well. Therefore closure is eventually opinion-based to some point.</p>\n<p>I thus do not think that we need a line in the help centre covering such questions as it could rather do harm in form of people feeling obliged to close questions with this argument, even though nobody actually considers them off-topic and they are best fit on our site (rather than, e.g., Law or Health). (On German Language SE, we had a some quarrel and confusion about a close reason that said that some specific type of question was off-topic under certain conditions, which most people did not really agree with, and eventually solved it by making the close reason more fuzzy and less prescriptive.)</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2075", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 2086, "author": "jakebeal", "author_id": 22733, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p>These sorts of questions do not worry me too much, for the following reason: we judge questions here based on whether they are likely to have durable value to others, not based on whether the original poster is likely to find the answer valuable. Thus, it doesn't really matter all that much whether the OP is sane or real (I think more of this is crazy than trolling, personally). Instead, it matters whether we think the question is interesting and answerable. If it's interesting and answerable, we keep it; if not, we close it. Strange and inappropriate origins of questions can still produce good answers, and that's the real measure of a question in my view.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2087, "author": "D.W.", "author_id": 705, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/705", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I can recommend you apply one or more of the following strategies:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li><p>Downvote them. If they seem unlikely to be true and not useful to the site, downvote them. If trollers find that their questions are downvoted, eventually they will get the message and move on.</p></li>\n<li><p>If the troll-question is covered by an existing question, vote to close it as a duplicate of the existing question.</p></li>\n<li><p>Ask a new question that is a more reasonable, generalization of the troll-question. Choose a new question that will actually be useful and that gets at the heart of the troll-question, but without the silly click-bait dramatics. Then, once your new question gets answers, vote to close the troll-question as a duplicate of the new question. This way, you have improved the site by posting a new, useful question that might be useful to others.</p></li>\n<li><p>Do nothing. Move on, and answer some other question.</p></li>\n</ul>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2092, "author": "Pete L. Clark", "author_id": 938, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/938", "pm_score": 5, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I think that some people here are perhaps a bit overly skeptical about what exists out there in academia. (I know that my own eyes have widened quite a bit in the time I've spent on this site.) I think that many posters here are quite confused / distressed either about academia in general or about their specific issues. It is clearly also the case that people are writing from all over the world, and sometimes there are serious language issues and/or cultural differences in play. </p>\n\n<p>The fact that (say) graduate students can be quite confused, even to the extent of not correctly understanding the basic facts of their situation, is unfortunately quite recognizable to me from my real world academic experience. So many times I have seen students troubled because they are getting contradictory information / advice from different faculty members. When I talk to the faculty members, very often the contradiction disappears. Clearly a lot of students are not comfortable asking \"What do you mean?\" and similar basic clarifying questions, so they can live in quite counterfactual worlds. (This describes me as a student, by the way.)</p>\n\n<p>In particular I find the second question quite believable. I think that if I were to meet the OP in real life and could brush aside linguistic differences, the way I would describe his situation would be quite different from the way he has described it, but I find the overall sentiments very sincere. </p>\n\n<p>The first question is a bit different: it's a highly unusual situation combined with an OP who doesn't sound like a faculty member and thesis advisor to me. I stayed away from it because it seemed, if true, to be too exceptional to be worth wading into.</p>\n\n<p>Anyway, I agree with @jakebeal: we don't have to believe that the OP is in the situation s/he claims in order to accept the question. We have to believe that the question is a useful one for others in academia. Hypothetical or bizarre questions can be silly or bait for arguments, but not necessarily so: sometimes they elicit very interesting and useful answers. </p>\n\n<p>By the way, I have always found the SE-wide policy</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>You should only ask practical […] questions based on actual problems that you face.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>to be off-center enough not to take too seriously. In sites based on branches of academia like mathematics or philosophy, what is a \"practical question\" or an \"actual problem\"? I take this to mean that people asking questions should be asking them in good faith and out of a sincere desire to know the answer. I would urge others not to read too much more into this than that. </p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2085", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 2094, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 4, "selected": true, "text": "<p>To answer the question, this is the right place to bring it up. If two users, or groups of users, get into an editing war, a mod will lock the post until things can get sorted out. Hopefully, by raising the issue in meta the issue will get sorted. I am not sure what the right answer is in regards to the title in question. It might be best to ask a specific question on meta about that question and link to the meta question in a comment on the main question. This current question is probably fine, but not ideal, since it has the needed details.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2095, "author": "aeismail", "author_id": 53, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/53", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>In addition to StrongBad's answer, you can also attempt to \"flag\" the question for moderator attention, and then provide information about what's wrong under the \"in need of moderator intervention\" box at the bottom of the pop-up menu.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2093", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/32436/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 2104, "author": "Massimo Ortolano", "author_id": 20058, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/20058", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>We have already a bunch of <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/search?q=%5Bsocial-media%5D+researchgate\">questions and answers</a> about ResearchGate. So, if you have a new question, you can probably go on and ask. Be sure, however, that your question can be answered by the usual bunch of strangers on the Internet, who are just users of that service and for which certain details of its workings are totally unaccessible. </p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2105, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 3, "selected": true, "text": "<p>The specific question you described in a comment,</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Why Researchgate have bad reputation according to members of this site?</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>sounds like it would be closed as an opinion-based question - it's basically an invitation for others to share opinions, which is off topic here as described in the <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask\">help center</a>.</p>\n\n<p>Besides, existing questions like <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/16870/researchgate-an-asset-or-a-waste-of-time\">ResearchGate: an asset or a waste of time?</a> and <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/24127/should-i-send-a-cease-and-desist-letter-to-researchgate\">Should I send a \"cease-and-desist\" letter to ResearchGate?</a> already explain in great detail why so many academics dislike them.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2107, "author": "410 gone", "author_id": 96, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/96", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "<p>No, you can't ask a question with the intent of having a discussion about <em>any</em> subject.</p>\n\n<p>We're not a forum, and we're not here for discussion. We're here for specific questions with specific answers.</p>\n\n<p>If you just want to chat, we have <a href=\"http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/2496/academia\">a separate place for that</a>.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2103", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/41198/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 2112, "author": "eykanal", "author_id": 73, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/73", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I see no issue with removing that section, personally. I agree that it doesn't add anything substantiative to the question.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2113, "author": "Wrzlprmft", "author_id": 7734, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734", "pm_score": 3, "selected": true, "text": "<p>In you specific example, I agree with removing the background.</p>\n\n<p>However, in general, I would be very careful to remove background information, because <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1212/7734\">academia varies more than you think it does</a>: What you consider irrelevant from your experience may be relevant in other fields, countries and similar. Moreover, we encourage new users to rather give us too much background than to little, as they often even know less what’s relevant. It might thus be discouraging if we remove the background early on.</p>\n\n<p>As an alternative to deleting consider moving the background under some subsection such that the relevant parts of the question are streamlined and the background isn’t lost.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2106", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/14341/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 2115, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 3, "selected": true, "text": "<p><strong>TL;DR</strong>: The <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/personal-statement\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;personal-statement&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">personal-statement</a> tag was created to represent a non-standard meaning of the phrase. Tags should be unambiguous words or phrases used according to their <em>most common</em> usage in an academic context. So let's synonymize <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/personal-statement\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;personal-statement&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">personal-statement</a> to <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/statement-of-purpose\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;statement-of-purpose&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">statement-of-purpose</a>, its most common usage.</p>\n\n<hr>\n\n<p>The <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/personal-statement\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;personal-statement&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">personal-statement</a> tag was created by a user to distinguish questions about a \"personal statement\" required for graduate school admissions that was <em>distinct</em> from the \"statement of purpose.\"</p>\n\n<p>The problem, of course, is that \"personal statement\" is used more often as another term for \"statement of purpose\" than to refer to a <em>different</em> kind of statement. So the likely result of having two tags is that users will be confused as to how to tag questions, and we'll end up \"splitting\" questions about the same document into two tags - which is a bad thing.</p>\n\n<p>For the reason stated above, I personally am in favor of making <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/personal-statement\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;personal-statement&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">personal-statement</a> a tag synonym of <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/statement-of-purpose\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;statement-of-purpose&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">statement-of-purpose</a>, and using <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/statement-of-purpose\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;statement-of-purpose&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">statement-of-purpose</a> for:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>questions about a statement of purpose</li>\n<li>questions about a personal statement AKA statement of purpose</li>\n<li>questions about a personal statement that is <em>not</em> the same as a statement of purpose, just because we don't have any good way to distinguish this case from the previous one (and the previous one is much more common). We can edit the tag wiki excerpt to specify that <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/statement-of-purpose\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;statement-of-purpose&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">statement-of-purpose</a> also includes questions about personal statements.</li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>But that's just my opinion, we'll see what others think.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2116, "author": "Ooker", "author_id": 14341, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/14341", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>As someone who create the tag, I of course think it necessary to have a distinguished tag (in fact, 3 of 7 questions in <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/personal-statement\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;personal-statement&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">personal-statement</a> are mine). You can read the whole difference between these two statements in <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/56772/14341\">How to structure the personal statement?</a>, but in short, in universities that require both, the SOP/research statement focuses only to your research, while the personal statement is only to tell about anything else that reveals you as a person. </p>\n\n<p>If we synonymize them, we need to make sure that for questions that ask about this specific case, the answerers should be <strong>aware</strong> of this unusual. If we synonymize them, and when the asker has specifically told what meaning they are mentioning, the answerers find no problem with that, then I happy to have them synonymized.</p>\n\n<p>Unfortunately, this is not the case. In the linked question in paragraph 1, you can see that the top voted answer (not the accepted one) had mistaken the concept, <em>even when I had told what meaning I used</em> (to be fair, I didn't add the note line at first). The number of vote indicates that not only that answerer, but also the voters mistook that too. Answers are pearl, so an off-topic answer is badly wasteful.</p>\n\n<p><strong>>></strong> That's not the fault of them, after all there is no agreement among the schools. Some separate the two, some don't. For who lives in the latter, we need to educate them that there exists the former. And there is no way to teach about something better than creating a noun, a name, a concept, a category for it. <a href=\"http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2976405/Could-ancestors-blue-Ancient-civilisations-didn-t-perceive-colour-didn-t-word-say-scientists.html\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">We cannot see the blue color, unless we have a name for it</a>. <a href=\"http://nautil.us/blog/how-our-words-affect-our-thoughts-on-race-and-gender\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">We also don't have any bias for people who have pendulous earlobes, because we don't have a name for them</a>.</p>\n\n<p>So this case, I propose to keep the tag. All it needs is the detailed description below.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2114", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/9488/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 2122, "author": "Roger Fan", "author_id": 20375, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/20375", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>There have been a couple questions about speaking on the site (for instance, <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/12904/good-book-on-english-for-academic-writing-and-speaking-for-non-native-speakers\">here</a> and <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/55683/tongue-slip-problem-in-presentation-even-after-a-good-amount-of-practice\">here</a>). I don't think, however, that any question regarding your proposed example is really applicable. The common element of the speaking questions that have been asked before is that they are either reference requests for resources to use (or point others towards) when learning the language, or are specifically about how to communicate in academic presentations.</p>\n\n<p>Otherwise, it's a not-well-defined topic that doesn't really fit the site or the audience. Even in this meta post, you haven't really been able to conceptualize what the question you want to ask is. Basically, it boils down to something like \"How do I communicate what I think better?\", which is an incredibly broad and impossible-to-answer question. Even if you could get a reasonable question out of it, it becomes a pretty clear case of boat programming to me. Communication is essential to a lot more than academia, and unless the question involves communicating in specific academic situations I don't think it would be on-topic.</p>\n\n<p>Ultimately, the best advice I can give you is to work on your English, practice thinking and speaking, and continue to familiarize yourself with the topics. Working on your writing will help as well, you have very good English for a non-native speaker, but there is a lot of room for improvement in terms of clarity and structure.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2123, "author": "jakebeal", "author_id": 22733, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Academic communications, including speaking, are most certainly on-topic at this site. The challenge is making an answerable question out of your concerns. </p>\n\n<p>For example, what you have expressed above is not quite answerable. My key questions would be:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>What is the context of the communication? Informal setting? Planned discussion? Prepared talk? These strongly affect the answers you might get.</li>\n<li>What exactly is the help you want? Are you wanting to know how to prevent the problem, how to recover from it, how serious it is, something else entirely?</li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>In short: ask away, refine as best you can, and be prepared to refine further in response to \"unclear what you're asking\"</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2121", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/14341/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 2129, "author": "jakebeal", "author_id": 22733, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733", "pm_score": 3, "selected": true, "text": "<p>I see the following:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>Significant parts of Europe, such as Norway and Switzerland, are not part of the EU</li>\n<li>Europe is likely to remain coherent for a long time, whereas it is possible that near-future political events might significantly change the definition of the EU.</li>\n<li>All of the questions that I see tagged with EU appear to be fine to tag with Europe. </li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>I would thus recommend re-tagging, and not creating a synonym.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2130, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>The EU and Europe are not the same. The tag usage, in my opinion, is pretty good and demonstrates a need for two separate tags (and possibly a third tag). </p>\n\n<p>There are questions which apply only to the EU. All the questions currently tagged EU seem correctly tagged. There are few EU specific questions tagged Europe.</p>\n\n<p>There are questions that apply to all of Europe. This seems to be the vast majority of the questions tagged Europe.</p>\n\n<p>There are a few questions that apply to non-EU countries in Europe.</p>\n\n<p>I propose three tags: <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/europe\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;europe&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">europe</a>, <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/europe-eu\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;europe-eu&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">europe-eu</a>, and <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/europe-non-eu\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;europe-non-eu&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">europe-non-eu</a> (I don't really like that name/hyphenation). Then we could make <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/eu\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;eu&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">eu</a> a synonym of <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/europe-eu\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;europe-eu&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">europe-eu</a>.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2139, "author": "Federico Poloni", "author_id": 958, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/958", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I am for creating a synonym, for the reasons already perfectly stated in @ff524's comment:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>you are suggesting that eu questions are a subset of the europe category, and that the broader tag (europe) is a good enough classification and the eu sub-classification is not necessary. Is that accurate? If so, why not create a synonym? That's what we usually do for \"subclasses\" for which we don't want to maintain a separate tag, because otherwise the separate tag will probably just be recreated soon.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>I realize that EU does not coincide with Europe. Still, keeping track of the full hierarchy between the various European supernational entities is <a href=\"https://i.imgur.com/xEKxj2e.jpg\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">quite complicated</a>, and in my opinion the advantages do not offset the inconvenience of having multiple tags, especially if they are used only for five questions or so.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2140, "author": "Cape Code", "author_id": 10643, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/10643", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>The current situation is fine. <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/eu\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;eu&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">eu</a> is specific to grants and administrative aspects relating to the political entity of the European Union, and <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/europe\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;europe&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">europe</a>, although a very vague tag since academia varies vastly between European countries, describes the geographic entity. <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/europe\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;europe&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">europe</a> can be used to exclude the American or Asian context. They are not synonyms </p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2127", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/9488/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 2132, "author": "WBT", "author_id": 36320, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/36320", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "<p><strong>Yes.</strong></p>\n\n<p>If it were an organization or site limited to one specific university/local chapter, then it might not be useful to enough people to warrant Q &amp; A here.</p>\n\n<p>However, I think ff524's rule that \"we generalize questions to provide answers that teach people how to judge for themselves any journal, university, honor society. etc.\" is too broad, limiting questions and answers to only those too broad to be useful for the specific question being asked. </p>\n\n<p>General assessment questions are helpful, but specific ones about sufficiently large organizations or websites should also be permitted, as evidenced by the reception to the questions linked to above (feel free to expand the list if you know of other examples beyond my quick search). </p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2133, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I didn't say that I was expanding <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1462/are-questions-about-the-reputability-of-individual-journals-publishers-or-confe\">this policy</a> to apply to <em>all</em> websites and large membership organizations. I believe it applies to questions about individual honor societies, including <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/60869/is-honorsociety-org-legit\">your question</a> asking about the legitimacy of a specific honor society. </p>\n\n<p>For questions of the form \"Is honor society X legitimate?\" \"Do graduate schools care about membership in honor society X?\" \"How to specify membership in honor society X on my CV?\" and \"Does membership in honor society X carry any professional weight/recognition?\" I believe the rationale <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1477/11365\">here</a> still applies and they should be asked and answered in a general way as stated in that answer.</p>\n\n<p>The question <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/18193/do-graduate-schools-pay-attention-to-joining-phi-kappa-phi-or-other-honor-societ\">Do graduate schools pay attention to joining Phi Kappa Phi or other honor societies?</a> <em>is</em> a general question (see \"or other societies\") that happens to give a specific example in the title. The most upvoted answer on that question gives advice about honor societies in general.</p>\n\n<p>Regarding other instances of questions about specific professional associations, websites, etc. I think it's worth evaluating them on a case-by-case basis. Services like Google Scholar, ResearchGate, and Academia.edu and associations like ACM, IEEE, AMS, etc. are very different from any individual honor society with respect to the magnitude and reach of their impact on the academic community. </p>\n\n<p>As a rule of thumb, I think if you can rephrase the question to ask \"about X and other things like X\" without it being ridiculous, then you should. Asking a question about \"ACM or other huge academic society and publisher for computer science\" on the other hand sounds like asking about \"Holy Grail or some other famous cup\" (to borrow a <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/18496/11365\">great phrase from Pete L. Clark</a>). I don't think we need to generalize to the point of ridiculousness.</p>\n\n<p>I'll also address </p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>If we're limited to one general question, why even have a tag for <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/honor-societies\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;honor-societies&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">honor-societies</a> or <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/online-resource\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;online-resource&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">online-resource</a> etc.?</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Because people may ask <em>different</em> generalizable questions about these topics. If you look at the four existing (open) questions in <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/honor-societies\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;honor-societies&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">honor-societies</a>, you will see that there are multiple general questions asking different things.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2134, "author": "xLeitix", "author_id": 10094, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/10094", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I am with ff524 on this one. To me, one useful rule of thumb for \"too localized\" is if we could easily end up with an array of near-identical questions that differ only in the subject. This could happen if we encouraged questions about individual journals (<em>\"Is journal A legit?\"</em>, <em>\"What about journal B?\"</em> etc.), and the same is also true for individual honour societies. This is no real danger for the likes of Google Scholar or ACM. There simply are not all that many of these systems or organisations out there. This is, I think, also what Pete meant with his \"Holy Grail or some other famous cup\" statement.</p>\n\n<p>I do agree that not all of the questions that you cite above are great questions - I would have no issue with some of them being closed. However, SE is not case law - just because you found one or more comparable examples that kind of slipped through (and not all that you mention qualify, in my opinion) does not mean that your question also becomes fine. I agree with closing your question.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2131", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/36320/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 2146, "author": "jakebeal", "author_id": 22733, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Most <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/legal-issues\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;legal-issues&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">legal-issues</a> questions on Academia.SE are not about the law per se, but rather about the de facto interaction of academic standards and practices with issues regarding the law. That sort of thing is completely within scope of this site.</p>\n\n<p>Your linked question, on the other hand, explicitly says that it is:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>\"ignoring ethical/political/any other non-legal issues\"</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>in other words, focusing explicitly on the law. This is very different, and requires a precise technical answer, making it on topic at Law.SE but not here.</p>\n\n<p>Presumably, you gave it this focus so that it would not be closed as a duplicate of \"<a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/17005/22733\">Is consent required to record audio of a conference talk in the US?</a>\", since the top and accepted answer to that question says that the legal issues are less important than the academic standards and practices around the issue. So either:</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li>You have some reason to believe that the standards of the academic community would be different when international conferences are held in France than when they are held in the United States, and should modify the question to explain that, or</li>\n<li>The question belongs on Law.SE and not Academia.SE, or</li>\n<li>Something I have no understanding of is going on in your question and I would advise you to explain it better.</li>\n</ol>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2147, "author": "Franck Dernoncourt", "author_id": 452, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/452", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>The stance on questions pertaining to legal issues has not changed.</p>\n\n<p>The most upvoted answer in <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1340/452\">On-topic-ness of questions on legal issues related to academia?</a> clearly says:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>I believe questions asking for general legal background about a particular academic issue should be considered on topic here.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>The question <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/31806/452\">https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/31806/452</a> is therefore on-topic.</p>\n\n<hr>\n\n<p>There exist a number of questions that clearly ask for the legal side only, and are not closed, e.g.:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li><a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/100529/452\">Is &quot;Assistant Professor Position (Tenure Track) for a female Researcher&quot; illegal in Austria?</a></li>\n<li><a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/86414/452\">Is it legal to use sci-hub.cc in Germany?</a></li>\n<li><a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/10340/452\">Is it illegal to share publications not in the public domain with collaborators?</a></li>\n<li><a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/59121/452\">License of code accompanying a published article</a>.</li>\n<li><a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/51195/452\">Is it okay to upload the PDF of my non-open access papers in academia.edu or research gate?</a> (the question clearly focuses on the legal aspect only)</li>\n<li><a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/36438/452\">Do Universities have a right to stop students from talking about questions on tests?</a></li>\n<li><a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/29951/452\">Who owns the intellectual property for work you do on weekends?</a> (the question clearly focuses on the legal aspect only)</li>\n<li><a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/65934/452\">Do Nature journals wrongly claim copyright in their published pdfs?</a> (the question clearly focuses on the legal aspect only, and was asked several months after the question mentioned in the meta question got closed)</li>\n<li><a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/72788/452\">Correctly licensing someone else&#39;s photo for publication in open-access journal</a> (the question clearly focuses on the legal aspect only, and was asked several months after the question mentioned in the meta question got closed)</li>\n<li><a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/72809/452\">Is it legal to upload preprint on ResearchGate?</a> (the question clearly focuses on the legal aspect only, and was asked several months after the question mentioned in the meta question got closed)</li>\n</ul>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2141", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/452/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 2149, "author": "Grace Note", "author_id": 72, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/72", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"https://twitter.com/StackAcademia\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/wLQrl.png\" alt=\"Help this community grow -- follow us on twitter!\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2151, "author": "E.P.", "author_id": 820, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/820", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"http://www.zotero.org\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/NS3GV.png\" alt=\"Zotero reference manager: free and open source\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2153, "author": "jakebeal", "author_id": 22733, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"http://retractionwatch.com/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/SFSyZ.png\" alt=\"Retraction Watch\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2155, "author": "E.P.", "author_id": 820, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/820", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"http://arxiv.org/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/S7nmM.png\" alt=\"arXiv.org - over a million papers, free to access\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2156, "author": "E.P.", "author_id": 820, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/820", "pm_score": 5, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"http://arxiv.org\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/ziQXb.png\" alt=\"arXiv.org: the leading open access eprint repository\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2157, "author": "E.P.", "author_id": 820, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/820", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"http://detexify.kirelabs.org/classify.html\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/E9D64.png\" alt=\"Detexify: automated LaTeX symbol recognition\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2158, "author": "E.P.", "author_id": 820, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/820", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"http://thecostofknowledge.com/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/vu8lo.png\" alt=\"The Cost of Knowledge - join the Elsevier boycott and take back our scientific publishing!\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2160, "author": "Dilaton", "author_id": 5904, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/5904", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"http://www.physicsoverflow.org/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/Pqs48.png\" alt=\"physicsoverflow.org\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2162, "author": "e-sushi", "author_id": 8031, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/8031", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"http://crypto.stackexchange.com\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/AkQzj.png\" alt=\"cryptography.stackexchange.com\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2164, "author": "pintoch", "author_id": 21974, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/21974", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"http://dissem.in\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/HAnRi.png\" alt=\"Are your papers available in an open access repository? Check with Dissemin\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2165, "author": "Cape Code", "author_id": 10643, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/10643", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"https://pubpeer.com/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/FvMAw.png\" alt=\"Pubpeer.com\" /></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2166, "author": "E.P.", "author_id": 820, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/820", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"https://hsm.stackexchange.com/\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/353zN.png\" alt=\"History of Science and Mathematics at Stack Exchange\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2167, "author": "E.P.", "author_id": 820, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/820", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"http://arxitics.com/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/ANuxU.png\" alt=\"arXiv Analytics: specialized web portal dedicated to reading &amp; discussing arXiv eprints\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2168, "author": "E.P.", "author_id": 820, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/820", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"https://scirate.com/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/pefiz.png\" alt=\"SciRate\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2169, "author": "E.P.", "author_id": 820, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/820", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"http://scicomp.stackexchange.com\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/O9ZQy.png\" alt=\"Computational Science at Stack Exchange\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2170, "author": "Martin - マーチン", "author_id": 13372, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/13372", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"http://chemistry.stackexchange.com\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/noaFv.png\" alt=\"Haikus are awesome/ Chemistry is more so/ Ask straight away!\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2171, "author": "E.P.", "author_id": 820, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/820", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"http://archive.org/web/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/1wvvA.png\" alt=\"Wayback Machine: experience the Web as it was\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2172, "author": "E.P.", "author_id": 820, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/820", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"http://archive.org\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/ij43t.png\" alt=\"archive.org - the public library of the internet\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2173, "author": "E.P.", "author_id": 820, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/820", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"http://opensciencefederation.com/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/mOPXr.png\" alt=\"Tagline to show on mouseover\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2174, "author": "E.P.", "author_id": 820, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/820", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"http://creativecommons.org/licenses/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/7w2zo.png\" alt=\"Tagline to show on mouseover\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2175, "author": "Ooker", "author_id": 14341, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/14341", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/82841/language-learning?referrer=sg-MbJAGOjNnNFDS7ptHjQ2\"><img src=\"http://area51.stackexchange.com/ads/proposal/82841.png\" alt=\"Tagline to show on mouseover\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2186, "author": "Sepideh Abadpour", "author_id": 11734, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11734", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/90327/geomatics-and-remote-sensing?referrer=8G2asYAyI_To9RoVf1VtPg2\"><img src=\"http://area51.stackexchange.com/ads/proposal/90327.png\" alt=\"Check out the Area 51 Remote Sensing Proposal\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2193, "author": "plannapus", "author_id": 9664, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/9664", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"http://earthscience.stackexchange.com\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/lkIwY.gif\" alt=\"For those seeking down-to-earth answers to their questions\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2201, "author": "feetwet", "author_id": 37048, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/37048", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"https://law.stackexchange.com/\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/DOMu0.gif\" alt=\"Law.SE\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2208, "author": "Dilaton", "author_id": 5904, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/5904", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"https://openscience.ub.uni-bielefeld.de/\" rel=\"nofollow\"><img src=\"http://www.physicsoverflow.org/?qa=blob&amp;qa_blobid=8501890176375168144\" alt=\"OpenScience Q&amp;A\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3222, "author": "John Targaryen", "author_id": 42334, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/42334", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/auto-latex-equations/iaainhiejkciadlhlodaajgbffkebdog?utm_source=academiaSOAd\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><img src=\"https://i.imgur.com/H8e7Cyi.png\" alt=\"Auto-Latex Equations add-on for Google Docs\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3271, "author": "malexmave", "author_id": 26477, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/26477", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/90201/open-science?referrer=dD9JBmhmXjEM__yBBhYtaA2\"><img src=\"http://area51.stackexchange.com/ads/proposal/90201.png\" alt=\"Stack Exchange Q&amp;A site proposal: Open Science\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3289, "author": "Martin Van der Linden", "author_id": 10664, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/10664", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/97583/effective-altruism\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/Nkk8k.png\" alt=\"Effective Altruism SE proposal\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3334, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"https://scifundchallenge.org/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/csQSQ.png\" alt=\"We train scientists how to connect to the public, back scientists in their outreach, and crowdfund to support research. The goal? A more science engaged world.\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3339, "author": "E.P.", "author_id": 820, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/820", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"http://doai.io\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/ndeRs.png\" alt=\"Digital Open Access Identifier - a DOI resolver that prioritizes open access\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3343, "author": "Tom", "author_id": 39119, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/39119", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"https://tldrlegal.com\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/7ybQr.png\" alt=\"Open Source Licenses in Plain English\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3384, "author": "E.P.", "author_id": 820, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/820", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"https://socopen.org/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/gYfY7.png\" alt=\"Tagline to show on mouseover\"></a></p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2148", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/72/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 2161, "author": "jakebeal", "author_id": 22733, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p>My impression is that Academia.SE is virtually unknown, but that this is not a problem for three reasons.</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li>The goal isn't to be famous, it's to help people by building good curated answers, and a lot of people do get helped by our answers, judging by the views and votes. If you google for random academia-related questions, Academia.SE actually shows up fairly often amongst the professional advice-givers.</li>\n<li>This community isn't all that old yet, and it is still growing.</li>\n<li>The larger StackOverflow community <em>is</em> fairly widely known, and I find it easy to explain Academia.SE by saying it's a topic site as part of that network.</li>\n</ol>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2163, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Last semester, one of my MS students (an international student from India) asked me a question, and I wanted to point him to an answer I had written on Academia.SE that I thought addressed his question. (And I thought that the other answers to that question would also be helpful to him.) I started to explain to him about the Stack Exchange network and Academia.SE, and he told me he had heard of it, and had used it extensively in navigating the graduate school admissions process.</p>\n\n<p>I don't have any data, but having met someone in real life who used Academia.SE <em>before</em> meeting me made me think we're not as unknown as I had previously thought.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2159", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/20058/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 2181, "author": "BrianH", "author_id": 6787, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/6787", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Hm, the user is a high-rep user on cross-validated...which actually makes the question particularly odd, because I don't really understand how the user doesn't know how to find academics who need help - he's answered over 1600 questions on Cross Validated alone. I too suspected something might be 'off' here, but I figured it would be best to close as \"Unclear what you are asking\". </p>\n\n<p>It could be a valid question, but in its present state I think it could be closed anyway. But if it turned out to indeed be an attempt to advertise a commercial service or gain leads, then certainly it could be closed as \"spam\" - but we don't have that as a close reason, so indeed I wonder how these should be handled? Just closed as 'other', or do we need something more specific?</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2182, "author": "Penguin_Knight", "author_id": 6450, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/6450", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p>As someone who started in <a href=\"https://stats.stackexchange.com/\">CV</a>. I can vouch for this questioner as he has been nothing but a wonderful participant at CV. He always provides very apt and helpful answers.</p>\n\n<p>Though, I think the question can definitely use some clarification. The deep root is about networking in academia, which I believe is a valid question for this board.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2183, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>If the question was asked from the other side of the table and was about finding a reputable paid statistical consultant, I think it would be fine (assuming on topic otherwise). </p>\n\n<p>The question itself reveals the potential conflict of interest with the \"advertising\" discreetly mentioned in his profile. This is exactly what we ask for in situations like this.</p>\n\n<p>While he might be looking to gain clients here, it reads to me like he is trying to improve his networking/advertising efforts. So in general, I think questions with this level of \"advertising\" are okay.</p>\n\n<p>Specifically, I am not sure the question is particularly clear or really answerable. I am not sure it is so unclear that it should be closed.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2184, "author": "Massimo Ortolano", "author_id": 20058, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/20058", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Though I don't question the OP's statistical knowledge and his capacity as a consultant, I think that leaving this question open as is can cause a flood of questions advertising a variety of consulting services or offers of collaborations.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2185, "author": "Wrzlprmft", "author_id": 7734, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734", "pm_score": 4, "selected": true, "text": "<p>To take yet another point of view and to address the more general question:</p>\n\n<p>I do not think that we can distinguish whether such a post was created for purposes of self-promotion or from a genuine interest in learning about new ways of finding customers, jobs or similar. Therefore we should apply the presumption of innocence to such posts (maybe unless we are overrun by them). In this specific case, I find it plausible that the asker is honestly interested in what he is asking for. Therefore I do not think that it should be closed for this reason.</p>\n\n<p>Moreover, I do not see how this question is much different from many questions from users who are looking for a position. Both imply that the asker has certain skills and is available for hire.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2187, "author": "Fomite", "author_id": 118, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/118", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I think trying to project motives onto a posters question, and then closing it because it <em>may</em> be self-promoting, is flawed. The post is far from an egregious case, and honestly, even if it is a thinly veiled bit of self promotion, it involves the following chain of logic:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>Someone searching StackExchange for statistical help will somehow <em>miss</em> CrossValidated and come here instead.</li>\n<li>Having failed to find the proper StackExchange site, rather than just asking their question (and getting it migrated or closed), they'll search for, I don't know, \"Statistics Help\".</li>\n<li>They'll find Peter's question.</li>\n<li>They'll read Peter's profile.</li>\n<li>They click on his link, contact him, and this ends with a doubtlessly lucrative consulting contract...</li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>That's a chain of events that I'm pretty sure will never actually happen.</p>\n\n<p>If instead we read this post as a legitimate question, I think it's a much more reasonable one. Connecting people who need statistical expertise with the people who have it is a problem for people <em>in the same university</em> (I know this from experience). Working outside that system strikes me as harder, and something worthy of discussion.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2180", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/10094/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 2202, "author": "Massimo Ortolano", "author_id": 20058, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/20058", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<blockquote>\n <blockquote>\n <p>Is is bad practice to use the blockquote syntax to highlight a tl;dr?</p>\n </blockquote>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Yes, because now we have a double block quote, but only the outer one is a real quote: sometimes, yes, you might need to reproduce the original formatting too. </p>\n\n<p>Since questions can be edited in time, and there other ways of highlighting a part of the text (e.g. italics or bold), I think it's useful to have a clear marker of what's a real quote and what's not.</p>\n\n<p><strong>Note:</strong> I have to admit, though, that I'm kind of obsessive for this sort of things (as my PhD students kindly like to remind me).</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2203, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>In the absence of block quotes, I am pretty sure your two uses in this question and the examples you link to should be offset with quotation marks (although my grammar is atrocious). The example where people complained, however, should not be offset with quotation marks. As bad as my grammar is, my understanding of typographical style is worse, but I think anything in quotation marks can be typeset as a block quote.</p>\n\n<p>I do not think we should limit the use of block quotes to quotes taken directly from the text of the question (or even answers or other sources), but we should reserve them for quotes. I think bold and/or italic can be used to provide emphasis.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2204, "author": "Dirk", "author_id": 529, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/529", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I'll answer my own question with my view: </p>\n\n<p>In view of the <a href=\"https://stackoverflow.com/editing-help\">very few possibilities</a> that markdown offers to format answer and basically no customizability of the markup, one can barely speak of a markup language (there even is not syntax for <em>emphasis</em>, only commands for typesetting such as italics, bold, and bold italic). Moreover, logical markup is not used to parse answers by algorithms (other than rendering). Hence, my view is that markdown shall be used to format the posts to appear as needed.</p>\n\n<p>Finally, other SE sites seem to use blockquotes for other purposes than quotes: A comment to StrongBad's question over at english.stackexchange states that</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>…the main use of block quotes here is to format and separate examples of word usage.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Over as tex.stackexchange I also noticed the pattern that people used blockquotes to emphasize paragraphs.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2205, "author": "Wrzlprmft", "author_id": 7734, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734", "pm_score": 5, "selected": true, "text": "<h3>TL;DR</h3>\n<p>Yes, it is bad practice. Use either boldface or headlines to highlight TL;DRs. Use blockquotes only for text that could have otherwise been set in quotation marks.</p>\n<h3>Regarding the examples</h3>\n<ul>\n<li><p>The blockquotes in <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/62658/7734\">your answer</a> are irritating. From my first glance at the answer, I expected something like: A brief introduction; a quote from the question; some elaboration; a suggestion on how to phrase something. Thus when I actually read the answer, I lost some time to being flummoxed.</p>\n<p>Even, if we ignore the fact that the formatting of blockquotes is intended and designed for quotes, your answer is badly formatted. About half the text is emphasised and it would be much easier to read, if you integrated the blockquotes in the respective sentences, e.g., like this:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>My interpretation of the situation is that this is not an academic issue since you are approaching somebody who leads some business with some business-related issue.</p>\n<p>The fact that that somebody is also a professor and that somebody who you know has a class with this professor seems unrelated. So my advice would be to handle this as if it were a business meeting and not an academic meeting.</p>\n</blockquote>\n</li>\n<li><p>In <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/7973/7734\">this answer by Aeismail</a>, the blockquotes are not needed, but as the text is actually a quote of some sort and could be legitimally enclosed in quotation marks, it does not cause any kind of dissonance while reading.</p>\n</li>\n<li><p>In <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/60612/7734\">this question by Electrique</a>, the blockquotes have no reason to exist at all. The list is already visually detached from the rest of the text anyway.</p>\n</li>\n<li><p>In <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/17988/7734\">this question by ff524</a>, the blockquotes are not needed either. The question is already emphasised through the boldface. In my opinion, the best way to format this question would be using headlines, such as <em>Background; Actual Question; Related questions.</em> This way the main question is highlighted as intended and there is no extensive use of boldface.</p>\n</li>\n</ul>\n<h3>In general</h3>\n<p>We are trained to read quotes as quotes and their design is tailored towards this purpose. Therefore abusing them decreases readability and should be done as rarely as possible.</p>\n<p>Alternatives are:</p>\n<ul>\n<li><p>If you want to emphasise a sentence or a shorter amount of text: boldface.</p>\n</li>\n<li><p>If you want to emphasise a longer amount of text: Use a headline that communicates the importance of this part.</p>\n</li>\n<li><p>If you want to communicate that a portion of the text happens is different (but not more important), e.g., meta information or a digression, use italics.</p>\n<p><em>Before somebody comes along and complains that you may want to use italics for other purpose: Upright is the italics of italics. LaTeX’s</em> <code>\\emph</code> <em>works</em> exactly <em>like this.</em></p>\n</li>\n<li><p>Not emphasising at all. Often it is just not necessary.</p>\n</li>\n</ul>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2207, "author": "Federico Poloni", "author_id": 958, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/958", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "<p>In my opinion, the biggest issue here is that misusing blockquotes as a form of emphasis happens because:</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li>they look too emphatic. The yellow background is too flashy. The black-on-grey used here on Meta seems a better alternative, or also the schemes commonly used on e-mail (intented text with a thin colored vertical bar on their right).</li>\n<li>there is no alternative syntax in Markdown for the same purpose.</li>\n</ol>\n\n<p>To fix #1. I have submitted a feature request for <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2206/removing-emphasis-from-blockquotes\">changing the color scheme for blockquotes</a>.</p>\n\n<p>I would appreciate a fix for #2, too, but it would require adding Markdown syntax, which of course cannot be a decision specific to academia.se, and shouldn't be taken lightly (I am definitely against a further Balkanization of Markdown). A possibility, anyway, could be using exclamation marks:</p>\n\n<pre><code>This is normal text\n\n! This is a paragraph with emphasis\n\nThis is normal text again.\n</code></pre>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2200", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/529/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 2210, "author": "Stephan Kolassa", "author_id": 4140, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/4140", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>To be honest, I think you are a little too quick in inferring nefarious motives (&quot;to sneak through closing&quot;) to posters. Regarding your three examples:</p>\n<ul>\n<li><p><a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/32510/10643\">Reference on how often &quot;To the best of our knowledge&quot; assertions turn out to be false</a> - I agree that I find it hard to believe that there is actual research on this, already because <em>finding</em> this kind of verbiage in papers is hard enough, and then finding out whether such a claim is false or not is at least as hard.</p>\n</li>\n<li><p><a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/30031/10643\">Impact of the visit weekend weather on the admitted graduates' grad school decision in the US</a> - I'm working on including weather information in retail sales forecasts, and I find it quite possible that someone somewhere has done such an analysis.</p>\n<p>Not that I think the question is very interesting. But I find that different people find surprisingly many things interesting that would bore me to death.</p>\n</li>\n<li><p><a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/32436/10643\">What motivates researchers in industry to publish their results?</a> - and for this one, I would definitely not be surprised if some sociologist had done surveys on exactly this kind of question.</p>\n</li>\n</ul>\n<p>Conversely, I don't see a &quot;polling&quot; aspect to the questions you refer to, even if they do generate some discussion in the comments.</p>\n<p>Bottom line: If you disagree with a tag, edit it away and see whether the poster insists. If you feel that a question is not useful, downvote it. A tag does not prevent you from voting. I'd trust the voting system to make sure useless questions sink.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2211, "author": "jakebeal", "author_id": 22733, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733", "pm_score": 3, "selected": true, "text": "<p>I too, find this use of the \"reference-request\" tag annoying, particularly because in some cases it seems to unnecessarily preclude providing an answer based on experience (see, for example, my comment and then answer on the \"<a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/32436/10643\">What motivates researchers in industry to publish their results?</a>\" question).</p>\n\n<p>My approach has been, whenever possible, to either:</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li>Ignore the \"reference-request\" tag when used by this particular user and to answer anyway based on experience, or</li>\n<li>Explain why no such study is likely to have been created.</li>\n</ol>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2209", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/10643/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 2217, "author": "jakebeal", "author_id": 22733, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733", "pm_score": 4, "selected": true, "text": "<p>I believe that such a question could be entirely within scope. Some key information to include in order to make it clear enough to be answered would include:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>What country you are in</li>\n<li>What sort of graduate program (e.g., M.S., Ph.D.)</li>\n<li>What level of institution (e.g., world-class research university, vocational college)</li>\n<li>What the general goals of the course are</li>\n</ul>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3223, "author": "David Richerby", "author_id": 10685, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/10685", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Questions about how to plan curricula in general are fine: planning curricula is an important thing that happens in academia. Questions about what the curriculum for a particular course should be would be off-topic, since you'd be asking about (in this case) computer science, rather than about academia.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2216", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/6162/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 2220, "author": "jakebeal", "author_id": 22733, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>What I have observed in this community's collective judgement is that the axis that you propose to consider (\"Is this question about features offered by a website?\") does not appear to be a useful discriminator for question quality.</p>\n\n<p>The problem is that both \"feature\" and \"website\" cover way too broad a spectrum:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li><p>\"Website\" can mean anything from <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/google-scholar\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;google-scholar&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">google-scholar</a> and <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/arxiv\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;arxiv&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">arxiv</a> (clearly considered <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/62480/22733\">interesting</a> and <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/31800/22733\">useful</a>) to the details of a specific graduate program's online application form (clearly a \"too specific\" closure).</p></li>\n<li><p>\"Feature\" can mean anything from the DOI question above to the transient and proprietary details of how a particular search engine is currently ranking its results (clearly a \"too specific\" closure) to obvious <a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/14470/289613\">boat programming</a> like \"As a visually impaired scientist, how should I access arXiv?\"</p></li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>Instead, I would propose the following three-prong test with regards to questions related to the use of academia-related websites, apps, and similar systems:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Is the website academia-specific?</strong> (e.g., Google Scholar is, Yahoo Answers is not)</li>\n<li><strong>Is the website well-established and widely used in a significant number of disciplines?</strong> (e.g., arXiv is, CrazyEddiesPreprintShack.com is not)</li>\n<li><strong>Is the question about functionality that is both long-term stable and academia-specific?</strong> (e.g., curating one's publications on arXiv is, search-engine result orderings are not)</li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>If a question passes all three of these tests, then it is likely to be on topic (though it may fail in other ways); if it fails any of them badly, then it probably should be closed as off-topic.</p>\n\n<p>Now, as with every judgement of on-topic-ness, there will be boundary cases in which the judgement is not obvious. I think that the two arXiv questions that you link are a little bit toward that boundary: they obviously pass the first two tests, and while the functionality is long-term stable, it's a bit questionable whether it's necessarily academia-specific. On balance, though, they were simple enough questions with simple enough answers, and there's no reason to be nit-picky.</p>\n\n<p>For your Sci-Hub question, on the other hand, while I believe it can pass the first two tests, for the third test both the stability and the specificity of the functionality seem <em>extremely</em> dubious. You are asking how to yank many, many terabytes of data from Sci-Hub or from the organizations that it pirates. That's not a scientific problem, that's a rather blatant abuse of shared network resources, and any method for doing so will likely soon be defended against by Sci-Hub.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2221, "author": "Federico Poloni", "author_id": 958, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/958", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<h2>Questions on websites</h2>\n\n<p>Yes, in my view, questions on the usage of websites that target academics should be considered <strong>on topic</strong> on academia.se. Using websites such as arxiv.org, google scholar, and article submission systems is a part of the work of a professional researcher, and questions on this aspect should have full citizenship here.</p>\n\n<p>Of course, there are other conditions for a question to be acceptable: if a question is too localized (for instance, a very specific website on a single research topic with a tiny audience, or an unknown startup), then it should be closed, and the same if it has nothing specific to academia (for instance, if it is a general question on the usage of a browser --- these are known as \"boat programming\" questions in the stack exchange culture).</p>\n\n<p>OP's question mentions sci-hub.io, a website which has gained much popularity recently, despite its dubious legal nature. It is 100% targeted on academics, and it satisfies the notability criterion, so I find little justification to close it on the basis of its content.</p>\n\n<p>If any, the only reason for which I could consider closure is if we agree on a very strict policy on questions involving copyright infringement. But this is a different issue than the one on \"on-topicness\".</p>\n\n<h2>Questions on copyright infringement</h2>\n\n<p>Since the discussion in the other answers and comments has diverged into legality and copyright infringement, I should probably give my opinion on this part, too.</p>\n\n<p>Lots of sites can be used to infringe copyright, including <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/61423/958\">Twitter</a> and <a href=\"http://mashable.com/2009/04/20/google-torrent-search/#a5PWpZ9Cr5q1\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Google</a>. Some of them are used <em>prevalently</em> to infringe copyright, but ultimately the guilt lies with the usage, not with the website itself.</p>\n\n<p>In addition, some forms of copyright abuse are widespread in academia, and a non-negligible part of the community recognizes them as illegal but does not consider them ethically wrong.</p>\n\n<p>My stance is: <strong>if a user asks a question on how to infringe copyright, we leave the question open</strong>, and point out that it is illegal and/or wrong in the answers and comments. Closing questions does not make the asker aware of the legal and ethical issues; it only creates an illusion of control and censorship, and drives the user away.</p>\n\n<p>If, as @MassimoOrtolano wrote, \"the only possible ethical answer to a question about how to bulk download Sci-Hub papers is: <em>You don't</em>.\", then we leave that question open and answer <em>You don't</em>. We don't say <em>sssh, we don't speak about this sort of stuff here</em>, because it sends a wrong message.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2222, "author": "Massimo Ortolano", "author_id": 20058, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/20058", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I think that we should not publicly support, in any case, the usage of services that are at the edge, or beyond the edge, of legality, however widespread they are in academia, and even if we privately think that they are ethical because they might constitute a form of protest against the publishing industry. Doing otherwise would open to a number of shaky possibilities that probably Stack Overflow Inc. would not be willing to support (e.g., linking papers or books on the SE sites directly to Sci-Hub or Libgen).</p>\n\n<p>Thus, I think that the only possible ethical answer to a question about how to bulk download Sci-Hub papers is: <em>You don't</em>. Other answers can be interpreted as a tacit, <em>public</em>, support of such a service. </p>\n\n<p>We can then discuss what is the more appropriate close reason for such questions or if we want to put a canonical answer, but I think that the above should stand.</p>\n\n<p>For what concerns clearly legal services, instead, I agree with <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2220/20058\">jakebeal's answer</a>.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2219", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/452/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 2220, "author": "jakebeal", "author_id": 22733, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>What I have observed in this community's collective judgement is that the axis that you propose to consider (\"Is this question about features offered by a website?\") does not appear to be a useful discriminator for question quality.</p>\n\n<p>The problem is that both \"feature\" and \"website\" cover way too broad a spectrum:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li><p>\"Website\" can mean anything from <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/google-scholar\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;google-scholar&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">google-scholar</a> and <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/arxiv\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;arxiv&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">arxiv</a> (clearly considered <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/62480/22733\">interesting</a> and <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/31800/22733\">useful</a>) to the details of a specific graduate program's online application form (clearly a \"too specific\" closure).</p></li>\n<li><p>\"Feature\" can mean anything from the DOI question above to the transient and proprietary details of how a particular search engine is currently ranking its results (clearly a \"too specific\" closure) to obvious <a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/14470/289613\">boat programming</a> like \"As a visually impaired scientist, how should I access arXiv?\"</p></li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>Instead, I would propose the following three-prong test with regards to questions related to the use of academia-related websites, apps, and similar systems:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Is the website academia-specific?</strong> (e.g., Google Scholar is, Yahoo Answers is not)</li>\n<li><strong>Is the website well-established and widely used in a significant number of disciplines?</strong> (e.g., arXiv is, CrazyEddiesPreprintShack.com is not)</li>\n<li><strong>Is the question about functionality that is both long-term stable and academia-specific?</strong> (e.g., curating one's publications on arXiv is, search-engine result orderings are not)</li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>If a question passes all three of these tests, then it is likely to be on topic (though it may fail in other ways); if it fails any of them badly, then it probably should be closed as off-topic.</p>\n\n<p>Now, as with every judgement of on-topic-ness, there will be boundary cases in which the judgement is not obvious. I think that the two arXiv questions that you link are a little bit toward that boundary: they obviously pass the first two tests, and while the functionality is long-term stable, it's a bit questionable whether it's necessarily academia-specific. On balance, though, they were simple enough questions with simple enough answers, and there's no reason to be nit-picky.</p>\n\n<p>For your Sci-Hub question, on the other hand, while I believe it can pass the first two tests, for the third test both the stability and the specificity of the functionality seem <em>extremely</em> dubious. You are asking how to yank many, many terabytes of data from Sci-Hub or from the organizations that it pirates. That's not a scientific problem, that's a rather blatant abuse of shared network resources, and any method for doing so will likely soon be defended against by Sci-Hub.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2221, "author": "Federico Poloni", "author_id": 958, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/958", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<h2>Questions on websites</h2>\n\n<p>Yes, in my view, questions on the usage of websites that target academics should be considered <strong>on topic</strong> on academia.se. Using websites such as arxiv.org, google scholar, and article submission systems is a part of the work of a professional researcher, and questions on this aspect should have full citizenship here.</p>\n\n<p>Of course, there are other conditions for a question to be acceptable: if a question is too localized (for instance, a very specific website on a single research topic with a tiny audience, or an unknown startup), then it should be closed, and the same if it has nothing specific to academia (for instance, if it is a general question on the usage of a browser --- these are known as \"boat programming\" questions in the stack exchange culture).</p>\n\n<p>OP's question mentions sci-hub.io, a website which has gained much popularity recently, despite its dubious legal nature. It is 100% targeted on academics, and it satisfies the notability criterion, so I find little justification to close it on the basis of its content.</p>\n\n<p>If any, the only reason for which I could consider closure is if we agree on a very strict policy on questions involving copyright infringement. But this is a different issue than the one on \"on-topicness\".</p>\n\n<h2>Questions on copyright infringement</h2>\n\n<p>Since the discussion in the other answers and comments has diverged into legality and copyright infringement, I should probably give my opinion on this part, too.</p>\n\n<p>Lots of sites can be used to infringe copyright, including <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/61423/958\">Twitter</a> and <a href=\"http://mashable.com/2009/04/20/google-torrent-search/#a5PWpZ9Cr5q1\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Google</a>. Some of them are used <em>prevalently</em> to infringe copyright, but ultimately the guilt lies with the usage, not with the website itself.</p>\n\n<p>In addition, some forms of copyright abuse are widespread in academia, and a non-negligible part of the community recognizes them as illegal but does not consider them ethically wrong.</p>\n\n<p>My stance is: <strong>if a user asks a question on how to infringe copyright, we leave the question open</strong>, and point out that it is illegal and/or wrong in the answers and comments. Closing questions does not make the asker aware of the legal and ethical issues; it only creates an illusion of control and censorship, and drives the user away.</p>\n\n<p>If, as @MassimoOrtolano wrote, \"the only possible ethical answer to a question about how to bulk download Sci-Hub papers is: <em>You don't</em>.\", then we leave that question open and answer <em>You don't</em>. We don't say <em>sssh, we don't speak about this sort of stuff here</em>, because it sends a wrong message.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 2222, "author": "Massimo Ortolano", "author_id": 20058, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/20058", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I think that we should not publicly support, in any case, the usage of services that are at the edge, or beyond the edge, of legality, however widespread they are in academia, and even if we privately think that they are ethical because they might constitute a form of protest against the publishing industry. Doing otherwise would open to a number of shaky possibilities that probably Stack Overflow Inc. would not be willing to support (e.g., linking papers or books on the SE sites directly to Sci-Hub or Libgen).</p>\n\n<p>Thus, I think that the only possible ethical answer to a question about how to bulk download Sci-Hub papers is: <em>You don't</em>. Other answers can be interpreted as a tacit, <em>public</em>, support of such a service. </p>\n\n<p>We can then discuss what is the more appropriate close reason for such questions or if we want to put a canonical answer, but I think that the above should stand.</p>\n\n<p>For what concerns clearly legal services, instead, I agree with <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2220/20058\">jakebeal's answer</a>.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3230", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/8542/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3236, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>There are limited rules regarding how users can use their votes. The only constraints I can think of are that the system prevents, or at least tries to prevent, systematic down voting of a user and sock puppet accounts. This means that if a user can down vote whatever they want for whatever reason they want and there is nothing the mods can do about it. Any \"policy\" we decide on in regards to down votes (and up votes) is completely unenforceable.</p>\n\n<p>I do not think systematically down voting a user's questions to punish them is a good idea. First, they will likely get reversed by the system bot, although in this case with multiple accounts, they probably would not. Second, if a user eventually asks a good question even if it takes multiple tries, we want to encourage the good question.</p>\n\n<p>There is also a big difference between a down vote with a flag and one without a flag and also between a down vote with and without a comment. If you are going to down vote, it is best to leave a comment to help the user, often a new user, understand what they have done wrong. In all cases of bad user behavior, you need to raise a flag alerting the mods. We have extra tools to deal with things like multiple accounts, rude users, and duplicate questions. If you do not flag us, we do not know.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3237, "author": "Orion", "author_id": 4018, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/4018", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I understand that in the current system, votes on questions and answers are both a way for higher reputation and then more privileges, and a way to punish the poster for any <em>other</em> reason. Probably there should be a punishment (down-vote) mechanism (other than flags) independent of the question/answer votes (e.g., in the user profile page). </p>\n\n<p>If the system wouldn't change, I suggest that question/answer votes should only blindly address the quality, as much as possible, not the context, of the question/answer. As a future content reader I wouldn't care about the context, nor about whether the user is/was rude. I would suggest that the moderators encourage users not to vote for anything other reason than the post quality.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3238, "author": "RaidenF", "author_id": 50451, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/50451", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>As in every StackExchange site, the rules are pretty simple. <strong>You should downvote bad questions</strong>.</p>\n\n<p>You could read <a href=\"http://codeblog.jonskeet.uk/2010/08/29/writing-the-perfect-question/\" rel=\"nofollow\">this blog post by Jon Skeet</a> referring to this issue (it's a bit more focused on programming, but the general rules apply everywhere).</p>\n\n<p>If you downvote a question because the user who asked has done something reprehensible, this is not desirable in SE. The reason is, that a question is a question, no matter who asks. Also, \"hating\" on a user (even if someone promotes or attemps piracy or whatever), is not constructive. A terrible person, can ask a good question that is helpful to others. <strong>Judge the question, not the user</strong>.</p>\n\n<p>Furthermore, downvoting should always be revised. Downvoting is not the same as in reddit or other websites. It's not simply a means to indicate poor quality, but a means to provide <strong>meaningful feedback</strong>, and <em>lead to the improvement of a bad question</em> (or its removal).</p>\n\n<p>By downvoting a user, the aforementioned goal is not satisfied. A user that asks a bad question, may learn that it is not constructive and improve, he also has the right (and should) delete or edit bad questions into good ones. Such behaviour should be applauded, not reprimanded because of past \"sins\".</p>\n\n<p>The aforementioned question is a good one, and even if previous questions indicate that this user is interested in copyright infrigment (I have no idea about this user, hypothetically speaking), it does not matter. This website is about people coming to read answers to their questions, already posted by others, not about a community and its members' relationships.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3235", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3244, "author": "Fomite", "author_id": 118, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/118", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Citation metrics are flawed for...lots of reasons. Especially when they're pegged to something like \"indicating performance\", presumably with the usual rankings and the like that come with it.</p>\n\n<p>Just using StackExchange related problems:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>It utterly ignores other contributions, such as questions (never underestimate the importance of good questions to a site), comments, etc. As an example, whether you like it or not, JeffE's \"Run, don't walk\" comment is a cultural item on this site, and an \"h-index\" wouldn't really see that at all.</li>\n<li>External votes become a thing. \"Hot Network Questions\" get lots of traffic, even if they're not particularly good question. Which means that, by strategically answering those, you could boost your \"h-index\". At the same time, diligent, workman-like answering of lots of questions that are likely to be helpful, but not flashy, and get a few upvotes and an accept, would be discouraged. That's the opposite of a healthy community.</li>\n<li><em>We already have reputation</em></li>\n</ul>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3245, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>This has been proposed before: <a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/103735/modified-h-index-for-questions-and-answers\">Modified h-index for questions and answers?</a></p>\n\n<p>To me it does not seem all that useful. If you want to look at users based on their H-index, you can use this <a href=\"http://data.stackexchange.com/academia/query/66081/what-is-my-h-index\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">data explorer query</a></p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3243", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/31480/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3247, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>In regards to point 2, first I want to that historically SE communities do not like when users cherry pick example questions as justification as to why their question is on topic. Second, the apparent follow the leader effect is an artifact of the review queue. When a user votes to close a question or flags it, the question is added to a review queue that is available to high rep users. These users can then agree or disagree with the close vote/flag. The same thing happens when someone votes to reopen a question.</p>\n\n<p>Finally, community moderation is not perfect. Sometimes (fairly often) the community misses questions that should be closed. This is one of the reasons we don't like when users cherry pick example questions. Sometimes (on our site fairly infrequently) a group of users close something the community thinks is on topic. Apart from duplicates, the system does not let regular users act unilaterally and it provides mechanisms to undue the effects. As you have done here, it is perfectly reasonable to ask in meta or chat what is going on with a question. You can even flag it for moderator attention.</p>\n\n<p>In regards to your first point, I would suggest you edit your question to demonstrate why it pertains to life as a graduate student and not just to life in general. The questions about marriage and having children are not truly about those massive open ended topics, but rather the specifics of how marriage and having children affects being an academic. </p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3248, "author": "aeismail", "author_id": 53, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/53", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>As the \"high-profile user\" mentioned in the question, I want to point out my thought process.</p>\n\n<p>I worded my comment very carefully, saying that it was starting to veer into boat programming, rather than saying it was definitively boat programming. What I should have added to my comment was that I wasn't seeing the academic-specific nature of the question that would make the question on-topic here instead of one of the other SE sites, such as <a href=\"http://workplace.stackexchange.com\">The Workplace</a>. Getting married and having kids are not quite comparable, because these are \"major life events\" that also have very specific and unique ramifications in the academic world—extension of deadlines for \"early career\" applications, adjustments to teaching and research schedules, time to defense, and many others. The change between a grad student owning a pet and, say, a Wall Street financial analyst owning a pet is not as clear to me.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3246", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11819/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3250, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I am not sure if this answers your question in general, but it is related to the questions you tend to ask on the main site.</p>\n\n<p>While I do not tend to down vote your questions,when reading your questions I often struggle with how they fit with our <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask\">don't ask</a> \"policy\":</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>While your questions tend to be practical and answerable, I don't always see how they could be about actual problems you face.</p>\n\n<p>As a side note, I am not sure \"actual problems\" should be a requirement.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3253, "author": "Cape Code", "author_id": 10643, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/10643", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>The voting rules aren't very strict (as opposed to closing for example) but I don't think the fact that a question is hard to answer is a reason to down-vote. A question should \"show research effort be useful and clear\" to warrant an up-vote but it's also a matter of personal interests. </p>\n\n<p>I don't think that the issue with the questions you mention is that they are \"hard\" but rather that they look very much like advertisement for your opinions and pet peeves* that you tried too hard to make look like questions.</p>\n\n<p>My guess is that some users doubt that you genuinely think there are possible answers that would fit this site's format but rather hope for extended discussions in comments supporting your opinion.</p>\n\n<p>Sometimes the click-bait works and you gather many votes, sometimes it's too obnoxious and the opinionated undertone triggers down-votes.</p>\n\n<hr>\n\n<p>*Ok, so you dislike that some people pay to read articles. We get it.</p>\n\n<p>Ps. Many of your other questions are fine in my opinion.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3249", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/452/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3252, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I don't think that line in the help center applies to <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/reference-request\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;reference-request&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">reference-request</a> questions. </p>\n\n<p>In most cases, if you really had to, it is trivial to connect those questions to an actual problem.</p>\n\n<p>For example, the most recent <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/reference-request\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;reference-request&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">reference-request</a> is <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/65519/how-random-is-the-graduate-admission-process-in-the-united-states\">How random is the graduate admission process in the United States?</a>. This question corresponds to the actual, real problem (for example):</p>\n\n<p>\"I am interested in reducing the randomness of the graduate admissions process in computer science PhD programs, but in order to convince anyone to act, I need some reliable, verifiable data to show how bad the problem really is.\"</p>\n\n<p>In other cases, such as my <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/reference-request\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;reference-request&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">reference-request</a> question <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/38571/what-is-the-origin-of-the-underwater-basket-weaving-meme-in-academia\">What is the origin of the “underwater basket weaving” meme in Academia?</a>, where it is very difficult to connect the question to an actual <em>problem</em>, the community didn't seem to mind. (That question currently has 79 upvotes and 0 downvotes.) </p>\n\n<p>So, it seems that a question does not necessarily need to be explicitly attached to a problem. I think <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/reference-request\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;reference-request&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">reference-request</a> questions that are clear, specific, and relevant to the topics in the help center <em>are</em> on topic here. (As evidenced, perhaps, by my being a <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/tags/reference-request/topusers\">top answerer</a> and one of the top askers in that tag.)</p>\n\n<p>I interpret </p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>mainly to exclude hypotheticals <em>that lack context</em>, where the answer depends very much on the specific circumstance.</p>\n\n<p>To take your question <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/48796/can-i-teach-in-the-nude\">Can I teach in the nude?</a> as an example (I hope you don't mind), I commented there</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Also, per the help center: \"You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face.\" This does not seem to qualify. – ff524♦ <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/48796/can-i-teach-in-the-nude#comment112894_48796\">Jul 14 '15 at 16:54</a></p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>and further clarified that I find the question problematic because it is a hypothetical given without context:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>I don't think it would be a bad question if it was given in the context of a specific scenario, like <a href=\"https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/05/11/it-legitimate-pedagogical-tool-art-professor-ask-students-be-nude-one-class\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">this one</a>. As a general question, I still think it's terrible. – ff524♦ <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/48796/can-i-teach-in-the-nude#comment112898_48796\">Jul 14 '15 at 17:06</a> </p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>That's the kind of question I think is excluded by \"practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face.\"</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3254, "author": "jakebeal", "author_id": 22733, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I think that the \"practical answerable questions\" line should be interpreted quite permissively. I think that its real value is to permit closing of questions that are basically silly wastes of time because they aren't even vaguely close to the real world, e.g., </p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>What would happen if PhD programs required students to switch what professor they were working for every two weeks, and you couldn't go back to a professor?</p>\n \n <p>Would a scientific paper still count on your C.V. if it got published, but then the journal was shut down by the government and you could only get copies of the paper through WikiLeaks?</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Likewise, sometimes a question is unanswerable because it depends on too many particulars that can't be filled in since the situation doesn't actually exist.</p>\n\n<p>There will not be a clear black and white about which hypotheticals are OK and which are not, but I think that we should be fairly permissive, since many hypotheticals are close enough to real situations to be readily answerable.</p>\n\n<p>I think the issue that comes up with many <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/reference-request\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;reference-request&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">reference-request</a> questions is not about being hypothetical, but rather is often some sort of XY problem, in which the asker has refined down to a request for a highly specific piece of research that has probably not been carried out, when a slightly less precisely targeted question would likely have been readily answerable.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3255, "author": "Anonymous Physicist", "author_id": 13240, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/13240", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>A potential policy: \"Stack exchange is not a suitable tool for literature search. Questions solely requesting literature search are off-topic.\"</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3268, "author": "Chris Rackauckas", "author_id": 47971, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/47971", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I think hypothetical questions to better understand common rules/policies of universities should be accepted. For example, while one could ask for a reference to better understand \"what is the NIH policy on _______\", it can be much more natural and illuminating to ask the hypothetical \"If a PI submits a paper with ________, but _________, is the PI following policy?\". Sometimes this could be acceptable even if the applicability is unclear if the question helps one understand what the policies actually mean. </p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3251", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3257, "author": "jakebeal", "author_id": 22733, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733", "pm_score": 4, "selected": true, "text": "<p>What is the thing that you want to know? </p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>If you're asking about how to actually lay things out typographically using LaTeX, then it would be appropriate for TeX.SE.</li>\n<li>If you're asking about typical customs in how such things are presented by scientists, then it would be appropriate for Academia.SE.</li>\n</ul>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3258, "author": "410 gone", "author_id": 96, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/96", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Academia is not for domain-specific questions about academic subjects. It's for questions about academia itself.</p>\n\n<p>And just because a Stack Exchange looks like it ought to be the closest fit for a question, does not mean that a question belongs there. Most questions don't belong on any Stack Exchange site.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3256", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/1637/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3260, "author": "jakebeal", "author_id": 22733, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I think that it is a very case-by-case basis. Generally asking for commiseration is probably not interesting: we close a lot \"My advisor is bad, right?\" questions too.</p>\n\n<p>On the other hand, a lot of these questions end up illuminating interesting aspects of pedagogy, giving a professor's eye view of a situation, or offering an interesting comparison of different approaches.</p>\n\n<p>For example, the first question you list, on buggy code bases, I liked enough to answer myself, and think it has brought a number of other interesting answers too. I'm surprised that it was closed and have voted to reopen. Likewise, I see no issue with the second linked question that would make me feel it should be closed.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3261, "author": "eykanal", "author_id": 73, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/73", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I disagree slightly with @jakebeal's answer. These questions, as posed, are almost always written as a rant, and <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1140/what-is-a-rant-as-far-as-academia-se\">rants are not welcome here</a>.</p>\n\n<p>That said, <em>with edits</em>, these questions should stay. I am a big proponent of requiring the edit for the question to stay open, though... the unassuming reader would come to the conclusion that these questions are acceptable here, whereas we only really accept them because there's a hidden nugget of pedagogy to be explored.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3267, "author": "Chris Rackauckas", "author_id": 47971, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/47971", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "<p>As eykanal stated, a rant is not allowed, but there can be legitimate questions about ethics/legality. For the buggy code question, interpreting it as \"is it ethical for a professor of a course on X to have some issue that makes a lot of the coursework / grades being based on the ability to use/understand Y\" is an interesting question that is worth discussion. </p>\n\n<p>On the other hand, the attendance question is mostly a rant. There are related questions that can and should be asked. For example, <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/65868/why-do-some-instructors-care-so-much-about-attendance\">asking why some professors care about attendance is fine.</a> Also asking about whether it's ethical or against (standard) university polices for a professor to base a certain amount of one's grade on attendance is fine. And even the question of should professors care about and grade student attendance is an interesting pedagogical question.</p>\n\n<p>However, I don't think \"How to deal with _____\" questions should be allowed since they usually have standard answers. Did the professor break policy? Gather evidence and tell a higher authority. Was no policy broken? Talk to some friends, get some support, and try to do as well as you can given the situation you're in.</p>\n\n<p>I don't know of a clear and concise way to put this distinction.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3259", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/-1/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3265, "author": "eykanal", "author_id": 73, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/73", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Personally, I say <strong>leave it open</strong>.</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li>There's really no way to police this.</li>\n<li>The question is interesting; removing it punishes ourselves.</li>\n<li>This happens so rarely that doesn't really need a policy.</li>\n</ol>\n\n<hr>\n\n<p>EDIT: I posted this before @ff524 found the exact question, along with answers, already online. Given that update, I'm a bit more hesitant... as @Strongbad says, we don't need to repost stuff from other sites just for the heck of it.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3266, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>As the question has been copied from some <a href=\"https://www.aps.org/programs/education/ethics/upload/Ethics-Case-Studies-Student-Edition.pdf\" rel=\"nofollow\">APS material</a> and they <a href=\"http://www.aps.org/programs/education/ethics/undergraduate/plagarism-discussion.cfm\" rel=\"nofollow\">provide an answer</a>. I do not see a place for this particular question. It seems weird to just repost material from other sites.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3264", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/73/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3277, "author": "Community", "author_id": -1, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/-1", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Yes, this sounds reasonable, and you seem to have enough material to write a good answer to your own question (which is encouraged on SE, when appropriate). Go for it!</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3278, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I think it is hard to provide a canonical answer to \"should I quit\". I am worried that it is such a personal question that the answer(s) will not help the majority of people and only lead to discussion in the comments.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3281, "author": "Community", "author_id": -1, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/-1", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>This deviates from normal StackExchange logic but I prefer to think of the question this way: the question is <em>going</em> to be asked. It's a very good question for anyone affected by it and people obviously google all sorts of questions, the trivial and the deep. I would prefer this community be charged with posting as nearly a comprehensive answer as possible to this question over anyone else.</p>\n\n<p>I prefer this for all sorts of reasons:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>The alternative is letting people find their way to sites like, say, the Ph.D. Comics discussion forums, where I really don't think they're going to find a fair and balanced discussion of life as a continuing grad student. (I love the comic, but I've experienced the attitude you can get from having your head in it too much.)</li>\n<li>I <em>actually</em> think a thorough, well-written, well-vetted answer is possible. All you people make a professional career out of writing dense, comprehensive answers to hard questions. I know it's a broad question by StackExchange standards but have a little faith here.</li>\n<li>I generally like the Q/A format with decoupled upvotes and downvotes as well as the wiki style of the question.</li>\n<li>It <em>pulls in visitors.</em> This may be growth hack-ish but it's important. We're not trying to build a walled garden here.</li>\n<li>In the \"real world\" sense of \"good question,\" it's a good question. Of course it's a good question - it faces people, it has real consequences, it can be thought through in a somewhat rigorous manner.</li>\n<li>It's 2016. People tend to google good questions they have.</li>\n<li>In my experience this community has had a pretty darn healthy worldview between \"follow your dreams at all cost!\" and \"academia is part of the broader context of life, so let's take that seriously too.\" We have a <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/two-body-problem\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;two-body-problem&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">two-body-problem</a> tag. We take both succeeding in academia and succeeding in life, whatever that means to \"you\" or the OP, seriously.</li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>I'm glad we're discussing this seriously because StackExchange communities like StackOverflow have taken a draconian stance against open questions, and rightly so, for the natures of their communities and their scale. I think academia.SE is well positioned to put up a good answer to a big and hard question like this and will benefit for doing so.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3274", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/10529/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3284, "author": "Community", "author_id": -1, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/-1", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I would like to point out the problem that you do not know how many international students applied for these positions received by your colleagues who were rejected. You also have not clarified whether your colleagues are not funded through the university and I suspect you don't have a clue.</p>\n\n<p>I <em>strongly</em> encourage you to not accuse someone of \"playing the race card\" when you admit you do not understand the situation at all.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3286, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>The question says:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Most of the funding I applied for were strictly 'UK/EU citizens only', and it is rare to have full funding for international students. I have applied to a lot of places, and received a lot of responses in the form of \"... you are a good match, but I don't have funding for overseas students...\".</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>then goes on to ask why it is considered acceptable to limit some sources of PhD funding to its own or EU citizens.</p>\n\n<p>The OP never claims that \"UK is not providing funding for international student\" as you seem to believe, so the fact that some international students complete funded PhDs in the UK does not contradict any claims in the question. The OP says only that in his experience, there is less funding available to applicants who are not UK/EU citizens.</p>\n\n<p>If you have some reliable (not anecdotal) data showing that the ratio of available funding to PhD applicants is identical for UK/EU students and non-UK/EU students, by all means, please provide that data. I suspect that you do not.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3279", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/41198/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3282, "author": "Ric", "author_id": 9700, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/9700", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I think using many gender specific terms like \"man-hours\" is fine. </p>\n\n<p>We should strive to use the more gender neutral ones where we can (e.g., \"firefighter\" over \"fireman\"), but I don't think we need to explicitly avoid words that are well understood and are normally not considered to be offensive.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3283, "author": "Community", "author_id": -1, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/-1", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Gendered terms are bad, but I don't think we have adequate tools at hand for policing or otherwise creating a culture change for this. If you are reading this, I would suggest you refrain from using them totally (\"man-hours\", \"he\" when unspecified, \"you guys\", etc.), but I don't believe there's much more for anyone to do other than leading by example. I'm open to ideas though.</p>\n\n<p>As for why I think gendered terms are bad: I do not say man-hours. There are women on my team. It is quite simply an incorrect term and I'm pedantic enough of a grammarian to end the question right there. Many in industry go through unconscious bias training where we experience the physical cognitive strain that comes in connecting \"woman\" and \"scientist\" in the same sentence (the number of people who feel no such strain is frighteningly small). Hofstadter's <a href=\"https://www.cs.virginia.edu/~evans/cs655/readings/purity.html\" rel=\"nofollow\">satire paper on the argument</a> is the best evidence I know that gendered pronouns and default terms are harmful. I really can't write a conventional persuasive argument on the topic better than he illustrates it in this satirically-voiced essay, so I simply won't.</p>\n\n<p>How much vigilante policing we should do via comments is another question, and I think the answer is not much. I would actually really like to hear a solution that helps us de-gender our Q&amp;A besides comments that tend to pester and look more like (or are just indistinguishable from) trolling. The status quo is a bit unfortunate, but I don't see the available tools for policing being productive at all.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3285, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 5, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I am in favor of encouraging clarity above all else, and leaving other matters of language and style up to the author of the post.</p>\n\n<p>As long as the language of the post is clear and it is consistent with the <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice\">be nice policy</a>, we should let authors express themselves as they prefer. If you don't like gender-specific terms or pronouns, don't use them in your own posts, but don't insist that others refrain from using them.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3287, "author": "jakebeal", "author_id": 22733, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Given the increasing acceptance of \"<a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular_they\" rel=\"nofollow\">singular they</a>,\" there are very few places where using a gendered term is actually necessary. Furthermore, I do think that avoiding them is good practice for an inclusive community, as otherwise we are contributing with no good reason to the still-quite-strong <a href=\"http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MenAreGenericWomenAreSpecial\" rel=\"nofollow\">\"men are the default\"</a> environment.\nOf course, when one is talking about a <em>specific</em> person where the gender is known, it's always appropriate to use that person's preferred pronoun.</p>\n\n<p>As for how to approach is as a community: I would recommend treating unnecessary gendering just like we do blatant grammatical errors. If you notice it, edit to fix; no special criticism necessary.</p>\n\n<p>Thus, if you run into a sentence like:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Somebody can told me figuring how many man-hours project need?</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>just change it to a better one like:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Can somebody tell me how to figure out how many person-hours a project needs?</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>to fix it and move on.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3494, "author": "Karl", "author_id": 45983, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/45983", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>\"man-hours\" is not actually gender specifc. \"man\" is synonymous to \"person\", \"worker\" here. </p>\n\n<p>Think about \"mankind\". That's everybody.</p>\n\n<p>Imagine a female firefighter saying \"I'm not a fireman!\" as if it were an insult. Half her colleagues will feel slightly insulted. Fat lot of good that'll do for gender equality.</p>\n\n<p>It's even worse in languages like French or German, where the \"feminists\" put a female form with gender-specific article next to the old one with a male <em>grammatical</em> gender. Now no macho captain has to suffer that a female can carry the same title, because she's not a \"Kapitän\", she's a \"Kapitänin\"! \nCongratulations, you've made it <em>easy</em> for people to be sexist.</p>\n\n<p>How can I, as a male, stand up for women's equality, say that it <em>doesn't matter</em> in professional life, when all the time people come up with new vocabulary that cements differences? Honestly, I'm rather fed up with it.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3280", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3301, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I think questions on undergraduate admission exams (e.g., SAT and ACT) and application process (e.g., US common application and UK UCAS) are not generalizable.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3302, "author": "Ric", "author_id": 9700, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/9700", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I agree with Massimo Ortolano about the similarity between Masters and undergrad courses, but I disagree with what's off-topic. I think a more important question isn't so much the difference between undergraduate and graduate, but what constitutes academia.</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>This site is for academics of all levels—from aspiring graduate and professional students to senior researchers—as well as anyone in or interested in research-related or research-adjacent fields. (<a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic\">What topics can I ask about</a>)</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>It looks like academia is primarily defined by research, not taking classes. I personally think any course-related questions that don't have to do with research or admissions to a research position are off-topic.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3786, "author": "Wrzlprmft", "author_id": 7734, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Going by <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1363/7734\">this answer</a>, questions specific to undergraduate life (“sports, underage drinking, living in dorms, being able to make your own choices for the first time, etc.”) should be off-topic.</p>\n\n<p>Admittedly there isn’t such a thing as a specific <em>undergraduate life</em> in many countries (including mine), but that’s not really a problem, as this also means that there are no questions to ask about it – not that we get many questions about undergraduate life at all.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3300", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/20058/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3307, "author": "Jon Custer", "author_id": 15477, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/15477", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Personally, I do not find that the tag 'wetlab' is necessary. A main point of a tag is to be able to search through questions more easily. I'm not sure that a future searcher would necessarily link that question with 'wetlab' which could more easily be applied to chemistry (for example). </p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3309, "author": "Cape Code", "author_id": 10643, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/10643", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I think the wetlab tag is useful or might become so in the future if this site gets more attention in the natural sciences circles. </p>\n\n<p>Besides, I don't think it's hurting the site in anyways to keep it.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3306", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/40592/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3310, "author": "jakebeal", "author_id": 22733, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733", "pm_score": 5, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I think there might well be a good question in there, but right now, it's way too broad and poorly defined. Some issues that I see are:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>It's not clear whether the question can be <em>answered</em> per se, or whether in the current state of the world it's more a matter of discussion, debate, and experiment. This makes it like an \"I would like to have a discussion about...\" question, which of course are off topic.</li>\n<li><p>The definition of the focus is very broad:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>\"junk science I mean pseudo-science (i.e. work done with flawed or frivolous methodology), deliberately faked results, and generally very low quality research\"</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>The issue that I have here is that pseudo-science, fraud, and general boring crap appear to arise in different ways, and attempting to address them all together is extremely complex.</p></li>\n<li><p>The motivation of the question is unclear. Are you more concerned about punishing \"bad scientists\" or being able to find what you're looking for or about some sort of general societal collapse?</p></li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>I would thus suggest this might be best addressed not as a single question, but as a collection of more focused questions that tease out particular aspects of the more general topic that are narrow enough to possibly be answerable.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3321, "author": "smci", "author_id": 12050, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/12050", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Because it's so broad and vague. It could mean one, some or all of sixty things:</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li>how can we individually avoid committing bad science?</li>\n<li>how can academics avoid... peers committing bad science?</li>\n<li>... their department committing bad science?</li>\n<li>... their university committing bad science?</li>\n<li>... fellow members of professional societies committing bad science?</li>\n<li>how can we <em>advocate</em> for doing some/all of the above?</li>\n</ol>\n\n<p>Your question also mutates. You start by saying a) <em>\"junk journals and articles... pompous titles, pay-to-publish [etc.]\"</em> but then you say b) <em>\"by junk science I mean pseudo-science (i.e. work done with flawed or frivolous methodology), deliberately faked results, and generally very low quality research\"</em>.</p>\n\n<p>These are each very different things, some of which have no answers, some of which have clear well-known answers. There will always be bad or VLQ research. Peer-review can prevent people publishing e.g. bad physics in recognized physics journals, but it totally can't prevent people splintering off and forming a new field/journal/conference. Grant applications are another thing too, and each grant source has different criteria, levels of rigor, punishment for bad behavior (or lack of). (Peer-review is not perfect either: it's slow, political, fallible and ridden with cliques.)</p>\n\n<p>\"Deliberately faked results\" constitutes academic fraud, but it's comparatively rare, and I submit to you that many papers simply <strong>have no results at all</strong>, which is again bad but in a different, passive, way, since it obscures scientific method - unless they're review papers, which they're generally not. There is no shortage of such papers, in most fields.</p>\n\n<p>There are also authors who crank out 10+ papers on essentially the exact same finding - would you call that VLQ? Then again, given reject rates and unpredictable backlogs, who can blame them...?</p>\n\n<p>\"Pay-to-publish\" is again bad in a different way, not per se, but because it sidesteps peer review, disclosure, replicability, standard use of terminology, which are again all cornerstones of scientific method, so it generally results in a tsunami of crap, and cliques who manufacture plausibility by citing each other.</p>\n\n<p>So, you asked at least sixty different and contradictory questions. The tl;dr is clearly we can't prevent someone setting up the Abkhazia Open Institute of Antigravity and spewing out junk, but we can monitor and publicize any misdeeds, and try to limit them getting access to serious funding. But you knew that already. There is no blunt hammer to prevent the rest of the things you list. Wherever there are economic incentives, however slight, people will respond to them...</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3329, "author": "Franck Dernoncourt", "author_id": 452, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/452", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I think the answer <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3253/452\">you wrote somewhere else</a> applies here as well:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>The voting rules aren't very strict (as opposed to closing for\n example) but I don't think the fact that a question is hard to answer\n is a reason to down-vote. A question should \"show research effort be\n useful and clear\" to warrant an up-vote but it's also a matter of\n personal interests. </p>\n \n <p>I don't think that the issue with the questions you mention is that\n they are \"hard\" but rather that they look very much like advertisement\n for your opinions and pet peeves* that you tried too hard to make look\n like questions.</p>\n \n <p>My guess is that some users doubt that you genuinely think there are\n possible answers that would fit this site's format but rather hope for\n extended discussions in comments supporting your opinion.</p>\n \n <p>Sometimes the click-bait works and you gather many votes, sometimes\n it's too obnoxious and the opinionated undertone triggers down-votes.</p>\n \n <hr>\n \n <p>*Ok, so you dislike that some people pay to read articles. We get it.</p>\n \n <p>Ps. Many of your other questions are fine in my opinion.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>I think that your question on junk science is much more important than the vast majority of questions on this Stack Exchange website. However, my own experience in posting questions and getting >100 of downvotes is that questions pertaining to improving the research system are often not well received.</p>\n\n<p>I wish questions on the research system were posted on a different Stack Exchange.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3333, "author": "corsiKa", "author_id": 877, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/877", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>After reading it, I can tell you exactly why. </p>\n\n<p>According to the article \"<a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask\">What questions can't I ask here</a>\" in the help menu, there's this powerful quote:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>To prevent your question from being flagged and possibly removed, avoid asking subjective questions where …</p>\n \n <ul>\n <li>.. [four others removed] ..</li>\n <li>your question is just a rant in disguise: “______ sucks, am I right?”</li>\n </ul>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Simply put, your question is a rant in disguise which is specifically on the do-not-ask list.</p>\n\n<p>That's not to say the thing you're ranting about isn't a problem. But the question that is linked here doesn't appear to be a answerable question (at least, not in this venue.) </p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3308", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/10643/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3319, "author": "Wrzlprmft", "author_id": 7734, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734", "pm_score": 6, "selected": true, "text": "<ul>\n<li><p>If you are sure, <a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/58032/255554\">flag as abusive</a> (it’s abusing our site) and move on. <a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/193916/255554\">Do not downvote.</a> <a href=\"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Do not engage.</a> Six <em>abusive</em> flags will automatically delete the post and impose some bans on the poster. These flags will also alert the moderators (having highest priority). Under most circumstances this is the fastest way to get rid of the post.</p></li>\n<li><p>If you only suspect, flag for moderator attention. Flag for closure or deletion as appropriate.</p></li>\n</ul>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3320, "author": "aeismail", "author_id": 53, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/53", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Also downvote so that the questions or answers get moved to the review queue for faster handling.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3318", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3323, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>To me the best ads are for web resources which I would want to visit many times. This means that I think \"product\" ads (e.g., the one for <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2151/929\">Zotero</a>) and \"political\" ads (e.g., the one for the <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2158/929\">Elsevier Boycott</a>) are not particularly useful. The issue is the static and one-off nature of the material. Having ads be to unchanging webpages (e.g., political blog posts, new articles, or products) which you can digest fully in a single reading seems strange to me.</p>\n\n<p>That said, if the product and political ads point to something that is important to academics (and in the case of political ads, regardless of which side the ad one supports), then I think they are fine to let the community decide on.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3324, "author": "eykanal", "author_id": 73, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/73", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>The whole point of ads on this site is to allow the community to advertise what they, collectively, find useful and relevant. I disagree with your \"low vote threshold\" comment... the ten-vote threshold on meta for a site like ours is a pretty steep requirement, as the vast majority of our users don't visit meta, ever. For an ad to have accumulated ten votes meant that a non-negligible subset of the <em>active</em> community agrees with that ad.</p>\n\n<p>As such, I think your question is somewhat rhetorical; clearly, the community feels that we <em>should</em> use the site to advance these types of arguments.</p>\n\n<p>However, if you feel differently, you are welcome to campaign against the ad through a meta post. This question seems somewhat broad (\"Should our ads involve political content\"), which seems to have been your intention given the \"edit to add\" blurb. However, a question specifically asking about this ad (\"Should we allow that particular ad\") would give you a chance to voice your concerns very directly and allow for discussion on that ad specifically, and possibly drive others to downvote it and thereby remove it from the rotation.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3322", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/10643/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3328, "author": "aeismail", "author_id": 53, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/53", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p>This is something that has to be taken up with Stack Exchange paid staff—this is not something that we as moderators or individual community members can change. So if there is a consensus to request that they do so, we can bring it up with them. </p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3330, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I m not sure this is a big issue for us. Further, you can only make so many tag stand out. I think more often people ignore the \"field\" tag (e.g., math or history) than the country tag. If we were only going to highlight one type of tag, field might be more important. I am not sure how I feel about highlighting multiple types of tags.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3331, "author": "David Ketcheson", "author_id": 81, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/81", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>If the question is specific to one country or field, that should be included in the question title, or at least in the body. This will be more noticeable than the appearance of a tag, and would make modification of the tags unnecessary.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3336, "author": "marts", "author_id": 39045, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/39045", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>In my opinion, I don't think this would be such a useful feature. For two reasons. </p>\n\n<ol>\n<li>If the target location is not the US, UK or some other country that is well-known for its institutions, it might lead to too many specialised requests and not enough people to answer them. In other words, potential answer-writers might not consider a question because they can see it does not apply to the country that they have experience with.</li>\n<li>I think the separation is unnecessary and that many answers to questions that DO mention the country and field, still refer to another country, such as \"I know you ask about country X, but in country Y it is usually the case that...\" which can be relevant, informative and even help the OP simply by widening the horizon.</li>\n</ol>\n\n<p>I feel I have benefited from reading about the different fields and situations that have differing norms. Introducing country tags would try to tackle the problem of people asking unclear questions- I am not convinced that these users would then go and use country tags.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3327", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/4140/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3345, "author": "J. Roibal - BlockchainEng", "author_id": 47985, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/47985", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Yes, questions about the <em>process</em> of doing research are allowed, while questions about the <em>content</em> of your research are not allowed. When you ask about the process of performing graduate level research, this will be applicable to many newcomers who may have the same question. Questions about the content of your research will be of little value to most people, and this is the type of question to work with your advisor.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3346, "author": "Wrzlprmft", "author_id": 7734, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734", "pm_score": 4, "selected": true, "text": "<p>Going by your description I find it quite likely that your question is a typical off-topic question. However, without knowing your question, it’s impossible to be sure and there is a small chance (let’s say 10 %) that your question is a good fit for this site. Even then, I consider it very likely that you will obtain better results by asking your supervisor.</p>\n\n<p>Please consider the following:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li><p>If your question requires any knowledge about your specific field, it is off-topic.</p></li>\n<li><p>Question on this site should be requests for information. If your question is asking for a decision, it is not a good fit for this site. So, instead of asking “Where should I begin?”, rather ask, e.g.,: “What are possible approaches?”</p></li>\n<li><p>If your question can be expected to have plenty of answers, it is too broad. “What are possible approaches?” is very likely to fall into this category, if you do not narrow it down.</p></li>\n</ul>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3344", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/56527/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3706, "author": "cba1067950", "author_id": 70350, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/70350", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>There is a high frequency of questions that ask \"How can I best navigate some future event?\" most of which are perfectly acceptable to answer despite people needing to account for an inordinate number of unpredictable variables. </p>\n\n<p>\"How do I best apply for school.\" </p>\n\n<p>\"How do I best respond to so and so.\"</p>\n\n<p>All of those types of questions would ideally require a knowledge of the people involved at least but people still answer them based on, at best, a bit of data generalized to an almost entirely unknown situation.</p>\n\n<p>Estimating the exact impact of a global, national, or local economic trends is no easier than estimating the exact impact of a global, national, or local interpersonal trend. Brexit at least has a news cycle that can update the question. But this forum isn't designed to keep people current, it is designed to entomb information and then is misapplied to things that are changeable.</p>\n\n<p>If you are trying to form some sort of consistency then no keep it open, or block both. If you are going to on a whim block things that appear too frequently, then sure, but it shouldn't be on the pretense that they are unanswerable.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3709, "author": "WBT", "author_id": 36320, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/36320", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>The questions may not be answerable now, but they will be answerable in the future. Leave them open, maybe with an answer or comment that we don't know yet, and then they can be answered when the time comes that the answer is available. </p>\n\n<p>Article 50 has been triggered and the process of figuring out the answers has formally begun.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3351", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/1033/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3358, "author": "J. Roibal - BlockchainEng", "author_id": 47985, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/47985", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>It seems the title 'what are the reasons why faculty applicants accept or reject academic jobs' is too broad to be answerable in the SE format, however, the question asked by Franck 'is there research study that determines why applicants accept or reject academic position that have been proposed to them' is quite answerable. I have edited the title to be more specific, and I suggest the question to be re-opened.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3359, "author": "jakebeal", "author_id": 22733, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>A key reason that I voted to close is that the question did not show evidence of research, per Bill Barth's comment. This is an incredibly broad topic, and as the help page says:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Your questions should be reasonably scoped. If you can imagine an entire book that answers your question, you’re asking too much.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Did you try plugging in some related terms on Google Scholar, like Bill suggested? It certainly seemed to me that there were some useful possibilities in the literature that came back from a simple keyword search. If you didn't find that literature useful, what was unsatisfying to you about the results that came back? That might help narrow things down enough to be meaningfully reopened.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3357", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/452/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3361, "author": "David Z", "author_id": 236, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/236", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>You're not <em>required</em> to do anything with your answer. You got it in before the question was closed, fair and square, and if the community really didn't want anyone answering that question they should have been quicker to close it as a duplicate. But it is in the best interest of the site if answers are placed on the \"original\" questions as much as possible.</p>\n\n<p>With that in mind, I'd suggest the following: if you believe the question isn't a duplicate, make your case for reopening it by going through the usual channels. Offer counterarguments in the comments (to a limited extent), discuss on chat, and post on meta if you think it's really egregious. If, in the end, you don't win that argument, you should accept that the question is going to stay closed as a duplicate. In that case, it would be <em>nice</em> (though not mandatory) if you remove your answer to the duplicate and post the equivalent answer to the original question.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3362, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>In my mind the process is as follows. Post a question on meta or chat to make a case for why the question is not a duplicate. This is essentially what you have done here. If the community feels the question should remain closed, a mod can merge the new answers into the old question. If you want two questions merged, flag the question for moderator attention.</p>\n\n<p>We don't merge that often (I don't think I ever have) and I think it might be irreversible. This will keep the vote totals and revision history intact. If we decline to merge the answers, then you can provide an answer on the other question. </p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3360", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/47985/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3368, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<h3>Fix <em>all</em> the problems in the post</h3>\n\n<p>Try to fix everything that is wrong with the question all at once. For example, if you are editing a question to fix a grammar error, also check if maybe some tags are not applied correctly and remove those, remove <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1621/thank-you-sentences-and-greetings-under-posts-should-they-be-edited\">thanks and greetings</a>, etc. (See the <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/edit\">help center</a>). If the author of the post has provided new information in the comments that is necessary to answer the question, incorporate that information into the post with your edits. </p>\n\n<p>If you notice that people are making further edits to posts you have edited, try to learn from them for the future to see what else you could have done. Definitely be careful not to introduce new errors!</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3369, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 5, "selected": false, "text": "<h3>Make posts better, but don't impose your personal style</h3>\n\n<p>Usually we try to leave style up to the author of the post, and edit mainly for spelling/grammar, clarity, and readability (e.g. break up walls of text). </p>\n\n<p>If you have a preferred style for your own posts, that's great, but it's not necessary to impose that on other users' posts.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3370, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 5, "selected": false, "text": "<h3>Edits bump posts</h3>\n\n<p>Keep in mind that edits bump posts back to the front page. It's not a big deal to bump recent posts, and also not a big deal to bump old posts if it's only a few. </p>\n\n<p>But if you ever have the urge to edit 100 old posts all at once, it's probably a good idea to ask about it on meta first. Many users don't like when the front page is full of old questions that were bumped for some minor edits.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3371, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<h3>Suggested edits by editors with &lt;2k rep</h3>\n\n<p>If you have less than 2k rep, all of your edits have to be reviewed by multiple reviewers. Also, further edits to the post are blocked until your edit has been reviewed and either applied or rejected.</p>\n\n<p>That is another reason not to suggest a huge number of edits all at once, and to make an effort to fix everything that is wrong with the post in one edit, since we have a limited number of active reviewers. If you're suggesting lots of edits to old posts and the review queue backs up as a result, that might mean that more urgent edits to new posts aren't being reviewed.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3372, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 5, "selected": false, "text": "<h3>Avoid edits to \"on hold\" questions that will <em>never</em> be reopened</h3>\n\n<p>Editing a post that is \"on hold\" pushes it into a review queue for reopening. </p>\n\n<p>If you make cosmetic edits to a post that is \"on hold\" and is irredeemable (is inherently off topic for the site and won't be reopened), then it just wastes reviewer time: people have to review your edits if you have less than 2k rep, <em>and</em> people have to review the post for reopening even though the edits don't fix the reason that the post was closed.</p>\n\n<p>(See <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1226/editing-weak-questions-that-are-closed-for-being-off-topic-without-resolving-t\">this meta post</a> for more details.)</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3373, "author": "jakebeal", "author_id": 22733, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<h3>Leave the problems you're not certain how to fix alone.</h3>\n\n<p>If a post has multiple things wrong with it, some may be easier to fix than others. Fix only the problems that you are certain that you have a good solution to, and leave the others for later.</p>\n\n<p>Doing this makes an incremental improvement and easy approval. If your edits stretch too far, however, it can make a mess of good and bad improvements that is difficult for reviewers to sort out and your entire edit may be rejected.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3376, "author": "Brian Tompsett - 汤莱恩", "author_id": 26708, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/26708", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<h3>Be aware of culturally different spellings and word usages</h3>\n<p>It is well known that there are different, but correct, spellings for certain words. Examples are <em>color</em> and <em>colour</em>, <em>behaviour</em> and <em>behavior</em>, <em>analyse</em> and <em>analyze</em>. An editor should not change the author's version of the spellings to their own.</p>\n<p>However, it may be acceptable to make the spellings consistent with one form if it is clear the author can't spell; but you should be confident with spelling in American, British or Canadian etc.</p>\n<p>Culturally variant vocabulary is more difficult, and to avoid the semantic differences in words between readers it can be helpful to stick to a more academic style of writing. As this is Academia.SE we should be able to use language forms that might be acceptable in a disertation or journal paper. This often avoids those semantic variations that occur in more casual language.</p>\n<p>If an article already contains typos and other errors, formalising the language may improve its universal readability.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3378, "author": "jakebeal", "author_id": 22733, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<h1>Add Missing Body Questions</h1>\n<p>Sometimes, an asker will put a question in a title, but never actually put the question in the body, treating the two as though they were a single piece of prose.</p>\n<p>For readability, it is best that both the title and the body be able to stand alone. Thus, it is good practice to add such a &quot;missing body question&quot; into the beginning of the body.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3379, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<h3>Don't engage in edit wars</h3>\n\n<p>If your edit is rolled back (either by the original author of the post or another user), <em>don't</em> get in an <a href=\"https://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/03/the-great-edit-wars/\">edit war</a>.</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>If the edit is minor, let it go.</li>\n<li>If the edit is substantial and you think the user may have reverted your edit accidentally, or without understanding why you have made it, you can leave a comment explaining your position and asking for clarification.</li>\n<li>If the edit is important, you have left a comment, and the issue still has not been resolved, you can raise a flag asking for a moderator to take a look.</li>\n</ul>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3385, "author": "Kimball", "author_id": 19607, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/19607", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<h2>Don't edit; ask questions or make suggestions</h2>\n\n<p>I generally prefer not to edit other people's posts, so as not to inadvertently change their meaning/nuances and because I have better things to do. If something is unclear, or I have a suggestion, I generally just make it in comments (though the OP does not always address this). This is not a blanket rule--I don't literally mean no one should edit anyone else's posts (I've occasionally edited posts of new users)--it can be more efficient/effective for an experienced/insightful user to edit rather than the original author. But if you're not sure of what you're doing, use comments and let the OP or someone more experienced edit if they think it's necessary.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3386, "author": "Kimball", "author_id": 19607, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/19607", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<h2>Leave a comment about your significant (particularly uncertain) edits</h2>\n\n<p>If you made a significant edit, particularly if you're not sure if you've preserved the author's meaning, leave a comment for the author saying what you did, possibly asking if it's what they meant. This may make the author more appreciative of your edits and mitigate reactions like this: <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1828/why-can-another-user-edit-my-answer-to-a-completely-different-content-without-my?rq=1\">Why can another user edit my answer to a completely different content without my review or permission?</a> </p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3367", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3382, "author": "aeismail", "author_id": 53, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/53", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>It depends on what the question is about. Questions asking about pedagogy, organization, and similar matters that aren't course-specific are fine. Questions that are too closely tied to a given course are probably not, as would be questions that are platform-specific. (\"How do I enable feature X in course Y?\" is probably not appropriate.)</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3383, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>In my view, MOOCs are services that are sometimes used in academia and sometimes used in a totally non-academic context (e.g. for self study for fun, for training in the workplace.)</p>\n\n<p>I consider questions that are directly relevant to those using MOOCs in higher education to be on topic. I <strong>don't</strong> consider questions about MOOCs outside the context of academia or academic people to be on topic.</p>\n\n<p>This seems consistent with the community history here. For example, <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/16969/is-it-possible-to-master-one-topic-by-starting-with-a-mooc-course\">is it possible to master one topic by starting with a MOOC course?</a> was closed by the community for this reason.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3381", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/452/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3390, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 5, "selected": true, "text": "<p>There are three main paths by which a question can be deleted.</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li><p>Flags: If a question receives enough spam or abusive flags, the community bot will automatically delete the question and feed the spam/abusive detection algorithms. While this question is not spam, the <a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/234032/why-dont-we-treat-rubbish-the-same-as-spam/234035#234035\">abusive flag</a> can be used for trolling. The question has only received a single abusive flag, which is not enough to trigger the community bot.</p></li>\n<li><p>Delete votes: Users with enough rep can vote to <a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/5222/209097\">delete questions</a> when the question has either been closed for long enough or is sufficiently down voted. The question in question, is has neither received enough down votes nor been closed long enough for users to delete the question</p></li>\n<li><p>Moderators: Moderators can unilaterally delete a question. We tend to try not to do this and let the community take care of things, but sometimes we need to step in. That said, during the <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/990/2014-moderator-election-qa-questionnaire\">mod elections</a> we were asked about our thoughts on unilaterally deleting things. All the elected mods basically said <em>let the community decide</em>, so we tend to be conservative when deleting things.</p></li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>As for why I haven't deleted the question. I did not see the question prior to it being closed. It was closed by 5 high rep users rather quickly. The question only has a single flag and there are not a large number of comments. I think the community is handling the issue well and there is no need for a moderator to step in at this point.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3395, "author": "R.. GitHub STOP HELPING ICE", "author_id": 15828, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/15828", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I think the question shows utter incompetence as a lecturer, but it's a valid question and should not be removed because I've had lecturers who were actually this socially incompetent, and as such it's a legitimate question. Hopefully someone will learn from some of the excellent answers it's attracting.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3396, "author": "Federico Poloni", "author_id": 958, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/958", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p><em>Converted from a comment on the main site question (which I now have deleted):</em></p>\n\n<p>I am European so I probably know very little about this movement and the controversies that surround it, but I am strongly against the deletion of this question. In my view, merely discussing a topic in a civil way should never be censored because someone finds it offensive.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3389", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/51735/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3392, "author": "Anonymous Physicist", "author_id": 13240, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/13240", "pm_score": 5, "selected": false, "text": "<p>This site does not show what is a priority among academics because \"the content of your research\" is off-topic here.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3393, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Note that a lot of the questions containing the word \"appropriate\" have nothing to do with things that could \"repress and stifle the free exchange of learning and ideas\". </p>\n\n<p>For example, </p>\n\n<ul>\n<li><a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/49093/what-is-appropriate-number-of-keywords-for-conference-paper\">What is appropriate number of keywords for conference paper?</a> </li>\n<li><a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/37947/how-to-decide-the-appropriate-level-of-explanation-for-math-in-academic-papers\">How to decide the appropriate level of explanation for math in academic papers?</a></li>\n<li><a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/28633/how-to-find-out-the-terms-used-for-a-topic-so-that-i-can-find-the-appropriate-l\">How to find out the terms used for a topic, so that I can find the appropriate literature on it?</a></li>\n<li><a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/19237/help-picking-an-appropriate-citing-style\">Help picking an appropriate citing style</a></li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>Also, you wrote </p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>A search in this site for questions containing \"methodologies\" returned 539 results. \"Appropriate\" returned 2,397 results. \"New research\" was behind \"appropritate\" by 3 questions.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>But on <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/search?page=2&amp;tab=relevance&amp;q=is%3aquestion%20%22appropriate%22\">my search</a>, \"appropriate\" returned only 597 questions. I suspect you were searching across all posts (including answers), not only questions. </p>\n\n<p>Regarding the sidebar, as pointed out in a <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3391/does-an-unbalanced-focus-on-appropriateness-and-offensiveness-suggest-educat#comment10019_3391\">comment</a>:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Which sidebar? I see only two on my account: \"related questions\" and \"hot network questions\". Given that I see only academia.se questions in your screenshot, I assume you are speaking about the first. But, of course, those include only topics related to what you are browsing at the moment, so it is normal that you see there only appropriateness-related questions if you are viewing an appropriateness-relating one. This is by design</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>In other words, the \"evidence\" you supply in support of your claim that there is an unbalanced focus on \"appropriateness\" and \"offensiveness\" is based on a flawed methodology.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3397, "author": "Ooker", "author_id": 14341, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/14341", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>People tend to focus on the wrong, the crime, more than the average, the normal. </p>\n\n<p><br>^{\nThat's the normal psychology, not anything wrong.}</p>\n\n<p><br>^{^{\nBut sometimes, it does make trouble.}}</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3400, "author": "Andrew Grimm", "author_id": 3945, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/3945", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Questions about appropriateness or offensiveness fit in with <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_triviality\" rel=\"nofollow\">Parkinson's law of triviality</a>. Everyone can have an opinion on what's appropriate or offensive, even if they're not otherwise interested in academia. </p>\n\n<p>It probably \"helps\" that one of them is about sexuality (the dress one), and one of them is about a hot political topic in the US.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3391", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/58028/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3405, "author": "Wrzlprmft", "author_id": 7734, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I voted to close the coffee question because:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li><p>It is not specific to academia and in fact none of the answers found an academia-specific angle to answer that question. All the ethical considerations can be equally translated to other contexts.</p></li>\n<li><p>Apart from the title, the question is essentially a poll, which are not a good fit for Stack Exchange in general:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li><blockquote>\n <p>So, how do you think people judge the stealing of free food, and how have you formed these perceptions?</p>\n</blockquote></li>\n<li><blockquote>\n <p>I am interested specifically in the attitudes of academics towards stealing free food.</p>\n</blockquote></li>\n<li><blockquote>\n <p>[…] I was wondering what others' experiences have been as regards stealing free food.</p>\n</blockquote></li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>One could consider this as a request directed only at answerers who are very knowledgeable about the norms in question (professional conference organisers?) or asking for surveys of this issue (which probably don’t exist), but the way the question was written, it was inevitably taken and answered as a poll, leading to the plethora of largely redundant answers that we now have.</p></li>\n<li><p>There is a clear ethical dilemma (stealing vs. wasting) without an apparent solution, on which people will inevitably have varying opinions, which makes the question attract opinion-based answers, unless carefully warded against those.</p></li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>In general, I think that ethics questions can only work on this site (and SE in general) if they refrain from poll-like elements altogether and instead ask for an ethical analysis of an issue in an established framework (such as authorship ethics, codes of conduct, etc.) or under clear paradigms (such as fairness or neutrality). Any question containing a sentence along the lines of “What are the attitudes of academics towards X?” fails to do this and should be edited early or closed.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3408, "author": "Tom Au", "author_id": 755, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/755", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>This kind of question is just \"outside\" of what I would consider to be \"Academia,\" but I believe the ethical sentiment behind it has merit. </p>\n\n<p>A slightly more on topic question would be an ethical question directly related to Academia: for instance, \"what kind of content usage would Academics consider plagiarism, even though it technically doesn't violate copyright laws?\"</p>\n\n<p>Confucius did say in his \"Analects\" that \"goodness was the chief of all virtues (followed by wisdom and courage), so questions about ethics that routinely (as opposed to incidentally) affect Academics are probably good things.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3409, "author": "einpoklum", "author_id": 7319, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7319", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>If X is part of academic life or relates very closely to academia (e.g. X = \"The notion that the US federal government should should more/less of the budgestary burden of higher education\"), then on topic. Otherwise generally off-topic.</p>\n\n<p>But - if the poster can spin the question well enough, it could become on topic, e.g. X = \"The claim that the Turkish coup attempt was a false flag operation\" would be off topic, but if you add \"in light of its use in a blanket travel ban for academics\" then it becomes borderline on-topic. Maybe.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3404", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/23260/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3413, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>When a question is marked as a duplicate, it doesn't necessarily mean that the exact question asked is the same. (The text of the duplicate notice is misleading in this respect.) Rather, it means that members of the community believe that some or all of the answers to the marked duplicate directly address this question, and there is nothing useful to say other than what's already in the answers to the other question (or could be added as an answer to the other question). </p>\n\n<p>Or, to quote <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1237/11365\">another meta post</a> here,</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>I think it is important to consider closing as duplicate as \"these are very similar questions, to the extend that the answers will be pretty much the same\", and not \"these are absolutely identical questions\".</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>So, a <em>question</em> being different from \"duplicate\" isn't necessarily a good reason not to close it as a duplicate, if the <em>answers</em> will be the same.</p>\n\n<p>What to do if you disagree that \"the answers will be pretty much the same\"? Easy: edit the post to highlight the difference, and explain why you believe that this difference could potentially lead to different answers. Then cast a reopen vote, if you have the privilege. (Even if you don't, your edits will push the question into a reopen queue where others can cast votes.)</p>\n\n<p>For example, if the post was previously \"Publishing: quality vs. quantity\", in the body of the post, note what the marked duplicate says and why you believe the considerations are different when not asked in the context of a single project. Then it will go through the reopen queue where, if community members actually think the answers will be different, they will vote to reopen.</p>\n\n<p>The benefits of this approach are:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>if the answers to the marked duplicate <em>do</em> answer the OP's question, they get (multiple, very good) answers very quickly.</li>\n<li>if the answers to the marked duplicate <em>don't</em> answer the OP's question, then by focusing the question on the different aspect, the OP gets advice targeted to the differences in their situation, rather than just having the answers to the other question repeated (which would of course be pointless).</li>\n</ul>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3420, "author": "Cape Code", "author_id": 10643, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/10643", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>First, let's see if your premise, that is that there is a trend towards closing more questions as duplicates, is backed by the <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/tools/question-close-stats?daterange=last2days\">site closing stats</a> (status on 17/Aug/16):</p>\n\n<pre><code>Period | # closed as dup. | % of all closed | % of total asked \nlast 90d | 159 | 22.36 % | 8.82\nlast 30d | 53 | 23.14 % | 9.41\nlast 14d | 22 | 23.16 % | 8.39\nlast 7d | 12 | 26.09 % | 8.45\nlast 2d | 5 | 29.41 % | 9.43\n</code></pre>\n\n<p>It seems indeed, that the last week has seen an increased percentage of closed question for which the reason was duplicate, but the percentage of duplicates per question asked is relatively stable. I'm not sure that there is such a trend.</p>\n\n<p>I spend time and effort identifying duplicates, and I'm \"guilty\" of identifying the one you mention. Whenever I feel I'm reading the same question again, or that the question is so common that I feel we <em>must</em> have had this question before (for example: <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/75028/10643\">What to do if I&#39;m afraid that my idea will get stolen during review process?</a>) I search the existing questions and re-read them. I then indicate that I believe the question to be a duplicate.</p>\n\n<p>This does not mean that the question is automatically closed as other users or a community moderator have to agree. If you see a question that you feel should be kept open, use your reopen vote privilege. </p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>This seems to harm the intention of this site and is overall unjustified</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>I disagree, identifying duplicates is beneficial to the community as it ensures all answers are archived at the same place. It prevents the scattering of information in many posts, ultimately leading to users missing useful content. This is in my opinion more crucial than missing a subtle nuance between two questions.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3412", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/8760/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3415, "author": "Superbest", "author_id": 244, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/244", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<ol>\n<li>Go to top questions.</li>\n<li>Sort by votes.</li>\n<li>Read the highest rated questions and see what they have in common.</li>\n<li>???</li>\n<li>Rep points!</li>\n</ol>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3416, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<ul>\n<li>Read <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1203/welcome-to-academia-se\">Welcome to Academia.SE</a>.</li>\n<li>Read <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic\">What topics can I ask about here?</a> in the help center.</li>\n</ul>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3414", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/60445/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3418, "author": "Wrzlprmft", "author_id": 7734, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734", "pm_score": 5, "selected": true, "text": "<p>I propose <strong><em><a href=\"http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ivory%20tower\" rel=\"nofollow\">The Ivory Tower</a></strong>,</em> as this is the place where academics of all sorts clichéically and metaphorically live.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3419, "author": "Massimo Ortolano", "author_id": 20058, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/20058", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I propose... ehm, cough cough... <em>The procrastinators' den</em>. </p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3421, "author": "arboviral", "author_id": 52346, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/52346", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>What about <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Room_%28university%29\" rel=\"nofollow\"><strong>the common room</strong></a>?</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Exist[s] to provide representation in the organisation of college or\n residential hall life, to operate certain services within these\n institutions [...], and to provide opportunities for socialising.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Seems to cover it to me. Every UK university I tried Googling used it (or a derivative such as JCR, MCR and/or SCR) in some form, most in the above sense (<a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Room_%28university%29#United_Kingdom\" rel=\"nofollow\">Bristol, Cambridge, Durham, Exeter, Kent, Lancaster, Leicester, Nottingham, Oxford, Reading, St Andrews, Southampton, York</a>, <a href=\"https://www.ucl.ac.uk/ascr\" rel=\"nofollow\">UCL</a>, <a href=\"http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/maps/buildings/edgbaston-campus/red-zone/staff-house.aspx\" rel=\"nofollow\">Birmingham</a>, <a href=\"http://www2.hull.ac.uk/student/pdf/Accom%20Hull%202871.pdf\" rel=\"nofollow\">Hull</a>), some as the name of a physical social space (<a href=\"http://www.imperial.ac.uk/food-and-drink/catering-outlets/senior-common-room/\" rel=\"nofollow\">Imperial</a>) or events facility (<a href=\"http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/business/facilities/meeting-facilities/university-hall\" rel=\"nofollow\">Cardiff</a>). Some universities have named their online student communities or e-learning sites after it (<a href=\"https://www.google.co.uk/#q=manchester+university+virtual+common+room\" rel=\"nofollow\">Manchester</a>).</p>\n\n<p>It is also used in the US, although less common. Where used it seems to carry similar connotations, for instance the stated purpose of MIT's recently opened Quantum Information Science (QIS) Common Room is as a</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>venue for impromptu technical discussions and [...] social\n events</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>(<a href=\"http://www.rle.mit.edu/iquise/qis-common-room-grand-opening/\" rel=\"nofollow\">link</a>).</p>\n\n<p>My only concern is that it might be biased towards the UK and other English-speaking countries.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3423, "author": "elan.em", "author_id": 40887, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/40887", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>As much of academia (profs, TAs) has them (or uses them in the case of undergrads), another option might be '<em>Office Hours</em>.'</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3424, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I propose <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadrangle_(architecture)\" rel=\"nofollow\">The Quad</a> as they are often a popular hangout on university campuses.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3426, "author": "Brian Tompsett - 汤莱恩", "author_id": 26708, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/26708", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Let's go all Oxbridge and make it a <strong>Senior Common Room</strong>....</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3427, "author": "Ric", "author_id": 9700, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/9700", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>If we're leaning a little more towards a research theme we could go with <em>The Lab</em>.</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>I'm sorry I wasn't able to get your homeworks graded today, I was up late working in <em>the lab</em>.</p>\n</blockquote>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3429, "author": "Community", "author_id": -1, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/-1", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p><strong><em>Academia Secrets</em></strong>, since people in the room seem to provide each other the scoop on things occurring at their respective institutions. </p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3432, "author": "Wrzlprmft", "author_id": 7734, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "<p>To throw another suggestion into the den:</p>\n\n<p><strong><em>The social event</em></strong> typically¹ refers to the excursion or similar at conferences, where attendees can talk about things other than the topic of the conference.</p>\n\n<hr>\n\n<p>^{\n¹ at least in the my fields\n}</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3417", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3433, "author": "eykanal", "author_id": 73, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/73", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>This site is a forum for academics from all fields, all nationalities, and all cultures to speak with one another. We have had many questions where the answers have contained the types of contradictions you mention—<a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/644/73\">this one stands out in my mind</a>, mostly because I was one of the answerers. I was right, for my field (and some others), and he was right for his field (and some others). There are lots of differences between fields and these differences frequently come out in the answers.</p>\n\n<p>To that extent, if you think an answer is incorrect, or if you think it's representing only a subset of academia, post a different answer and call out those differences. Even if the answer gets no votes people should know that there are other ways of doing things.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3434, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I am actually having trouble understanding the examples you give as evidence.</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/75358/is-it-ok-to-show-up-to-a-conference-without-registering-nor-having-conference-me#comment183350_75360\">This comment</a>, which seems to be one of your examples of the problem you are asking about, does not appear to me to be written in an assertive tone:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p><em>You can of course email the organisers and ask if you can participate without paying</em> I would not actually recommend this unless you have a reason much more compelling than &quot;I couldn't get funding&quot;. I think it will simply annoy the organizers, who are usually influential people whose bad side you don't want to be on.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Frankly, I don't see any assertiveness in its tone. It actually includes several qualifiers - &quot;I would not recommend this&quot;, &quot;I think&quot;, &quot;usually&quot;.</p>\n<p>Whereas to me, <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/75358/is-it-ok-to-show-up-to-a-conference-without-registering-and-not-eating-any-meal#comment183352_75360\">your response</a> <em>does</em> seem to have an assertive tone. Instead of saying in a more reserved way &quot;in the conferences <em>I</em> attend this is different from what you report, and here's how&quot;, or &quot;this is not true <strong>as a general rule</strong>&quot;, you appear to deny the other person's experience by saying it is &quot;certainly not true&quot;:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>@NateEldredge, certainly this is not true. The organizers are usually not influential, but local academics which are not influential. The most influential people are usually the PC members and especially chairs. Not organizers. Emailing the organizers with a reasonable reason is a good advice.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Your main proposal seems to be that users should use a less assertive tone. Perhaps you could rewrite that first comment you gave as an example to indicate how you would write it in a less assertive way?</p>\n<p>Finally, when a user asks about how something will be perceived by other academics, I think it is useful for them to know if the response will be emphatic, and if different people have passionate and diverging responses. To quote a <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/75318/would-it-be-rude-to-ask-a-famous-professor-who-doesnt-know-me-personally-for-a/75319#comment183410_75347\">comment by user2390246</a> on one of the other threads you find objectionable,</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>Yes, very nice answer. The range of (quite passionate!) opinion expressed on this page is a clear indication that your mileage may vary. So, OP needs to find out a) will such a letter help him/her in their particular situation, and b) will the professor be able to write them a strong letter? @BenWebster's suggestions for how to do this are spot on.</p>\n<p>Note also the element of &quot;gamble&quot;. There clearly (as evidenced here) exist people who would look very favourably on such a letter, and others who would consider it very negatively. So having canvassed opinion, OP needs to decide whether it is worth gambling, or whether they are better off going for a set of &quot;standard&quot; (but hopefully strong) recommendations.</p>\n</blockquote>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3439, "author": "J.R.", "author_id": 780, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/780", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Of all the answers on that <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/75318\">recommendation letter question</a>, <strong>yours</strong> is the one that uses the <strong>most</strong> bold print. Moreover, in that answer, not only do you disagree, but you \"<em>completely</em> disagree with <em>all</em> the other answers\" [emphasis added]. </p>\n\n<p>I don't see what you're driving at. You've made your comments (12 of them); you've put forth your opinion in an answer; presumably, you've voted your conscious as well. I don't see any need to raise the matter here in meta and accuse your peers of being \"assertive, threatening, and intimidating.\" (That seems to describe your behavior as much as anyone's.)</p>\n\n<p>You've had the chance to make your case and the community has heard you out. </p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3430", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/8760/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3437, "author": "aeismail", "author_id": 53, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/53", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>A simple \"thanks\" comment is considered \"chatty.\" A comment that explains why you think an answer is useful, however, would be OK, as it clarifies and furthers the utility of the answer.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3438, "author": "J.R.", "author_id": 780, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/780", "pm_score": 5, "selected": true, "text": "<p>Short thank-you comments are generally frowned upon by the Stack Exchange. The 15-character minimum aims to keep comments substantive. </p>\n\n<p>Some other things to consider:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>On the main site, only five comments are shown on the page. Adding a \"thank-you\" comment could push down a more meaningful comment and make it harder to find on the page, like the comment that is hidden here:</li>\n</ul>\n\n<p><a href=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/hKV3o.png\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/hKV3o.png\" alt=\"enter image description here\"></a></p>\n\n<ul>\n<li><p>Moderators get flagged every time a question gets 20 comments or more. So, by using four comments to thank four users, you are using 20% of that quota just to say thank you. </p></li>\n<li><p>I realize this isn't addressing the exact situation as you describe, but I still think the overall philosophy applies:</p></li>\n</ul>\n\n<p><a href=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/hnKmP.png\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/hnKmP.png\" alt=\"enter image description here\"></a></p>\n\n<p>If you really feel compelled to leave a thank-you comment, I suppose you could so do \"responsibly\" by saying thank you – but then go back a day or two later and delete those comments. That way, the four professors get notified of your gratitude, but the thread gets tidied up without any moderator intervention, too.</p>\n\n<p>Note also, though, that a busy SE user might prefer to NOT get such a notification in their inbox. It can be a distraction to go check a notification that says nothing more than, <code>Many thanks, J.R. :)</code>, with the name and emoticon added just to reach the 15-character minimum. I know I have other things I'd rather be doing.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3436", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/-1/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3443, "author": "Community", "author_id": -1, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/-1", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I think the definition on academia.SE should be disambiguated to be effectively the same as the definition on mathoverflow:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Questions requesting a source of information on a topic. Answers are only expected to supply a reference and information about the reference, not information about the topic.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>A significant fraction (half?) of questions on academia.SE are requests for factual information. Answers to these questions should be based on facts and evidence. We shouldn't have to use a special tag to say that in response to a factual question, we want factual answers. If we did that, the reference-request tag would be used so often that it would become essentially useless. A secondary benefit of conforming to mathoverflow's usage is that we will avoid creating confusion. We shouldn't have identical-looking tags with radically differing definitions on different SE sites.</p>\n\n<p>Many low-quality questions on academia.SE are \"Dear Abby\" questions: a long, detailed personal story of woe (I'm pregnant with a two-headed love child by my student who is on the water polo team) followed by \"what should I do?\" These could be answered by personal anecdotes or with advice based on individual values or experiences. But most of these are ill-suited to the SE format, because they are too specific to the individual's circumstances. SE questions and answers are supposed to be of value to more people than just the OP. If reference-request is interpreted to mean \"please answer based on facts and evidence,\" then there would be a great deal of overlap between (a) the set of Dear Abby questions (which should be closed) and (b) the set of questions without a reference-request tag.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3444, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I think answers to questions with <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/reference-request\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;reference-request&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">reference-request</a> need a reference. That said, a reference only answer to me is like a link only answer (although, potentially less likely to rot). Ideally, the reference should be accompanied by either the key information in the reference or why the reference is a good choice.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3447, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>To quote myself:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>My understanding is that many answers here are based on personal experience, and that reference-request distinguishes questions that seek answers that are substantiated by reliable evidence (with citations to said evidence). </p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>When I ask a question tagged <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/reference-request\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;reference-request&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">reference-request</a> I am requesting that answers be based on reliable evidence (not anecdotal evidence or personal experience) and should include citations to said evidence. </p>\n\n<p>There are many good answers on Academia.SE that are <em>not</em> supported by citations. For example, consider many of <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/search?tab=votes&amp;q=user%3a1482%20is%3aanswer\">your answers</a> which do not have citations, but are still very good answers.</p>\n\n<p>Furthermore, there are many questions that can potentially be answered either from experience, or with an answer based on research. For example, <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/72833/impact-of-slide-quality-on-student-learning\">Impact of slide quality on student learning</a>. <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/72837/11365\">My answer</a> to that question is based on research, <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/72862/11365\">another</a> is based on personal experience.</p>\n\n<p>I find it useful to be able to specify that I am looking <em>only</em> for answers based on research. For example, in <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/37780/research-on-career-path-after-tenure-denial\">this question</a> I ask about the career path of professors after they are denied tenure and request \"answers that briefly summarize the results of a study on this subject, with a reference to said study\". If I hadn't explicitly requested a research-based answer, I would have gotten a lot of answers like the ones <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2553/what-to-do-after-being-denied-tenure\">here</a> (or actually, it would have just been closed as a duplicate of that).</p>\n\n<p>I also find the <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/reference-request\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;reference-request&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">reference-request</a> tag to be useful for identifying questions that I might like to answer, because I happen to like answering questions that seek evidence-based answers. It is one of my <a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/19173/what-do-favorite-tags-and-ignored-tags-do\">\"favorite\" tags</a>.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3441", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/-1/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3450, "author": "eykanal", "author_id": 73, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/73", "pm_score": 5, "selected": true, "text": "<p><a href=\"https://stackoverflow.com/help/whats-reputation\">Here's the FAQ on how reputation works</a>. The one-point cost is simply to discourage massive downvote campaigns. Honestly, you should ignore it... it's more worthwhile to both yourself and the community if you upvote good stuff and downvote bad stuff. If you're concerned about reputation, give good answers to questions over time. If you're not concerned about reputation, then who really cares anyways? :)</p>\n\n<p>Do note that <a href=\"https://stackoverflow.com/help/whats-meta\">voting on Meta works differently</a>.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3453, "author": "Laurent Duval", "author_id": 38057, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/38057", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Yes, reputation can be interpreted as a sort of currency: you earn some by asking and answering with quality. You can award bits of your reputation for <a href=\"https://stackoverflow.com/help/bounty\">bounties</a>, or to draw more attention to a specific question. Since knowledge and science are cumulative, I understand why positive actions result in a reputation gain (or none), to encourage quality. However, downvoting should be taken with care, and I believe the point loss is quite symbolic. Alternatively, you can edit the post which, if accepted, may provide you with a little reputation gain.</p>\n\n<p>And the first downvote gives you a <code>critic</code> badge. If a question or answer poses serious problems, you also have the possibility to flag it. Useful flags also earn a badge.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3449", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/-1/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3458, "author": "Massimo Ortolano", "author_id": 20058, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/20058", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<blockquote>\n <p>They are mechanistic rules that only tangentially have to do with academia.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Preparing the list of references is certainly a major task when writing an academic publication, whether a report, a paper or a book: thus, I would not consider citation style only tangential to academia.</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>the answer is the same: look at your style guide.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Here you assuming that every university or every journal have a style guide, and that that style guide covers all possible citation cases. Both assumptions are generally false: many universities around the world don't have a style guide (as many universities don't have policies on certain aspects of academic life, or don't have a student health office, psychological help etc.), and many style guides, even journal ones, don't cover all cases. </p>\n\n<p>Thus, I think that questions about citation style should be on topic.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3459, "author": "Wrzlprmft", "author_id": 7734, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<blockquote>\n <p>They are mechanistic rules that only tangentially have to do with academia. </p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>While I agree that they somewhat differ from the majority of questions here, citation style is something that primarily concerns academics. Hence, I do not see why it should be off-topic. If you specifically do not want to see such questions, you can simply ignore the tag.</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Whether you choose to have sentence capitalization or word capitalization, use a comma instead of a colon, or have the citation inside the quote or outside -- the answer is the same: look at your style guide.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Taking a brief look at the <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/citation-style\">questions tagged <em>citation-style</em></a>, I found none that looked as if it could be answered with “look at your style guide”. Rather the questions are, e.g., about handling rare cases not covered by some style guide, the rationale behind certain styles, or the exegesis of a popular style guide.</p>\n\n<p>If a question could only be answered with “look at your style guide”, I would indeed consider it a case for closing as depending on individual factors.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3457", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/14885/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3464, "author": "Ric", "author_id": 9700, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/9700", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Just because something attracts junk comments, doesn't mean it's a bad question. Personally I think the question is legitimate and should stay up.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3465, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I have mixed feelings on this. I think the questions address legitimate issues in academia that can be answered. The questions attract a lot of discussion in the comments and bad answers. I think we should moderate the comments and answers and not slam the door on relevant questions.</p>\n\n<p>I would rather see comments flag as too chatty and bad answers either flagged as not an answer or down voted into oblivion. </p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3469, "author": "Tom Church", "author_id": 563, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/563", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I felt that much of the problem with this question was the presence of a personal story that did not bear on the question being asked, so I edited the question to remove the story.</p>\n\n<p>The resulting question (i.e. the underlying question of the original post!) strikes me as much more reasonable.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3474, "author": "jakebeal", "author_id": 22733, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I think that controversial questions are fine, but require a much higher level of care in community attention and moderation. </p>\n\n<p>In particular, they typically rapidly shoot to the \"hot questions\" list and start attracting low-quality answers from new site users. I typically protect such questions as soon as I am able, in order to keep the trash-answer rate down, but there is a significant delay (maybe a day?) before non-moderators can protect. </p>\n\n<p>Flagging early to ask the moderators to protect can thus help a lot in mitigating quality issues.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3463", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/10643/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3467, "author": "Shog9", "author_id": 78, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/78", "pm_score": 5, "selected": false, "text": "<p>So... what do you want to happen here? </p>\n\n<p>The answer isn't providing instructions for cracking the software. The answer isn't linking to cracked software, or suggesting possible search terms for finding cracked software. </p>\n\n<p>The answer boils down to, \"if you want to take a class run by a teacher who instructs you to crack the software you'll be using, then follow the teacher's instructions.\" </p>\n\n<p>That... Isn't actually all that unreasonable. It may still be bad advice for exactly the reasons you cite - but the <em>answer itself</em> is hardly illegal. </p>\n\n<p>If you disagree with the advice given in that answer, then downvote it and upvote a different one. For instance, the answer which describes how one might complete the course without actually using Mathematica, or the one which suggests buying a license. Or write your own answer.</p>\n\n<p>That's how Stack Exchange is supposed to work: bad advice gets downvoted, good advice gets upvoted. Perhaps it would benefit your cause here to find out why so many people seem to think that answer provides good advice...</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3468, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>We have discussed what our stances are on legality in regards to questions <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3411/what-is-our-stance-on-questions-that-can-be-used-for-legal-and-illegal-purposes\">What is our stance on questions that can be used for legal and illegal purposes?</a> This is not necessarily the same as for answers, but my opinion is the same. <em>I am hesitant to provide answers that will likely be used to break the law, even if there is a technically legal way of using the information.</em> For answers, I would not go so far as delete them, but would like to see answers about ways to break the law down voted.</p>\n\n<p>I am not a lawyer or expert on international copyright law as it pertains to software. That said, the answer does not particularly focus on the act of \"cracking\" the software, but rather on the use of cracked software. As I said in <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3425/929\">this answer</a> I think there is a difference between distributing material that is in violation of copyright law and using the material. The answer also presents a case why using the cracked software may not be unethical (which is another aspect that is important in my opinion). I do not like answers which promote legal, but unethical, behavior either.</p>\n\n<p>Overall, I do not like the answer and have down voted it. There is a comment, left by you, expressing concerns about the legality of the answer. Apart from leaving an additional comment about the ethics, or writing a new answer, I do not see anything else that needs to be done.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3466", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/6526/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3471, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>In general, as moderators, we try and not moderate discussion on our moderator actions for exactly the reasons you alluded to. In this case, I deleted your comment not because it was critical of another moderator's behavior, but because it was additional discussion that was not appropriate to be left as a comment. It would have been fine in meta or chat.</p>\n\n<p>The ability of moderators to move comments to chat are limited (we can only do it under certain circumstances and only once per answer). The only options I had were to either leave or delete the comment. There was a \"warning\" prior to your comment that the discussion had been moved to chat. You also should have received a ping from a comment that ff524 left as a response (which I also deleted). I decided that if the response was insufficient, that you wanted to follow it up in meta or chat.</p>\n\n<p>For completeness your comment was:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>@ff524: Why did you single out two comments and not move them to chat? These weren't the only ones directly responding to the answer. Are you not thereby narrowing down the (published) range of opinions, and hence inadvertently abusing your moderator powers? </p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>and her response was:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>@Stefan I undeleted the two that seemed were correct use of comments and also highly upvoted. People interested in the range of opinions are strongly encouraged to visit that chat room.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>The comments she left were one by me:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Do you have any evidence to backup your claims? </p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>and one by a high rep user</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>-1: When you base your answer (even partially) on sarcasm, you lose (your) credibility and (my) respect. Your argument is that imposing some instances of \"X only\" inherently works against \"equality (or some acceptable bounds on the proportions of) X and Y\". That is clearly wrong: if things are highly skewed away from the proportions you want, you don't correct with equal proportions, you correct by skewing in the other direction. Let me ask you this: what do you think is the percentage of female speakers at the most recent International Congress of Mathematicians?</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Both of these are attempting to enable the answer to be improved and not discussion. Looking at the <a href=\"http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/45675/discussion-on-answer-by-gorchestopher-h-what-is-the-purpose-of-women-only-meetin\">chat transcript</a> with the other comments, I don't see any that obviously are trying to improve the answer.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3472, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>To expand on StrongBad's answer, here are some reasons why questions or complaints about moderator actions belong here on meta, not in comments on the main site:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>As meta posts, they have visibility to people who are interested in participating in the governance of this site (i.e. meta users), who can then chime in with their own answers and votes. As comments buried on an answer on the main site, they do not. If you have a problem with moderator actions, you should <em>want</em> to bring that to the attention of people who care about such things, not bury the discussion where hardly anybody will see it.</li>\n<li>As comments on a main site question, they are distracting to future readers (\"I came here via Google search to find an answer to this question, why am I reading about moderator policies?\"). This is contrary to the Stack Exchange philosophy, which is all about a focus on Q&amp;A, no distractions. (Note that the instructions in the <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment\">help center</a> say not to use comments for \"Discussion of community behavior or site policies; please use meta instead.\")</li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>Criticism of moderator actions is 100% acceptable on Academia.SE, but please put it on meta, where it belongs.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3470", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/-1/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3482, "author": "RoboKaren", "author_id": 14885, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/14885", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I disagree with the tag renaming.</p>\n\n<p>Sexual misconduct is often more about power or the abuse of power than it is about sex. </p>\n\n<p>Rape was once seen as a subset of 'sex' but is now appropriately being seen as the vicious form of abuse and crime that it is.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3488, "author": "Tom Church", "author_id": 563, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/563", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>The term for this concept in English is \"sexual misconduct\"; this is a <a href=\"http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Term+of+Art\" rel=\"nofollow\">term of art</a>, whose meaning cannot necessarily be broken down to its constituent parts.</p>\n\n<p>Those who have chosen to tag questions with this label assumedly meant to use this term, and not some other term with different connotations. Therefore it would be inappropriate to rename this tag to some other term.</p>\n\n<p>Regarding the proposed alternatives:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li><p>\"Sexual sphere\" is not a phrase in English.</p></li>\n<li><p>As for \"sexual conduct\", the OP may be relieved to learn that this is a term found largely in legal codes that criminalize certain sexual behaviors such as statutory rape or bestiality. Therefore if his goal is to avoid stigmatizing the hypothetical individuals who are tagged with this label, his proposed term would actually be far worse!</p></li>\n</ul>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3477", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/958/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3485, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I think we should discourage the use of gendered pronouns in discussion (as well as in questions and answers). The use of gendered terms generally does not add clarity and has the potential to be offensive/upsetting when the wrong term is used. As very few of us list our preferred pronoun in our profiles, we generally have no way of knowing what the correct pronoun is.</p>\n\n<p>The issue is, how do we want to discourage the use of gendered pronouns. I do not think policing usage is the way to go. In other words, we should not systematically remove all usage of gendered pronouns. Instead, I think we should bring up in chat and meta that we strive to use gender neutral language when possible.</p>\n\n<p>I also think if users list preferred pronouns in their profiles, then they can flag posts for moderator attention to \"fix\" references that use a non-preferred pronoun. I am not exactly sure how to handle edits for individuals who are gender fluid or who's preferred pronouns change with time.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3486, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 6, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I'll repeat what I said in the <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3280/how-do-we-feel-about-gender-specific-terms\">other thread</a>, which seemed to be supported by the community (as indicated by their votes):</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>I am in favor of encouraging clarity above all else, and leaving other matters of language and style up to the author of the post.</p>\n \n <p>As long as the language of the post is clear and it is consistent with the be nice policy, we should let authors express themselves as they prefer. If you don't like gender-specific terms or pronouns, don't use them in your own posts, but don't insist that others refrain from using them.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>In response to StrongBad's suggestion that</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>if users list preferred pronouns in their profiles, then they can flag posts for moderator attention to \"fix\" references that use a non-preferred pronoun</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>I disagree completely. Moderators editing comments does not leave any edit trail, so the user appears to say whatever the moderator wrote. It is used with extreme care in exceptional cases involving comments that can't be deleted (e.g. because they are an integral part of some exchange), but have <em>offensive</em> content that violates the <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice\">Be Nice</a> policy. (Gendered pronouns are not offensive content with respect to the <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice\">Be Nice</a> policy that all Stack Exchange users are required to follow.)</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3487, "author": "Tom Church", "author_id": 563, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/563", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p>It seems to me there are two different issues here:</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li><p>The original question by eykanal asks whether we should \"as a community, discourage the use of gendered pronouns in discussion\" because this \"risks introducing bias and may affect the quality of the discussion\".</p></li>\n<li><p>StrongBad raises an entirely different issue, claiming that it is difficult or impossible to write correctly using pronouns, arguing that \"as very few of us list our preferred pronoun in our profiles, we generally have no way of knowing what the correct pronoun is\" and \"the only way to know what is correct is to be told.\"</p></li>\n</ol>\n\n<p>These are really very different points, and it muddles the discussion to confuse them with each other. For example, the second issue would be obviated in a situation where all participants had specified their preferred choice of pronouns, while the first question would remain equally relevant.</p>\n\n<hr>\n\n<p>In any case, I do not think it matters much: <strong>neither issue is within the bailiwick of the community/moderators/meta readers</strong>.</p>\n\n<p>As with any SE network, contributors have the right to write their questions/posts in the form they desire, and neither the community nor the moderators should attempt to externally impose a particular style or preference. This seems close in spirit to edits to change e.g. British spellings to American, which has always been an invalid reason to edit someone's post.</p>\n\n<p>If someone wants to try to convince contributors that a particular style would be better, that's fine; one can always try to convince people to agree with oneself -- although doing it in comments might be off-topic, since comments are not for extended discussion. But I would be especially wary of such efforts from moderators, since they might give the false impression that they represent a collective norm of the community, rather than one person's opinion. (If moderators can post without the mod diamond, that would remove this problem.)</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3491, "author": "Flyto", "author_id": 8394, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/8394", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I think that, for all the reasons noted elsewhere, it is valuable to <em>encourage</em> the use of gender-neutral pronouns where peoples' preferred pronouns are not known, or when talking about a generic person rather than an individual.</p>\n\n<p>It should be mentioned somewhere in help or on meta that this is the preferred behaviour, and some people will hopefully make a point of commenting and pointing to that policy where applicable. My reasoning here is that it avoids potential offense, and avoids potential bias of the \"I assumed that all researchers in $field are $gender\" type, and (as far as I can see) has no downsides[1]. </p>\n\n<p>I am far less clear, however, on whether (or to what degree) this policy should be actively enforced. Are people politely asked to edit their posts? Do community members edit others' posts just for this reason? Is it something for moderators? \n(I would probably argue not the latter, except in cases of clear and deliberate misgendering where a complaint has been made - in which case it should fall under anti-harassment policies anyway)</p>\n\n<p>[1] yes, sometimes gendered pronouns can remove ambiguity in a sentence, but so can rewording the sentence to not be ambiguous</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3492, "author": "Flyto", "author_id": 8394, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/8394", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Having thought about this a bit more, and reflecting on comments, I thought I'd add a second answer rather than heavy editing on my old one.</p>\n\n<p>I think there are <em>three</em> slightly different matters that are being talked about here.</p>\n\n<h2>1. Referring to a user whose name or icon suggests a gender</h2>\n\n<p>In an ideal world we would not make assumptions based on these things, but in reality, at least for now, this is going to happen, and the number of people for whom it will be wrong, as a proportion of the population, is very small. Except in the case where somebody is being deliberately misgendered (which would come under anti-harassment rules), I think this is something to leave alone.</p>\n\n<h2>2. Referring to a user whose gender is not suggested by name or icon</h2>\n\n<p>Here, users should make every effort to refer to that user by gender-neutral pronouns. It must be pretty offputting for a woman to post here under a neutral name (for whatever reason) and be assumed to be a man - or, probably less common, vice versa. It is not appropriate to make assumptions, which may tend to reinforce stereotypes.</p>\n\n<p>I believe that this should be noted in the help, and people should make an effort to remind askers and answers of this policy in comments.</p>\n\n<h2>3. Referring to a generic person</h2>\n\n<p>I mean here when somebody is not talking about a specific SE user, but is referring to, for example, \"a student\" or \"a postdoc\". Here I think that it is really important to remain gender-neutral, lest we reinforce the idea that all researchers in $field are $gender.</p>\n\n<p>I think this is by far the most important of the three items here. I think that correcting gender-specific terms used in this sense should, in itself, be grounds for editing a post. If there is argument over this on a specific post, then preferring gender-neutrality in generic people should be the guidance for moderators.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3493, "author": "Karl", "author_id": 45983, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/45983", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I strongly object this would-be \"politically correct\" thought police, which is only done to hide real problems. A person so unstable it get's offended by a mere wrong pronoun needs help, by a therapist, not a thousand \"friends\" who really just find it unsettling to see a guy breaking to pieces over a trivial misconception.</p>\n\n<p>I add this much: If I have not hint as to what pronoun could be right, I also use \"they\" to refer to an individual person. It's a bit crude, but the other has solicited for it, and it is embarrassing for both having to correct me. Otherwise <em>\"he\" implies \"she\" unless otherwise mentioned</em>. If I need a lawyer, it does not matter to me if he's a man, woman, transsomething, or this very clever aarvark my second cousin refered me to.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3501, "author": "aparente001", "author_id": 32436, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/32436", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<blockquote>\n <p>Should we, as a community, discourage the use of gendered pronouns in discussion?</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Do you mean</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li><p>Should we discourage users from using gendered pronouns in general? or</p></li>\n<li><p>Should we avoid assuming a particular gender, when one hasn't been indicated in the question, username, profile, avatar or discussion?</p></li>\n</ol>\n\n<p>For #1: No, that would be absurd; #2: yes, <strong>we should avoid making unsubstantiated gender assumptions.</strong></p>\n\n<p>I will share two reasons for my answer to #2:</p>\n\n<p>When musicians audition for orchestra jobs, they play behind a screen, and their names are not provided to the committee. This practice was developed in order to remove gender bias. Compare youtube videos of historical vs. modern orchestra concerts. The contrast is striking. The gender make-up of the big orchestras has changed dramatically, thanks in part to this gender-free audition process.</p>\n\n<p>When I was a child, anti-Semitic neighbors made assumptions and nasty remarks to me, based on my surname. Well, my surname came from my father, who had been raised Catholic (but who, except from his name and some books sent on random birthdays, was entirely absent from the scene). Jewish law and custom says you are Jewish if your mother is Jewish. Mine was (although not through religious practice). Where did that leave me? Uncomfortable with unwarranted assumptions.</p>\n\n<p>Perhaps a new, more clearly posed question would be helpful for the site.</p>\n\n<p>(I would not suggest an edit to the question, given that a lot of very confusing discussion has taken place based on the question in its original form.) </p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3510, "author": "BioGeo", "author_id": 62976, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/62976", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I think it's more important to try to avoid bias based on gender, rather than using gender pronouns to hide the reason for bias.</p>\n\n<p>The first (which I agree is more complicated) is the actual issue we deal with.\nThe latter is only covering up the problem, but lets it proliferate.</p>\n\n<p>So, if someone is or feels clearly male or female (name, photo, information) then let's use gender pronouns and let those that have problems with the specific gender reveal themselves and be stigmatized.</p>\n\n<p>In the case that the question refers to the gender that a generic student or post doc should have, I don't see it as a big problem either. We can write he/she, or the student, or they... </p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3484", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/73/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3498, "author": "Davidmh", "author_id": 12587, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/12587", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I think it is not too localised. The particular example is regulated by US federal law, which makes it exactly as specific to a specific geographic location as \"How does the US admission to PhD students work?\", and less localised than anything tagged with, for example, Germany.</p>\n\n<p>Laws provide a framework we have to work in, and set limits, duties, and rights in the academic practice that academics should be aware of (or may wonder about).</p>\n\n<p>As long as the question doesn't require a lawyer familiar with the specifics of the case, I think it can stay.</p>\n\n<p>Furthermore, even if the jurisdiction is not the same as mine, many countries' laws mirror each other, so knowing how things are in another place may help me find out how they are in mine.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3503, "author": "Cape Code", "author_id": 10643, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/10643", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>One of the reasons for which I voted to close this question and similar ones as off-topic is that I believe their off-topicness makes them <em>not useful</em>. </p>\n\n<p>Apparently the OP wanted to advertise her/his self-answer but I doubt that this person or anyone else on this site is qualified to answer in a useful way. Besides, and especially in the American legal system, I think it's probably impossible to answer in a definite manner. Such questions about \"rights to this and that\" are typically controversial and not answerable outside a formal legal procedure. </p>\n\n<p>So what would a random user benefit from another random user claiming that that this law grants them the right to something? Imagine I asked about students' right re concealed carry of firearms on campuses in the US. I could easily post my own answer citing constitutional articles and laws and claim either that students have that right, or not. It would be useless. </p>\n\n<p>However, questions that are related to legal issue but really ask about what is the practice and reasonable expectations one can have in an academic setting are on topic. </p>\n\n<p>I think this quote form <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2146/10643\">another thread</a> summarized that sentiment quite appropriately:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Most legal-issues questions on Academia.SE are not about the law per se, but rather about the de facto interaction of academic standards and practices with issues regarding the law. That sort of thing is completely within scope of this site.</p>\n</blockquote>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3497", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/12587/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3500, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Suppose I am the hypothetical User B in this scenario. I have not previously indicated any gender preference, I wish to remain gender neutral, and User A has used male pronouns in reference to me in a comment, answer, or chat message. For example, User A might have written something like this on a comment on someone else's post:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>But in User B's answer, he said the opposite!</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>I have two options:</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li>I can let it go, if it doesn't bother me. (Note that use of \"he\" for a general, gender-neutral third person <a href=\"https://english.stackexchange.com/a/30461\">is still quite common</a> in many contexts, and doesn't imply that the author assumes that the person they are writing about is male. Similarly, <a href=\"https://english.stackexchange.com/q/28508\">use of \"she\"</a> for a person of unknown gender also does not imply an assumption that the person is female.)</li>\n<li>I can politely reply to User A in a comment, indicating my preference for the they/them/their pronouns. Then, after User A has replaced the comment or edited the post, I can delete my own. Note that this does not disclose my own gender identity, only my preference for gender-neutral pronouns:\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>I prefer to be referred to with the \"they/them/their\" pronoun, rather than gender-specific pronouns. Would you mind deleting your comment and replacing it with one that says \"But in User B's answer, <strong>they</strong> said the opposite!\"?</p>\n</blockquote></li>\n</ol>\n\n<p>I should also make sure to <strong>assume good intentions</strong>, as per the <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/be-nice\">Be Nice</a> policy. I should not assume that someone who refers to me using a non-preferred pronoun is doing this with any malicious intent.</p>\n\n<p>A flag would <em>not</em> be appropriate in this instance. Just as in \"real life\", if I am an adult who has a strong preference with respect to the pronouns that people use in reference to me, it is up to <em>me</em> to communicate that to others.</p>\n\n<p>As for a \"bystander who is concerned that the gender assumption could affect the quality of the discussion\", I'm not sure what specifically you are referring to. (An example of an instance of gender assumption affecting the quality of the discussion might help.) Also, use of <a href=\"https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/30455/is-using-he-for-a-gender-neutral-third-person-correct/\">he</a> or <a href=\"https://english.stackexchange.com/q/28508\">she</a> in reference to someone whose gender is unknown is more generally indicative of someone's language preferences than of a gender assumption, as per the referenced answers on English.SE. This applies <em>especially</em> in an international community like this one, where members' first languages vary with respect to how gender is used.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3502, "author": "aparente001", "author_id": 32436, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/32436", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Yes, it should be possible for User B or for a concerned bystander to raise a flag, requesting gentle but helpful moderator action in the situation described.</p>\n\n<p>As in all flags, the moderators would need to evaluate the specifics of the case, including, User A's level of comfort with English, any underlying tension that may exist between the two users, any observed effects on the quality of the particular discussion, and any other specifics the flagger might care to note.</p>\n\n<p>A user wishing to raise such a flag might not feel comfortable confronting User A publicly.</p>\n\n<p>This flagging ability is one way (among others) the site can ensure that everyone is comfortable participating freely in a public place where issues are discussed about the academic world, which has historically been a very gender-circumscribed environment.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3507, "author": "Scott Seidman", "author_id": 20457, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/20457", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>There is absolutely zero practical way to force a user/commenter/answerer to go to the profile and check for a pronoun preference. It's just not how this system was meant to work. </p>\n\n<p>Given that, I think there are just plain logistical issues preventing this proposal. People I interact with can tell me their preference, and I can do my best to remember it, but despite best efforts, I might not be able to. People come and go with high frequency, and given zero history of a new user, can't be expected to know a preference, and certainly should not be expected to go look it up. </p>\n\n<p>I suppose if people feel really strongly about it, I think they need to approach meta.SE, and ask for a pronoun preference field to appear prominently. </p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3499", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/32436/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3505, "author": "quid", "author_id": 42813, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/42813", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<blockquote>\n <p>I am wondering how safe my private data and locations are here? </p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Your private data should be safe. Moderators and staff can see it, but must not share it. Then, you give a location publicly. But maybe that's a false flag. </p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Do I need to delete my account? </p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>That's impossible to answer. </p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Is someone with experience in CS can break into StackExchange server and pick location and IP information? </p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Well, likely there is no system of which one can say it is absolutely impossible to break in. But then, SE is sizeable and in that business for quite some time with plenty of users with \"experience in CS.\" Thus, I'd say it should be as save as most anything. Why not worry about your emails instead? (Some info did leak in a encrypted form via the autogenerated indenticons, as it was the hash of some personal data, but this got plugged via salting the data.) </p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Do you think I should use from now on only anonymous question option and not to use account?</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>That's hard to tell. If your name is actually Simon and you are actually in Macau, then this could help to identify you a lot. Thus, if it is important for you to be not identified, then you might change this. </p>\n\n<p>You should also keep in mind that the content of your posts could be identifying that knows you or was part of the conversation. \"Yesterday, my advisor said: {Something distinctive}.\" If your advisor reads this they might recognize it whether your account is anonymous or not. </p>\n\n<p>Actually, think about it, specifically this post suffers this problem! It is rather self-defeating. </p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3506, "author": "eykanal", "author_id": 73, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/73", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Looking over the <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/users/41198/ssimon?tab=questions\">questions you've asked in the past</a>, I would say that you're significantly overreacting. Many people use this forum, including (possibly) your peers, your instructors, your collaborators, and your future employers. You seem to have maintained a professional air about you since you've started; keep it up and you should be fine.</p>\n\n<p>In the event that you do want to post a more sensitive question, simply log out before posting it.</p>\n\n<p>On a related note, feel free to visit (and upvote!) <a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/281223/139256\">this question</a> on the main Meta site.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3504", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/41198/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3520, "author": "tonysdg", "author_id": 36315, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/36315", "pm_score": 4, "selected": true, "text": "<p>I won't profess to know how to \"master the art\" of asking questions on SE. But I will answer based on my experience thus far with these sites.</p>\n\n<p>Chiefly, the best way to learn the art of asking questions is... to ask questions. Just like most other things in life, it takes time and practice to figure out how to do ask a \"good\" question -- though the links @ff524 pointed out will help narrow that down. But ultimately, it takes time to figure out what questions have already been asked, what questions are appropriate, what questions are worthwhile (so to speak), etc.</p>\n\n<p><em>So tonysdg, what you're saying is that I should start blasting the site with questions and eventually I'll get better, right?</em></p>\n\n<p>Sure, and if you keep randomly entering letters into a word processor, you'll get <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem\" rel=\"nofollow\">the complete works of William Shakespeare</a>. My point is: obviously I don't mean ask dozens of inane, silly questions -- but if you've been <strike>stalking</strike> reading SE sites already, then you have a fairly decent picture of what a truly awful question looks like. As for the questions in your mind that you aren't sure about -- ask away. Trust me, the community will let you know one way or the other ;-)</p>\n\n<p>And over time, you'll get a better and better sense of how to ask good, useful, meaningful questions on SE.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3521, "author": "Dirk", "author_id": 529, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/529", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>After re-reading your question, I add that it is well written in many respects and so I guess that you are on a good way. A bit more detail:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li><p>In your question you give necessary background, a bit too much probably, but in this regard the question is fine.</p></li>\n<li><p>The part \"vent off some steam on the Academia StackExchange\" was probably not a good idea. I think \"venting off steam\" here is not appreciated in general. In case the remark was tongue-in-cheek: adding humor to questions is difficult to get right (cf. <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/9396/should-academic-papers-necessarily-carry-a-sober-tone\">this question</a> and <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/15571/sense-of-humor-allowed-in-academic-writing\">this duplicate</a>) and often you are better off in leaving the humor out.</p></li>\n<li><p>When the question comes to the actual question, you are asking too many questions (I count three question marks), and also quite different ones. I suggest to think harder on what is the most important question for you, i.e. an answer to what question would help you most. In this particular case, I guess the question \"What I am doing wrong?\", while probably interesting, is not the one that is most important, since you focus on improving your situation and not focus on reflecting your behavior. </p></li>\n</ul>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3516", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/63352/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3518, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/a/78826/11365\">Here</a> is your answer. You have <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/moderator-tools\">enough reputation to see deleted posts</a> so you can copy and paste it yourself into the new question.</p>\n\n<p>In general: you can see your own <a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/226810/254250\">deleted recent answers</a> on your profile page, and if you have more than 10k rep, you can use the <a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/145060/enable-searching-with-deleted1-for-10k-users\">deleted:1</a> search operator to see your own deleted questions and answers.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3519, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>One thing you could have raised a flag for would be for the questions to be merged. In general, deleting and reposting questions is frowned upon. Users sometimes do this to avoid loss of reputation from down votes or to bring more attention to the question. In this case, it seems like the user is simply anxious. Which would bring your deleted answer back. That said, the questions are long and you answer is the only answer. When I looked, I decided not to invest the time sorting it out. Another option would be to undelete the old version and close the new one as a duplicate. These options seem like they might further stress out the user with little benefit to us as a community. </p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3517", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/32436/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3533, "author": "eykanal", "author_id": 73, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/73", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I suggest that <strong>Yes</strong>, these questions should be closed. </p>\n\n<p>My primary motivation here is that the voting-based nature of Stack Exchange will result in some answers being given more votes—sometimes many more votes—than others. Unfortunately, given that there is no \"correct\" answer in these instances, the votes really just indicate how many other anonymous internet denizens happen to agree with that answer, making the entire question simply a morality poll. The specific, appropriate answer may differ based on local norms, the individual's personal beliefs, and subtle nuances that people outside the questioner's culture may not recognize as important.</p>\n\n<p>As such, rather than allowing the poll to occur, I suggest is that the user would be better served by being explicitly told to consider it themselves and ask individuals within their own social and cultural circle, rather than relying on the wisdom of the masses.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3534, "author": "Wrzlprmft", "author_id": 7734, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<blockquote>\n <p>should questions related to students cheating (where the answer isn't explicitly defined in their academic integrity policy) be closed as \"primarily opinion-based\"?</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>No, this is far too general and comprises almost the entire cheating tag.</p>\n\n<p>I agree, however, that we should take care that these questions are asked in a way that makes them a good fit for this format. For example:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li><p>Questions should not just ask whether something is ethical or not, but for ethical arguments for and against something or for an ethical analysis. The asker has to make the decision, not we; but it is valid to ask us for aspects to consider when making the decision.</p></li>\n<li><p>Questions should specify an ethical framework or paradigm (e.g., fairness, avoiding disproportionate measures) on which answers should be based.</p></li>\n<li><p>Questions that aren’t actually about determining the ethics of a situation, but for example about possible legal consequences or similar should specify this. </p></li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>(Also see my answer on <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3405/7734\">“Attitudes of academics towards X?” On or off topic?</a>.)</p>\n\n<p>Of course, the questions should not be off-topic for other reasons, like depending on individual factors. I would close at least <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/q/79732/7734\">I used a solution that I happened to already have on my laptop on an exam. Did I cheat?</a> for this reason.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3568, "author": "Nate Eldredge", "author_id": 1010, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/1010", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>No, such questions usually can be answered, and should not be closed.</p>\n\n<p>Ethics questions should not be answered based on the answerer's <em>personal</em> ethics anyway, but rather, based on their understanding of the <em>consensus</em> ethical standards of the overall academic community. Ideally, explanations should be given that help the asker understand academic ethics.</p>\n\n<p>If an answerer believes there is no consensus on a question, then they can answer \"no consensus\" and explain why not. They should not take this as an opportunity to air their personal opinions on the question itself.</p>\n\n<p>People may disagree on whether there is a consensus, or what it is, but votes can help resolve such disagreements.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3532", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/73/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3545, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Adding an answer makes the question jump to the top of the front page. That means this is a great time to edit the question to add tags or fix any formatting issues.</p>\n\n<p>Tags are really important for future users to find questions, so if in doubt add an existing tag. If the tag you want to add does not exist, it is worth asking on meta or chat about it.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3546, "author": "Ébe Isaac", "author_id": 40592, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/40592", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>IMHO, this is totally fine. I've noticed many posts where answering users edit the tags of the question in various Stack Exchange sites. I find many of them useful too.</p>\n\n<p>As long as the additional tag is relevant to the question, there is nothing else to worry about.</p>\n\n<hr>\n\n<p>For instance, I skim through the live stream of incoming questions in Stack Overflow looking for Python topics. Many times, I see posts related to Python but don't have the tag. I add the tag and also answer the question. There are many expert users subscribed to this tag too. I've seen occasions where a better answer is posted in the same question afterward. This helps both the OP and the community. I would not rule this out as a probable conflict of interest.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3547, "author": "Wrzlprmft", "author_id": 7734, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Askers are notoriously bad at tagging their questions, choosing a useful title, and so on. If you answer a question, you are probably best qualified to edit it – not only because you apparently feel qualified to answer on the topic but also because you looked more at the question than any other user.</p>\n\n<p>While you technically have a conflict of interest regarding tag-related badges, you have to perform a lot of biased tag edits to actually see an effect and all you get at the end is a stinking badge. Moreover as tag edits bump the question, they draw attention and can be supervised by other users. In general, once you gain a privilege on a Stack Exchange site, you are trusted to handle it responsibly. Almost every privilege can theoretically be abused.</p>\n\n<p>You also technically have a conflict of interest by bumping the question or increasing its visibility (through added tags). However, as long as you perform the edit temporally close to answering it, the bump does not really change something as the question is on the front page anyway. Even tag-only edits to old questions are fine unless you do some systematic or binge tag editing (in which case, you should announce and ratify your plans on Meta first). As for increasing the question’s general visibility, this is a generally encouraged thing, as long as it does not lead to questions bugging people where they shouldn’t. Again, you are trusted to handle your privileges responsibly.</p>\n\n<p>Finally note that the <a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/239898/255554\">Explainer, Refiner, and Illuminator badges</a> explicitly encourage editing questions that you answer.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3544", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/32436/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3550, "author": "Wrzlprmft", "author_id": 7734, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<blockquote>\n <p>What is happening with that question about handling a potentially sexist behavior?</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Briefly: People don’t read or are incapable of sticking to the actual question. It’s a problem that we see an all sorts of question. Sometimes it’s not even a problem, because the asker clearly needs something else than what they asked for – <strong>but this does not apply here.</strong></p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Quite ironically @ff524 was the first to question the premises in a comment, while she was the \"victim\" of a similar treatment 2 years ago.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>In this case, addressing a problem with the premises in the comments is exactly the right way to go in my opinion. It does not address the actual question (hence it should not be an answer), but it points out potentially relevant information to the asker. Whether this information is actually relevant is something the asker has to decide¹, but we cannot just leave such a problem unmentioned.</p>\n\n<p>However, given that the asker is now obviously aware of this potential problem and has entirely removed the respective parts from the question, <strong>all comments pertaining to this should be removed.</strong></p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>I think one should stick with answering the question, why not while pointing out a potential false positive, and not just question the premises. </p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>For answers to this question, I agree. <strong>Every answer that does nothing but addressing issues with the premise should be deleted for failing to address the question.</strong> Note that this is not deleting an answer because it is bad or incorrect; it’s deleting an answer because it does not even attempt to answer the question at hand – it may be an answer to another question, but then almost everything is.</p>\n\n<p>I wish to state that this is not a chameleon question – the question was clearly stating that it was not about this specific situation:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>So I am not necessarily soliciting an answer specific to my situation, but in a more general setting.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Thus, everybody posting an answer addressing the premises was entering the risk of having their answer deleted anyway.</p>\n\n<hr>\n\n<p>^{¹ after all, it could just be that the asker forgot to report a detail relevant to her allegations (but not to her question) as her report was intended to be “without disclosing too much of it”.}</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3551, "author": "Wrzlprmft", "author_id": 7734, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>The more I look at this question, the more I think that plainly deleting answers or parts of answers that do not address the actual question won’t suffice to resolve the situation.</p>\n\n<p>Most answers have been voted upon on account of their attack of the premises instead of the solution they provide to the actual problem (if any). Hence the mess could only be resolved by resetting all votes (which is not possible even for moderators and would yield more confusion and disturbance than anything else).</p>\n\n<p>I therefore suggest the following course of action:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>Let the asker <strong>re-post the question</strong> in its current state (without explicit premises).</li>\n<li>Under all answers addressing the actual question, leave comments inviting the authors to re-post their answer on the actual question.</li>\n<li><strong>Delete the original question</strong> after locking it for a week or so for reference.</li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>For future similar questions, we should take care to emphasise the focus early by editing the question accordingly and deleting non-answers quickly.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3553, "author": "Federico Poloni", "author_id": 958, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/958", "pm_score": 5, "selected": false, "text": "<p>For future similar questions, in my opinion we should <strong>put the question on hold</strong> immediately (with reason \"unclear what you are asking\"), so that it can be edited and improved by the OP without receiving inappropriate answers. Sometimes <em>putting it on hold</em> only means <em>putting it on hold</em>, not <em>closing it</em>, and this is one of those cases.</p>\n\n<p>(As noted by @djechlin, it is a good idea to state explicitly in the comments that it is only a temporary closure while we wait for an edit, not to discourage the OP.)</p>\n\n<p>The alternative is doing some major edits on the question ourselves without waiting for OP: this is appropriate in some cases, but it is a more dangerous practice to suggest in general, because there is always the risk of turning the question into something completely different than what the OP was trying to ask.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3555, "author": "blankip", "author_id": 11420, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11420", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p>You should challenge the premise because that is what intelligent people do.</p>\n\n<p>The OP gave background to a situation. She had nothing more to add when questioned about this background. So to those answering the question we took the background as complete and fact. </p>\n\n<p>The question \"how to deal with sexism?\" is not a question, or at least one appropriate for this site. You would need to have an example of sexism in the workplace to be able to relate it to the standards of this site. There are hundreds of ways to deal with this at a school, each different depending on the circumstances.</p>\n\n<p>The OP never delivered though. She had a chance to convey to the readers why she thought there was sexism - (maybe there is and she doesn't explain things well). So to answer the question correctly you would have to state your opinion about the OP's situation. And my opinion was there was no sexism described and the OP's behavior seemed sexist. </p>\n\n<p>The OP still had a chance to add information or dispute anything. Instead she started editing and taking away the facts of this case. But even without the facts in the last edit, we still know what they are so we answer the question as complete as we can. </p>\n\n<p>To the contrary of others I think the question originally was valid. It was a microcosm of a teacher/student relationship and where things can go wrong. Now the question is so vague it is unanswerable. The question's edits should be rolled back. This is like someone asking on math stack - what is 2x6? and then editing it to say- what is 2x ? We know the answer is 12, editing the question doesn't help us unknow what was there. </p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3556, "author": "Community", "author_id": -1, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/-1", "pm_score": 5, "selected": false, "text": "<p><strong>It would be a mistake to reason from this to some sort of general rule about answer scope or challenging premises, because that's not the real issue here.</strong> </p>\n\n<p><a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem\">It is widely accepted at Stack Exchange</a> that we should be free to try to solve the underlying problem rather than answer the question as asked. Sometimes this leads to disagreements or disputes, and occasionally the premise of a question may be challenged inappropriately. But overall, I think this is a very good principle that increases the quality of the Q&amp;A resource. It would be a mistake to abandon or weaken this principle in hopes of addressing a perceived problem in a single question or small group of questions.</p>\n\n<p>Anyway, I don't think the challenges to the premise are really the problem. The simple fact is that this question was about a politically charged issue, and unfortunately that will divide people and bring out the worst in almost any forum. This site is no exception. There is no easy solution to this. In fact, not everyone will even agree about what the problem is, or that there is one.</p>\n\n<p>I think the best options available right now are:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Remove content based on being \"not nice\" where appropriate.</strong> In this case, the top answer challenges the premise, but is quite reasonable in tone. There are a lot of other answers that are much more antagonistic, while not really adding anything substantive. I see nothing wrong with deleting some of those answers.</li>\n<li><strong>Edit questions to make them less controversial, and focus on a clearer answerable question, when possible.</strong> This was done here, to be about a hypothetical, unambiguous situation. It didn't really work to reduce the controversy, though, perhaps partly because of the combative way the OP responded to criticism in the edits and comments.</li>\n</ul>\n\n<p><em>p.s. I find the criticism here of everyone who challenged the question's premise to go a bit far. The original question really did present a situation where reasonable people could disagree whether it was sexism. The OP's rationale for believing the student was sexist was given, so those challenging her were not simply speculating. And it's not clear to me that all of those challenging the OP had bad intentions. Keep in mind that an accusation of sexism could have harmful consequences both for the OP and the student.</em></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3558, "author": "Community", "author_id": -1, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/-1", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Really simply the issue was this:</p>\n\n<p>OP: \"So something sexist happened. I'd like to ask a question about dealing with sexism in general...\"<br>\nEveryone: \"That really wasn't a sexist thing that happened.\" [lots of answers]<br>\nOP: \"Actually I don't want your opinion on whether it was sexist, I was hoping we could just look past. So given that...\"<br>\nEveryone: \"that wasn't sexist, you sexist idiot.\" (Peruse the answers if you think I am exaggerating.)</p>\n\n<p>The tone really did lower here. And lower, and lower, and lower. Disagreement with the OP's stance toward the situation became justification for really denigrating tone.</p>\n\n<p>This is somewhat of a hole in what the philosophy of requiring context can provide. Sometimes you just don't want to have to justify the situation in the first place, <em>especially</em> on a sensitive topic such as sexism, and you just want to get to the advice of anyone who is willing to see the situation <em>your</em> way.</p>\n\n<p><a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/844/18072\">But this is addressed pretty thoroughly in another question on meta</a>:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>I think that examples in potentially subjective questions encourage people to pass judgment on the examples.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p><strong>As a proposal</strong>, create a <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/subjective-example\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;subjective-example&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">subjective-example</a> tag, with description something like</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>This tag is for situations where discussing the specific situation or example would invite unconstructive criticism of the example itself. Questions should generally include descriptions of specific situations, but there are exceptions where details would invite excess speculation or criticism. When using this tag, question askers are encouraged to use their judgment for what details to omit and question viewers should take care to honor this judgment.</p>\n</blockquote>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3559, "author": "RQM", "author_id": 48754, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/48754", "pm_score": 6, "selected": false, "text": "<h2>Should we ignore the premise?</h2>\n\n<p>Let us consider the following, exaggerated, cases:</p>\n\n<p>In the first, a question is posted, reading</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>If someone's life is in imminent danger due to a threat of a third person, am I justified in using lethal force agains that third person?</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>and in the second case, the text posted is</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Today, I overheard someone saying they wish my friend didn't come back to teach next semester. The person saying this looked as if full of anger. I feel like this person is going to assassinate my colleague any moment, and I think I need to take drastic steps to prevent my colleague from harm.</p>\n \n <p>In a general setting, if someone's life is in imminent danger due to a threat of a third person, am I justified in using lethal force agains that third person?</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>The first question is already an extremely complicated one, and even though it is commonly discussed in law classes in a general setting, no one answer could provide a complete and unambiguous solution. This is why courts of law are needed.</p>\n\n<p>Now, in the second case, one might argue that the question is exactly the same, since the first paragraph is entirely irrelevant to the question for being introduced with the words \"in a general setting\". Clearly, though, the person asking the question did <em>not</em> think the story in the first paragraph was irrelevant, even if claimed otherwise, since if it really were, there would have been no point in including the background story. Providing background to complicated problems, especially problems involving people, is a useful thing to do, because it allowes answers that are better suited for the situation which is <em>actually</em> at hand. It also allows people to point out that the question asked may not be \"the right one to ask\", given the background. The question has not been asked \"in a vacuum\", but in the context of a real-life situation.</p>\n\n<p>Also, since people are involved, one has to acknowledge that the answers given may have very real consequences to one or more parties. Pretending to not know about the real situation at hand is naive at best, in my view.</p>\n\n<p>So, if you, the reader, are convinced that the background should be ignored, since what is asked for is a general answer, would you think it right to ignore the fact that the situation at hand in no way warrants use of lethal force, and answer in the second case with \"Yes, if someone's life is in imminent danger due to a threat of a third person, one is justified in using lethal force\"? Provided one knew this was the case in the applicable jurisdiction, of course.</p>\n\n<h2>What should we do about that particular question and its answers?</h2>\n\n<p>If we ignore for the moment the question whether answering just the generic question is doing the asker any service, one may argue that there is now a disconnect between the edited question and the answers. I would agree, but propose that the solution is not to delete/edit the answers, but rather to roll back the edits to the question. If someone is indeed interested in an answer to the generic question so much, another question can be posted, without destroying the valid answers that have been given so far.</p>\n\n<p>After all, if I edited this meta question to be about the best sushi in town, you wouldn't delete the answers given here and demand discussion of sushi, would you?</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3560, "author": "Jeff", "author_id": 57314, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/57314", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I feel like the combative answers (and the ensuing combative replies by the OP) are more problematic than the original question. If you look at the original un-edited post, its tone is fairly neutral and it describes the author's specific situation and then very explicitly asks a general question:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>So I am not necessarily soliciting an answer specific to my situation,\n but in a more general setting. If you witness a student engaging in a\n sexist behavior, would you call him/her out? How would you do this\n without making the student feel intimidated?</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>It also seems problematic to me that we're potentially <em>retroactively</em> identifying this as a question worthy of being put on hold. It's not unusual to see bad questions on hold within hours, if not minutes. This lends further evidence to me that the problem is in the answers, not the post. Also, from the <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-ask\">help center</a>: </p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>But if you give us details and context, we can provide a useful answer.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Context is explicitly encouraged. However, it's not necessary to attack the OPs perception of the situation while still addressing both the actual question and the problems entailed in the context, which I tried to do in my answer.</p>\n\n<p>In the future I think it would be useful to:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>Flag and delete answers that <em>only</em> address the context, and not the question</li>\n<li>Point out early in comments to the OP that context in a situation like this may distract from answers to their question. Or maybe that should be in the help center?</li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>And then the bigger problem seems to me the way we moderate comments. I rarely see comments subject to much (perfectly possible I'm just missing that, so correct me if I'm wrong), other than getting moved to chat when there are too many. And yet here, most of the mess is in comments - there are only a handful of answers that ignored the question and only talked about the context. Just looking over <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment\">our own guidelines</a>, I feel like there's grounds to delete a ton of these comments.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3562, "author": "Azor Ahai -him-", "author_id": 37441, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/37441", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I know I don't have much rep here, but I look up to this site as I work my way up college, and it was honestly pretty embarrassing to see the comments on that post. I left a few comments, but they're gone now, as they probably should be.</p>\n\n<p>What frustrated me was <em>two dozen people don't need to question the OP!</em> I know it's nice to think that academia has no problems with sexism, but we all know that's not true. </p>\n\n<p>Yes, it was easy to point to the older professor and say \"Oh, well he was older, that's obviously 100% of the reason why the student respects him more than you! No sexism!\" </p>\n\n<p>But what annoyed me was that so many people felt the need to weigh in and make comments like \"Wait ... where's the sexism here?\" It didn't read like people questioning the premise in a rhetorical sense, it read like a bunch of people getting very defensive of accusations of mild sexism in a university probably hundreds of miles from them. </p>\n\n<p>I know it would be frustrating as a man to be accused of sexism - especially when it is absolutely not clear the student was being sexist - but that's how the community should have responded, by politely pointing out other factors, not by dogpiling on the OP in an effort to prove how <em>absolutely unimaginable</em> it would be that a little bit of sexism occurred in the ivory tower. </p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3563, "author": "darij grinberg", "author_id": 7725, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7725", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p>@RQM's answer (and my guess as well) in a nutshell: people were questioning the premise because they were worried that if they were to answer the question literally, their answer would be misapplied to a situation that doesn't fit it. I find this a reasonable worry given the original post, and would probably have done the same.</p>\n\n<p>Lots of answers on various StackExchange sites question the premise of the question (e.g., a student posts their homework, but the question makes it clear that the student doesn't understand the underlying definitions). This happens particularly often when the question is ambiguous and muddles up different issues. What we've seen here is a case of muddling up, although the political forcefield surrounding the issue has expectedly poisoned the discussion (though, compared to what we've been hearing just a few weeks ago, this was an exceptionally constructive debate).</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3565, "author": "Peter Cordes", "author_id": 39494, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/39494", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I think the answers to the original question were appropriate to the specific situation presented: it would be a bad idea to assume sexism was the reason for the student's actions.</p>\n\n<p>Now the OP has a different question: what to do when there <em>is</em> sexism.</p>\n\n<p>The best way to ask that is as a <em>separate</em> question, not an edit of the old question. A new question could be phrased something like:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>I've had <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/revisions/80561/1\">some interactions with a student</a> (link to rev1 of old\n question) that I'm worried are signs of or due to sexism. If future\n interactions with this student provide clear evidence of sexism, what\n should I do?</p>\n \n <p>I can't yet confirm or rule out sexism, but I'd like to be prepared in the unfortunate case that my suspicions are confirmed.</p>\n</blockquote>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3567, "author": "syntonicC", "author_id": 21497, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/21497", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>As originally written, the question was:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>So I am not necessarily soliciting an answer specific to my situation,\nbut in a more general setting.\nIf you witness a student engaging in a sexist behavior, would you call\nhim/her out? How would you do this without making the student feel\nintimidated?</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>If this were the original question and no other context was presented, it would be difficult to answer because it is so open-ended in the &quot;more general setting&quot;. What is &quot;sexist behavior&quot;? How was it &quot;witnessed&quot; (did others see it)? Did the student make direct remarks? What is physical? The context in which this occurred would be very important for moving forward. Depending on the severity of the remark and the context, different actions might be appropriate. Sexist behavior of any kind should not be tolerated but there is still a (debatable) scale, perhaps:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>implied sexism &gt; direct verbal sexism &gt; institutional sexism &gt;\nphysical sexism.</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>Each of these cases should be treated differently. So when the question is asked without context, I would have asked context to be presented. Without the context, the answer may not be applicable to the real life situation.</p>\n<p>In this case the background was originally given. The background of the question suggested to me that, on the scale above, it was implied sexism and even then, perhaps not even true based on the details given. Therefore, it seemed necessary to (politely) inquire into the nature of the context or question the premise of the question in more detail.</p>\n<p>While the post itself was well-meaning, there were a few comments in the background that made me question the premise. First, the question author states:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>It feels sexist to me (I am female).</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>This suggests that the remark might have been sexist but the author is not sure. However, the next few comments:</p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>I feel that I would be bullying the student if I were calling him out\non his sexist remarks</p>\n<p>(which, he is probably not aware of)</p>\n<p>even the young people can have sexist views, and that this will\nprobably happen again in the future</p>\n<p>If you witness a student engaging in a sexist behavior</p>\n</blockquote>\n<p>All of these suggest the post author has already made up their mind which does not seem like the best conclusion given the story. We weren't there, of course, so all we can go off of is what is written in the background. It seems reasonable to me to question the premise because it suggests the author has gone from &quot;there may have been sexist remarks&quot; to &quot;there were sexist remarks&quot;. We should never discourage individuals from reporting sexism but we should also not encourage false accusations of sexism. False accusations are not professional. In an attempt to ensure that the author receives the best possible outcome to the situation, questioning their underlying assumptions is valid to me. This situation would be far more straightfoward if the student directly stated a sexist comment.</p>\n<p>I do not approve of attacking the post author or aggressively trying to change their mind. But I see nothing wrong with politely engaging in a discussion to clarify the context. Additionally, the post author referred to the all posters as &quot;collectively dyslexic&quot; and was also aggressive with their comments and edits (some of which were later removed) which inflammed the situation further.</p>\n<p>In conclusion: <strong>The premise is being challenged because if the premise is incorrect, it may not be necessary to take action at all.</strong></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3593, "author": "jpmc26", "author_id": 10646, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/10646", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<h2>The general question</h2>\n\n<p>If the question had no context, it would be Too Broad and need to be closed immediately. I cite the <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/dont-ask\">What types of questions should I avoid asking?</a> page:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Your questions should be reasonably scoped. If you can imagine an entire book that answers your question, you’re asking too much.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>I consider this to be self evident. These kind of open ended posts don't make good questions for SE's Q&amp;A format.</p>\n\n<p>Asking, \"How do I handle sexist remarks in general?\" is as vague and open ended as going to DBA and asking, \"How do I index my columns, in general?\" or to SO and asking, \"How do I parse files in general?\" or to SciFi and asking, \"How do Sith win battles, in general?\" The only reasonable answer you can give is, \"It depends on the specifics.\"</p>\n\n<h2>The specific question</h2>\n\n<p>So the general question is unanswerable, but the user decided to provide some context <em>anyway</em>. On the other hand, the specific situation described <em>is answerable</em>. So as an SE user, you're left with two possible actions:</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li>Edit out the specific situation and close the question.</li>\n<li>Edit out the general question and answer in the specific context.</li>\n</ol>\n\n<p>The first option throws away a perfectly good question. The second option salvages the question and creates a useful resource, but if you believe no action should be taken in this case, it probably requires a frame challenge. At a bare minimum, you'd have to say, \"You shouldn't do anything because there isn't sufficient evidence of sexism here. Taking action is likely to be detrimental to everyone involved.\" But that isn't much different than the frame challenge.</p>\n\n<p>So the answer to, \"Why don't people stick to the question?\" is, \"Because they were trying to salvage the question and make it a useful resource.\" The only real failing on that front is that no one dared to edit out the \"general\" bits. Any issues with rudeness or arguing are a completely separate matter.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 4316, "author": "Volker Siegel", "author_id": 13560, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/13560", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<h1>It's not about academia!</h1>\n\n<p>The question is stated in some academic context, but that quickly becomes a backstory of the sexism related problem in the question. That is fine. </p>\n\n<p>Sexism as a concept is not the problem. Differences in opinion are not the problem.</p>\n\n<h2>Sexism is hard to discuss</h2>\n\n<p>It is all about communication, discussion of differing opinions on the topic. And sexism is a topic that is hard to discuss, with a long, well known tradition.</p>\n\n<p>So we can assume that the academia-related parts of the original question were actually meant as a context to express the communication in, a backstory.</p>\n\n<p>So the original question is not much about academia, but about communication of a difficult topic in the first place.</p>\n\n<p><strong>My proposal is to move the question over to \n<a href=\"https://interpersonal.stackexchange.com/\">Interpersonal Skills SE</a></strong>. </p>\n\n<p>They routinely help solving communication about sexism. Not only the one in the question, but also the much more intense one in the comment discussion.\nThat flareup will not even start there. In part because they are beta, and somewhat small. But with high density of competence.</p>\n\n<p>There, communication about sexism is one of the easier topics. They routinely handle things like family problems between three persons.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3549", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/10643/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3572, "author": "einpoklum", "author_id": 7319, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7319", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I'm voting yes because there don't seem to be any downsides and the hats are funny. But frankly it seems targeted mostly at the super-hard-core users. \"Mere mortals\" seem to get 2-3 hats and perhaps a slight sense of being less-than-adequate :-\\</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3576, "author": "NZKshatriya", "author_id": 63231, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/63231", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I vote yes. Because well, Yes is positive and there is a whole lot of negative going on as of late. And maybe cos I am hoping maybe I could get a funny hat?</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3606, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 3, "selected": true, "text": "<p>The \"Ayes\" have it, 58 to 9. We shall have hats!</p>\n\n<p>YAY HATS!!</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3561", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3572, "author": "einpoklum", "author_id": 7319, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7319", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I'm voting yes because there don't seem to be any downsides and the hats are funny. But frankly it seems targeted mostly at the super-hard-core users. \"Mere mortals\" seem to get 2-3 hats and perhaps a slight sense of being less-than-adequate :-\\</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3576, "author": "NZKshatriya", "author_id": 63231, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/63231", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I vote yes. Because well, Yes is positive and there is a whole lot of negative going on as of late. And maybe cos I am hoping maybe I could get a funny hat?</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3606, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 3, "selected": true, "text": "<p>The \"Ayes\" have it, 58 to 9. We shall have hats!</p>\n\n<p>YAY HATS!!</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3573", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22223/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3578, "author": "Wrzlprmft", "author_id": 7734, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734", "pm_score": 3, "selected": true, "text": "<p>I have not followed the question in question very much, but I think a more general answer is more useful and desired anyway. I answer under the assumption that your assertions on the situation are true, but this is not to be taken as an assessment of that specific situation.</p>\n\n<p>There are several mostly separate issues here:</p>\n\n<h3>OP has been increasingly argumentative.</h3>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>When he has disagreed with someone, he has added no documented or documentable information, or new logical points, he has only just cranked up the volume.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>This is a typical issue. Do not let this provoke you. If you feel that no new arguments have been added, state this in a friendly manner <strong>once</strong>. Should the opponent to continue to comment, ignore them. If you feel that the comments degrade into noise or offensive territory, flag them.</p>\n\n<h3>OP has been hypercritical of one of his students, which is tangential to his question.</h3>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>This has gotten now to the point of a personal attack on an individual student, who is under age.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>If the attacks happen in the question or answer, edit them to a more neutral description, stating this as an edit reason. Should these edits be rolled back by the author, flag the respective post for moderator attention, and leave it at that.</p>\n\n<p>Should the attacks happen in a comment, this comment is probably leading nowhere anyway. Flag for deletion. Should the comment be relevant, include the information in the respective question or answer and make it neutral on the way. Then flag the comment for deletion.</p>\n\n<p>Sidenote: I do not think that the underage aspect should affect any of this. Whether somebody deserves to be talked about in a condescending manner is irrespective of age.</p>\n\n<h3>OP's \"case\" against the student keeps growing, <em>ad infinitum.</em></h3>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Then OP should add it to the question, either by incorporating it into the text of the question, or by creating an addendum at the bottom of the question.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Addenda should be avoided. There is no reason to document the history of a question as the edit history already does this.</p>\n\n<p>Apart from this, it does not sound as if the information in question is any relevant, so just ignore the respective comments or flag them. Should they be relevant, edit them to the question yourself (see above), then flag.</p>\n\n<p>Should the question change to an extent that the current answers are invalidated, ask the asker to stop editing / adding information. Should this not work, flag for moderator attention.</p>\n\n<h3>General reaction to provocative behaviour</h3>\n\n<p>Slightly increasing provocations are the hallmark behaviour of trolls¹ who feed on aggressive reactions from regular users. The best behaviour is <a href=\"https://communitybuilding.stackexchange.com/q/1512/444\">not to feed the troll</a>: Stay calm and friendly, assuming good intention, in face of first provocations. Most trolls show their real face if they run against this. If this happens, stop reacting, and flag possibly inappropriate content. Should the provocations stop, there was no troll to begin with or they have retreated. Either way, the good guys win.</p>\n\n<hr>\n\n<p>^{\n¹ Just to be on the safe side, I repeat that this is not to be taken as an assessment of the example situation.\n}</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3579, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>In this case, my preference would be to close the question. I am not sure what the actual question is and whatever it is, it doesn't seem like a good fit for our site. Given the up votes, as a moderator, I am not going to act unilaterally. In this case, closing the question as \"unclear what you are asking\" would probably resolve the situation.</p>\n\n<p>Sometimes when discussion type questions are not getting closed, you can bring attention to them in chat, like I have.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3586, "author": "Pete L. Clark", "author_id": 938, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/938", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>For what it's worth, I don't find the OP's site behavior to be problematic. </p>\n\n<p>Fundamentally the OP <em>did</em> invite critique by posting the question in the first place. (This also serves as a passing comment on another meta question, which I believe is calling me to task for being overly critical of the OP's behavior, including use of the word \"obnoxious.\" But that's almost literally what he asked for: critical discussion of his behavior.) This means that he was fundamentally more open to hearing other perspectives than someone who would not seek to post such a question. </p>\n\n<p>In my dealings with the OP in the course of my answer and other comments, I felt like he was for the most part taking in what I was saying. He was also defending himself, which seems perfectly natural. I know very few people who respond to criticism (even criticism they invited) without some defensiveness. </p>\n\n<p>Is (again, as the question directly asks!) the OP being a bit \"mean\" with regards to the student? Well, the gist of my answer (already one of my most popular answers on this site, which is a bit weird but so it goes) is <strong>yes</strong>. But again, the possibility of that is what brought him here in the first place. I don't agree that the OP is engaging on a \"personal attack\" on his underage student. I would presume that the student is not active on this site or reading this question, and if he is then I don't see how this would cause him any particular distress. In fact the OP doesn't say anything truly <em>personal</em> about the student; he just describes him <em>as a student</em>. Again, I emphasize that much of my answer urges the treatment of students with more compassion, fairness and professionalism than the OP seems to have evinced in the situation...but I still don't see anything <em>out of line</em> or <em>inappropriate</em> here.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3577", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/32436/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3583, "author": "Community", "author_id": -1, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/-1", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>On meta.SE I proposed a mechanism to opt-out specific questions, either by smarter algorithms that watch out for polemical questions or by moderation tools. (I will link to this question there.) </p>\n\n<p><a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/287786/the-hot-network-questions-sidebar-should-not-include-heated-questions\">The &quot;hot&quot; questions algorithm should use logic to avoid controversial questions</a></p>\n\n<p>I am upvoting your question to reflect my view that there <em>are</em> problems with HNQ but I would rather work toward salvaging the feature.</p>\n\n<p>Truthfully though - I think there are bigger \"respect\" problems on SE and I do not think the umbrella community can escape developing better tools to deal with these problems. HNQ woes are a bit more on the \"symptom\" side of the scale. I am brooding putting together a larger post on this topic but naturally such a thing must be done very carefully :) but for now you may keep this sentiment in mind.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3584, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I don't believe an objective answer to this question is possible. The system does not track information about hotness points, questions on the HNQ list, or the use of the HNQ sidebar: <a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/238445/add-an-audit-log-to-record-when-particular-question-enters-and-leaves-hot-list\">Add an audit log to record when particular question enters and leaves hot list</a></p>\n\n<p>A number of times, one of our question has been featured on the HNQ list that I thought was neither representative of our community nor a particularly good question. This has happened enough that I proposed a feature be to prevent question from being added to the HNQ list: <a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/284929/allow-mods-or-gold-tag-badge-holders-to-prevent-question-from-being-on-hot-netwo\">Allow mods or gold tag badge holders to prevent question from being on hot network questions list</a></p>\n\n<p>Without the data, I am not sure how to quantify the affects on our community of these \"bad\" questions being featured on the HNQ list. I think that there have been \"good\" questions featured and that publicizing our good side is a good thing. What I would like to see is more of our good questions make the HNQ list.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3585, "author": "eykanal", "author_id": 73, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/73", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p>From what I've seen: At best, they've been slightly helpful. At worst, they're a temporary nuisance.</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li><p><strong>Moderately helpful</strong> – As Massimo pointed out, he came to this site through the network questions. This isn't so terribly unusual; I would guess that for every fifty network questions, we gain one user who didn't know we existed. We've been on there a lot lately, so over time that sort of thing does prove useful to the community. It also gives people an exposure to what Academia is like, although sometimes the questions are slightly (often?) more inflammatory than they need to be.</p></li>\n<li><p><strong>Temporary nuisance</strong> – Network questions always bring a lot of people, who leave all sorts of often bizarre comments and answers. These people rarely, if ever, return, and don't really add much to the community, or even that question. They frequently cause all sorts of automatic flags to get set off (tons of comments, tons of answers, low quality new user posts) which are a stupid and a pain. These questions also often end up with a bunch of cruft (old useless comments, bad answers), which leads to all sorts of flags being raised on these questions months or years later.</p></li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>Someone posted the following to Meta a while back: <a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/219922/what-is-the-goal-of-hot-network-questions?noredirect=1&amp;lq=1\">What is the Goal of &quot;Hot Network Questions&quot;?</a> This was one of those questions where the question had a lot more upvotes than any of the answers. My theory is that this place is more like Facebook and Twitter than the admins care to admit, and the only goal of Hot Network Questions is to keep people entertained, thereby keeping them on the site, thereby showing them more ads, thereby making a profit. Whatever the reason, they're there, they're probably not going away anytime soon, and while pontificating is fun it's probably not going to change anything.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3587, "author": "Wrzlprmft", "author_id": 7734, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>While I agree with the existing answers on and in particular that there should be some mechanism to avoid problematic HNQs, I would like to mention another advantage of HNQs:</p>\n\n<p>They allow good posts (questions as well as answers) to get more attention than they normally would, which in turn results in upvotes and badges. And at the end of the day, this is one of the central mechanisms of Stack Exchange: You get to know how many people found your contributions helpful and are rewarded (with reputation, badges, and sometimes hats). When a post of mine gets massively upvoted due to being a HNQ or an answer to an HNQ, this does not only mean reputation and badges but also (well, at least most of the time) that a large audience learnt something from my contribution, be it some hard information or a way to look at things. And that’s extremely rewarding and motivating.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3589, "author": "Jeff", "author_id": 57314, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/57314", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Obviously personal anecdotes aren't a good way to make rules, but I can say without a doubt that I only found Academia SE through the hot network questions sidebar. </p>\n\n<p>I was only ever engaged on Stack Overflow, which I think is a fairly typical gateway to Stack Exchange in general. In fact, it seems to me computer science, and fields that make a lot of use of computer science, are very heavily represented on Academia in proportion to other fields. This observation would fit that hypothesis.</p>\n\n<p>So, I feel like it's a pretty solid positive despite the increased moderation necessary on the questions that become sacrificial lambs by ending up there. After all, closing the community off from the influence of \"outsiders\" doesn't sound like a desirable thing to do. Maybe the question can be addressed by improving moderation tools on protected questions?</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3582", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/118/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3591, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I removed the <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ethnicity\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;ethnicity&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">ethnicity</a> tag because, as I noted in the edit summary, the question is</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>not about \"interacting with people of different ethnicities\"</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>which is what the tag excerpt says the tag is for.</p>\n\n<p>I also left a <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/81218/when-referring-to-the-race-should-black-be-capitalized-mla#comment201094_81248\">comment</a> just now explaining why I <em>don't</em> think that the question is \"answered in different ways depending on the reader's racial identity and affinity\".</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3592, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>In this case, meta is better than a flag since disagreements about edits are best resolved by the community and not by moderators acting unilaterally.</p>\n\n<p>While it was a moderator who removed the tag, it wasn't \"moderation\", but rather just a user tidying up how they thought best. Had you put the tag back and the user, who happens to be a moderator, removed it again, another moderator would have stepped in and temporarily locked the post and asked on meta for help resolving the edit \"war\". By coming here first you prevent people feeling attacked and make life easier for the moderators.</p>\n\n<p>As for the tag itself, I agree with this <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3591/929\">answer</a> that it is not needed.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3590", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/32436/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3595, "author": "eykanal", "author_id": 73, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/73", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Flags are intended to alert moderators that they need to take action. In that case, there isn't really anything that we, as mods, should do. You are free to leave a comment along the lines of \"OK, folks, enough already\", which may or may not have an effect. However, raising a flag is definitely not going to solve anything.</p>\n\n<p>Please do not simply flag using an unrelated flag as we'll simply end up declining it, wasting your time and ours.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3596, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Expanding on eykanal's suggestion of leaving a comment, I sometimes leave the following comment:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>It's not clear what this answer adds over previous answers that already address these points. </p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>and, if the author of the answer is new or not a regular contributor, I might also include in the comment:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Answers on Academia.SE are expected to offer a fresh take, rather than just reiterate existing answers; see <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1545/\">What are we generally looking for in answers</a>.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>I invite anyone who witnesses dogpiling to \"steal\" this formulation (or some variation of it) and leave this comment yourself :)</p>\n\n<p>Also note that <em>comments</em> that just repeat things that have already been said <em>should</em> be flagged. The appropriate flag depends on the situation, but I find that \"too chatty\" is often suitable.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3594", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/32436/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3601, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>There has not been a strong consensus on the linked meta post on what to do with the existing answers. Many people think that the answers should stay as they are; many argue that they should be deleted. A large number of users have argued that the edits to the question should be rolled back; a large number of other users think the question is better in this current form. It's hard to tell where people stand, also, because some answers to that meta post contain multiple points, and people voting on them may agree with some parts and not others.</p>\n\n<p>Given this disagreement, unilateral moderator action seems inappropriate, so don't flag them.</p>\n\n<p>If at any point you are able to show a strong consensus on meta for deleting them, then they could be deleted. A \"strong consensus\" would be if you </p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>Posted an answer here saying they should be deleted (and not containing any other proposals), </li>\n<li>and it got a large number of upvotes and few downvotes, </li>\n<li>and there was no competing answer suggesting to keep them, or a competing answer got much less support than yours.</li>\n</ul>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3604, "author": "Fomite", "author_id": 118, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/118", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>As someone who arrived in that thread after the edits, the first few top voted answers verge on nonsensical.</p>\n\n<p>I view the <em>Question</em> as the thing of paramount importance, and as such I'd support removing answers that were effectively made obsolete by refinement.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3605, "author": "Community", "author_id": -1, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/-1", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>For what it's worth, good answers should usually be standalone in the first place. At worst they should become obsolescent, but never wrong. If crucial context is added to the original question, hopefully, the answers are self-explaining enough so as to sound like good answers to the more general question missing the crucial context.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3607, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>(takes off moderator hat, puts on regular user hat.) I support the following, as an approach that helps people keep their contributed content roughly as they intend it to look:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li>Keep the question as is. Clearly, the current form is what the OP wants, and most of the answers do address the general question (even if some <em>also</em> refer to the specific example that has now been removed).</li>\n<li>Not forcibly deleting any answers. Authors of answers are of course still free to delete their own answers, if they want.</li>\n<li>Add a little bit of context to answers that refer to previous versions of the question, so that the answers make sense. For example, include in the answer a brief quote of the relevant part of the previous version of the question, when it is necessary to understand the answer. But keep the content of the answer as intact as possible while editing.</li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>(<em>If</em> this approach wins substantial community support: Any user with edit privileges can help with this, and add a comment referencing this meta discussion. No need to flag for a moderator!)</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3608, "author": "smci", "author_id": 12050, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/12050", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p><strong>It depends</strong>: there are rewrites, and there are rewrites. <strong>Rewrites which improve a clear, on-topic question (which is not an XY question) are fine. Adding (or preserving) a reasonable level of context is good, too. Rewrites which delete all context, mutate the question into something it never was, and thereby invalidate answers, are not fine.</strong> If the rewrites actively contradict each other, that's even worse.</p>\n\n<p>That question is one of the worst examples of rewrites mutating the original question beyond recognition. The original #1 edit essentially said <em>\"Student objected to my teaching methods and not my male colleagues, I feel this is sexist\"</em>. OP's #5 edit changed this to <em>\"IF A STUDENT COMMITS A CLEAR SEXIST BEHAVIOR IN FRONT OF YOU...\"</em>. Totally moves the premise. The OP's own version was not clearly anything, other than an annoying weak student raising bogus objections, by email. Hence, solutions would presumably address those behaviors, not the chain of assumptions about motive. To do otherwise is an XY problem. \"commit\" is loaded language. Then #9 says <em>\"I never said that it /was/ sexist; it occurred to me (based on previous interactions with this student etc) that this was probably sexism.\"</em>. Again, changes the question, and more missing context. We're now up to revision #12 on the mutating question, and we have all sorts of topics being injected like racism. The question has become a wish object for people to inject whatever perceived type of bias they want to conjecture about or analogize to. No relation to the original question! It's an irredeemable mess. (I hope it's no longer on HNQ and attracting wildly offtopic answers from newbies).</p>\n\n<p>I have to say that the OP's behavior in edits #6, #8 and #9 damage her credibility and don't invite us to take her conjecture at face value. So we end up with three different conflicting versions of a he-says-she-says, which might in any case be irrelevant to addressing the original question #1 that was asked.</p>\n\n<p>v#1 of the question should have been quickly put on hold for being unclear; or certainly by edit #5 which deleted the facts, changed the context and invalidated all the answers. If either of those had been done, this situation wouldn't have arisen. <strong>It's now way too late to fix the question.; it should belatedly be put on hold.</strong> Blaming the answers is an irrelevant sidebar.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3609, "author": "blankip", "author_id": 11420, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11420", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>This site is supposed to be about questions and answers, not feelings and emotions. That is the reason behind the very robotic up/down tick system and the UX of the Q&amp;A. Input in, answer out. The site is not a free-range forum, if it was the comments wouldn't be wiped, especially those that provide more insight.</p>\n\n<p>There are several sites this meta question would never come up and an example is mathematics. Imagine a person posting an equation that needs to be solved (overly simplistic):</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>2a + y * 4b -7c = r</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Suppose they ask if \"a\" can equal \"1\" while giving the number possibilities to the other variables. And then people answer... No it can't be one. </p>\n\n<p>Then the person starts rolling back one variable at a time until \"a\" could theoretically be \"1\". Well the question is nonsense. It should be rolled forward with the intent it was made. I am positive these edits on mathematics would be rolled back.</p>\n\n<p>I am not sure what the deal is here. Is it the word \"sexism\" that keeps it from being rolled back? Has this site taken be nice too far? Was leaving a question alone given more concern than the answerers? I don't know. But common sense says you don't let the OP divulge less information as the question timer clicks down when they didn't get the answer they wanted. <strong>If the OP wanted the current question answered that would be a new question, which should be closed due to lack of information.</strong></p>\n\n<p><em>My proposal = Roll back the question to the point where it had the most information.</em></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3610, "author": "Weckar E.", "author_id": 56566, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/56566", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>With the question being as strongly edited as this one, I would consider that the new version is effectively a new question to be treated as such. </p>\n\n<p>A rollback with the suggestion to post a new question with the revised text is my recommendation (regardless of the quality of the original question).</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3600", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/32436/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3612, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 5, "selected": true, "text": "<p>The tag wiki excerpt for <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/code\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;code&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">code</a> says:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Concerning computer code written or used in the context of a research project or other academic endeavor. Includes questions on licensing, ownership, sharing, distribution, and formatting of academic source code</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Questions with this tag are specifically about things having to do with the source code itself, like</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li><a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/81554/study-of-code-share-practices-in-science\">Study of code share practices in science</a></li>\n<li><a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/79101/advisor-professor-asks-for-my-dissertation-research-source-code\">Advisor professor asks for my dissertation research source code</a></li>\n<li><a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/78000/how-to-submit-code-visual-studio-projects-c-opencl-with-my-ieee-paper-submi\">How to submit code (visual studio projects, C#, OpenCL) with my IEEE paper submission</a></li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>The tag wiki excerpt for <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/software\" class=\"post-tag\" title=\"show questions tagged &#39;software&#39;\" rel=\"tag\">software</a> says:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Queries related to various software used in academia. Questions shall not address highly technical aspects of the software but shall address features/issues highly relevant to academia.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Questions in this tag should be about the software, not the code, like:</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li><a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/7671/software-for-extracting-data-from-a-graph-without-having-to-click-on-every-singl\">Software for extracting data from a graph without having to click on every single point?</a></li>\n<li><a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/79603/lab-colleague-uses-cracked-software-should-i-report-it\">Lab colleague uses cracked software. Should I report it?</a></li>\n<li><a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2381/popular-proprietary-program-or-obscure-open-source-substitute-for-reproducible-r\">Popular proprietary program or obscure open source substitute for reproducible research?</a></li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>These seem like distinct tags to me - I don't see any benefit in combining them.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3613, "author": "RoboKaren", "author_id": 14885, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/14885", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>The problem with the 'code' tag is that in the social and behavioral sciences, \"code\" means something different.</p>\n\n<p>You might argue that in academia, that \"computer code\" is the minority form of coding.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3611", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/18124/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3615, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 5, "selected": true, "text": "<p>Yes, you should incorporate information from comments into your answer if you think it will improve the quality of your answer!</p>\n\n<p>Also see (on Meta SE):</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li><a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/58915/should-i-incorporate-useful-comments-into-my-answer-or-just-upvote-them\">Should I incorporate useful comments into my answer, or just upvote them?</a></li>\n<li><a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/279989/should-i-revise-my-answers-based-on-comments-if-so-how-to-properly-attribute\">Should I revise my answers based on comments? If so, how to properly attribute?</a></li>\n<li><a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/142409/comment-subsumption-etiquette\">Comment subsumption etiquette</a></li>\n<li><a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/69394/how-to-encourage-people-to-edit-answers-instead-of-posting-additional-informatio\">How to encourage people to edit answers instead of posting additional information in comments?</a></li>\n</ul>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3619, "author": "Tsundoku", "author_id": 62311, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/62311", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>You <em>can</em> incorporate information from comments into your own answer, provided that you make it clear who wrote the comment. In fact, the footer of every page on a Stack Exchange site says: </p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>USER CONTRIBUTIONS LICENSED UNDER CC BY-SA 3.0 WITH ATTRIBUTION REQUIRED</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Since comments are user contributions, using them in your answers requires proper attribution according the the rules set out in the <a href=\"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 licence</a>. </p>\n\n<p><strong>Note</strong>: I included the quote from the footer to point something out that many Stack Exchange users overlook. The intent is not to say this should be attached to every (partially) quoted comment. (Copied from a comment, since comments are ephemeral.)</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3614", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/12454/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3617, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Some of these questions are probably answerable with the <a href=\"https://data.stackexchange.com/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">data explorer</a>. Moderators also have tools to look at site analytics. Our site \"graduated\" from being a beta site in April of 2014. This was during a period of intense growth as measured by most, possibly all, meaningful metrics including number of posts, votes, views, visits, users, and posters. This growth continue for about a year after graduation. Since April of 2015 our growth has slowed, but I see no indication that we are shrinking.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3618, "author": "jakebeal", "author_id": 22733, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733", "pm_score": 5, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I've also dipped significantly in my use recently, but I don't think that's related to sustainability of the site so much as personal ebb and flow in attention and whether Academia.SE is currently beating out other options for entertaining myself.</p>\n\n<p>I do suspect that we will see a lot of \"the core questions\" getting answered over time, but I don't think that's going to end up with the site ending up being \"done\" and pointless. A lot of what we talk about here is about relationships and organizations, and there is never a shortage of interesting human complexities in such things.</p>\n\n<p>Bottom line: I think Academia.SE will become unsustainable around the same time that relationship advice columns become unsustainable. At that point, we can all just live on <a href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_pig\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">airborne bacon</a>.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3622, "author": "Jeff", "author_id": 57314, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/57314", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>At its base this doesn't seem all that different from StackOverflow to me. If you look back, questions from 2009 about how to do a very basic thing in Python would get 2000 upvotes and a stream of updated answers over the last 7 years. If you follow the current queue of questions, you'll see instead that they tend to be very specific and that garnering 2 upvotes and 1 answer isn't at all unusual</p>\n\n<p>Does programming change more than academia over time? It seems obvious that it does, and SO will always benefit from an influx of questions about whatever is newest. But the fact remains that there are still dozens of new questions per day about things that have been around \"forever\", such as Python. They do seem to get more specific, and I would guess the rate of duplicates has risen also. So I still think it's generally a good comparison where their \"core questions\" are asked and answered, but the site remains very active.</p>\n\n<p>And just like SO questions about Python (or other older languages), despite diminishing returns I'm skeptical the community will ever reach a point where there simply aren't any more good questions.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3623, "author": "posdef", "author_id": 5674, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/5674", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I see no real threat with specialized questions, as long as they are actually answerable in similar level of detail. </p>\n\n<p>What typically does happen rather more often is that you get questions asking for advice, given a particular situation; majority of which are specialized to the extent that it's difficult to give a satisfactory and factual answer without knowing the people involved and situation in detail. Thus majority of the answers boil down to \"<em>talk to your supervisor</em>\" or \"<em>check with the department administration</em>\", something along those lines.</p>\n\n<p>My personal involvement at Academia.SE has also decreased over the past year, partly because of my stress over changing jobs, hunting postdoc etc, and partly because I feel rather disillusioned by academia altogether and I find that many of frustrating attitudes/statements about life in academia are also perpetuated here e.g. \"doing research is a way of life, not a job\" or the notion of citations and publications being fair. </p>\n\n<p>I realize that a lot of those things that I would like to have feedback on and discuss with other academics are not a good fit for the Q&amp;A format of the site, and that's totally fine. That's why people get a drink and chat after work :) </p>\n\n<p>It's just that there aren't many practical and factually answerable questions about academia, I think. At least, I haven't come up with anything lately... Instead, I think there will be many graduate level questions about interaction with students, teachers or otherwise faculty, about positions and salaries etc. </p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3626, "author": "Fomite", "author_id": 118, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/118", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<blockquote>\n <p>it seems to me that when I have been browsing new questions here, most\n of them are either duplicates (if not in the technical sense, at least\n morally so) or about some specialized issue I am not so interested in.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Honestly, one the front page I feel very similarly at times. There are days when I don't have the patience to deal with questions that look very much like \"Have you tried asking your advisor?\" or are on extremely specialized subjects.</p>\n\n<p>But in my perspective, the site has <em>always</em> been populated by a large number of these questions. They're part of the inherent nature of the site, in the same way \"How do I do this embarrassingly simple thing in Python\" is part of SO.</p>\n\n<p>There's also ebbs and flows in my participation in communities. I used to be <em>very</em> active on CV, but I'd drifted a bit. There's times here where the site is up all day, and times I haven't checked in a week. And I've definitely seen some sites that have hit unsustainability - I think Academia is pretty far from that point.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3616", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/19607/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3628, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p>The next level would be to lock the question but this seems extreme. The real problem in my opinion is that the question is on the hot networkquestion list. We need better control of that. I proposed <a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/284929/allow-mods-or-gold-tag-badge-holders-to-prevent-question-from-being-on-hot-netwo\">Allow mods or gold tag badge holders to prevent question from being on hot network questions list</a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3629, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I sometimes leave this comment on answers that don't add anything new:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>It's not clear what this adds over existing answers that suggest the same approach, such as [link to answer that suggests same approach]; can you edit to clarify? On Academia.SE, we are generally looking for answers that offer a \"fresh take\": see <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/a/1545/\">What are we generally looking for in answers?</a> </p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>It's not exactly \"something more radical\", but it at least helps inform such users about our expectations.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3630, "author": "Ébe Isaac", "author_id": 40592, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/40592", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>It is true that most of the answers are just emotional responses, but locking the question might deny probable legitimate answers to be posted in the future. @gnometorule seems to have a good trivial suggestion for this matter; downvote answers you feel that are bad and move on. </p>\n\n<p>Also, I feel that your comment under the question is a good solution already: telling them to check all answer posts before attempting to post another answer. It helps people think twice before posting an answer (It sure prevented me from posting an answer). </p>\n\n<p>My thought about this would be to have an option called 'duplicate answer vote', but not sure how well that would work out. </p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3633, "author": "aparente001", "author_id": 32436, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/32436", "pm_score": 0, "selected": false, "text": "<p>A moderator or garden variety good Samaritan with foresight and courage could have edited \"revealing\" out of the title. I think that word caught the eye and kapow, the views started to climb and then skyrocketed.</p>\n\n<p>Easy for me to think of this now....</p>\n\n<p><strong>Edit</strong>:</p>\n\n<p>I will be more specific. Example:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>What to do with a student coming to class in distracting outfit, to the degree that it disrupts the teaching environment? h</p>\n</blockquote>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3627", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/958/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3632, "author": "Massimo Ortolano", "author_id": 20058, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/20058", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>In principle I agree with you, and I upvoted your proposal.</p>\n\n<p>In practice, I'm worried about how we could ensure uniformity of treatment between different disciplines, when people might not understand the potential generality of a certain relatively technical question related to a certain field, and where to draw the line of technical but not-too-technical.</p>\n\n<p>Will we be spending time reminding people, in comments or here in meta, that certain questions are on topic?</p>\n\n<p>Just to give an example from the recent past, several people would vote to close questions about writing style and formatting. These are somehow technical questions related to what is clearly a major activity of ours. How can we ensure uniformity of views with more borderline questions? </p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3638, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I have a concern about \"procedural\" issues, not about the idea you're proposing:</p>\n\n<p>By this point, some votes have accrued on this question. But they are not so useful for moderation purposes, since you have not clarified what kind of question you're referring to: </p>\n\n<ol>\n<li>I doubt all of the people voting on this question have the same thing in mind, so it's hard to point to this post as evidence of \"consensus\" for something.</li>\n<li>I (and other users) use meta posts as a reference (in comments) when I see close votes on a question that I think should stay open. I couldn't use this post as a reference to explain why a particular question should stay open - it's too vague.</li>\n</ol>\n\n<p>Moving forward with this suggestion, can you (or someone else) open a new meta post with a much more specific \"type\" of question you think we should be more tolerant of, with an example? You can look at <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/search?q=closed%3A1+duplicate%3A0\">closed questions</a> for ideas - if we are actually getting and closing questions of the type you're referring to, there should be some examples in there.</p>\n\n<p>(Ideally, answers to this new meta question should explain why the category of question is good for the site, if in favor, or bad, if opposed. That way the post is useful as a reference for purpose #2. Then votes on the answers can show consensus - purpose #1.)</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3643, "author": "Fomite", "author_id": 118, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/118", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p>My feeling is <em>No</em>. There are a couple reasons I think this way:</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li>Academia is, in many ways, a site about the <em>practice</em> of academia, the process of being an academic, etc. rather than highly technical questions about narrow aspects of research. I <em>like</em> that, and there's not actually firm evidence in the question you link in your question that Academia isn't \"sustainable\" with that scope. Stepping away from that has the potential to dilute what people are interested in coming here for with technical questions, effectively decreasing the signal:noise ratio. This has happened on other sites I have been on - for example, when CrossValidated took in the machine learning questions from a failed site, my interest dropped pretty dramatically as I had to do far more sifting to find questions I was interested in. This risk is, IMO, higher on Academia, as you're not just talking about \"one adjacent\" fields, but all fields.</li>\n<li>Academia <em>does not</em> have good field coverage. There are <em>lots</em> of people in CS, Applied Math, etc. There are <em>some</em> in the biological sciences. There are vanishingly few in say, Medieval History. This is important not only for \"can someone answer this\" but for field specific norms. An economist and I might be able to answer the same question, but we'd answer it differently, and potentially miss field-specific nuances (for example, epidemiology as a field is pushing pretty hard against p-values). You can already see this happening occasionally (for example, the LaTeX vs. anti-LaTeX soapboxing).</li>\n<li>It serves the technical sites poorly. At least one of those questions is more suited to CrossValidated. The StackExchange network is best served by directing people to the site with experts, rather than trying to take on those questions on more generalist sites, which at best ends up fragmenting \"Where can I find answers to questions about X\" and at worst results in lower-quality answers. Because many of us are probably decent Python programmers does not mean we should be answering programming questions when SO exists.</li>\n</ol>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3631", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/10643/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3635, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 5, "selected": true, "text": "<p>Like all sites in the Stack Exchange network, this community <em>focuses</em> on the subset of questions that we believe we have the expertise to answer really well. Therefore, questions that are outside the scope of this site will be put on hold.</p>\n\n<p>In particular, although we are academics, we do not answer questions about every field that is studied in academia! For answers to questions about Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Math, Computer Science, English, Cognitive Science, Finance, Economics, Politics, etc... you will have to go to their respective Stack Exchange sites. Instead, on Academia we answer questions that are <em>not</em> about the content of the field of study: questions about applying to graduate school, about the process of submitting a paper to a journal for publication, about applying to postdoc and faculty positions, about teaching at the university level, and other things like that. Thus, <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/83373/relevent-change-in-the-finance-field\">your question</a> was outside the scope of this site.</p>\n\n<p>As with the other Stack Exchange sites, you can find out more about the scope of the community in the help center, on the page titled <a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic\">What topics can I ask about here?</a>. This page lists some of the categories of questions that are welcome here, as well as some of the categories of questions that are not. Every Stack Exchange site has a page like that; you are encouraged to peruse it before posting.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3636, "author": "Massimo Ortolano", "author_id": 20058, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/20058", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<blockquote>\n <p>To my knowledge, academia is a broad category that covers many topics with education. </p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Academia.SE is a community that covers a number of topics related to the academic world. Not all the academic topics, though. And the list of accepted topics can be modified with well crafted proposals. I let you judge whether yours is a well-crafted proposal or not.</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>So it would seem to be a reasonable conclusion to post a question asking for articles or sites for research on a thread for academia.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>We do not substitute advisors, colleagues and research work. And for specialized topics many other communities give suggestions or articles, books etc.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3637, "author": "Wrzlprmft", "author_id": 7734, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/7734", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<blockquote>\n <p>How can someone ask a question regarding research in academia without being accused of \"shopping\"?</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>To take your particular situation as an example:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>How can I find out about recent changes in a particular field?</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p><a href=\"//academia.stackexchange.com/q/3420/7734\">A similar question</a> already exists and in fact we have an <a href=\"//academia.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/literature-search\">entire tag</a> for similar questions. However, “ask on Academia SE” is not an answer to this question. Note that this is crucially different from asking for specific resources for your particular field, which would be off-topic – as it is not about academia but about a specific academic field. As a litmus test questions that can only be answered by somebody in your particular subfield are off-topic here (and should be asked on a Stack Exchange pertaining to your field instead).</p>\n\n<p>Moreover, asking for specific resources would be indeed what we call a shopping question, because it effectively asks us to evaluate resources, which is something that we do not like to do as we would like to keep a neutral stance on such questions, there is no definite answer (and what is a good answer is opinion-based), such questions tend to attract tons of answers, and some other problems. As many other Stack Exchanges have similar rules regarding such questions, it is possible that asking for specific resources will not be well received on the Stack Exchange for your field of interest.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3634", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/67819/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3647, "author": "eykanal", "author_id": 73, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/73", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p><em>I'm in the same boat as those commenting that I don't fully understand the question, but I'll hazard an answer all the same.</em></p>\n\n<p>Many, many people have thin skin (i.e., get insulted easily). I'll venture to say that <em>most</em> people have thin skin. To that extent, when resolving a disagreement, the \"lets be frank\" approach is very likely to cause someone to be insulted. As practiced negotiators know, insulting your negotiation partner is a pretty poor strategy.</p>\n\n<p>To that extent, when working through a disagreement, unless you are confident the opposing party will NOT be insulted—a rare situation—its always a good idea to be cordial and polite, to ensure that you can focus the discussion on solving the disagreement.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3648, "author": "Fomite", "author_id": 118, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/118", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<blockquote>\n <p>I would like to know why there is intense focus on not offending\n people? Sure, people should not go about intentionally offending\n people, but someone will be offended by something somewhere, someday,\n even if we don't intend it.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>There are two major reasons, in my mind:</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li>Inoffensive approaches are often more productive than a theoretically more direct approach. \"Don't offend someone\" is not a side-goal, it is an aspect of the main approach. Offending someone is often extremely counter-productive, and will crater the proposed solution no matter how good it is.</li>\n<li>While \"someone, somewhere, someday\" might be offended by anything, trying to minimize this probability is still a worthwhile thing to do, especially when you have a specific concern (in contrast to your hypothetical someone). Something, somewhere, someday will kill me. I still wear my seatbelt. </li>\n</ol>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3651, "author": "Bryan Krause", "author_id": 63475, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/63475", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I think this might be an interesting discussion, but the example you gave seems far separated from the type of \"not offending anyone\" that your post implies (referring to discipline and sexism).</p>\n\n<p>Part of the original question for the answer you linked was:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Is there any moral (or even legal) problem in criticizing other people's figures on my website? Should I expect any sort of retaliation if I decide to do that?</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>In that context, avoiding offending someone is clearly a way to:</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li>Avoid legal issues - if there is a gray area, posting praise of a figure is probably less likely to solicit negative attention from the authors that could lead to threats or actual legal action</li>\n<li>The issue of retaliation is most easily avoided by not offending anyone; this way, you aren't depending on the people you criticize taking the moral high ground.</li>\n</ol>\n\n<p>Therefore, it solves the original question to be non-offensive, rather than putting up a barrier to solving the problem as you suggest.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3663, "author": "Nikos Kazazakis", "author_id": 68309, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/68309", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Many a time have I wished to just call a student or colleague stupid. In my opinion, there are three factual reasons (ergo disregarding morality, politeness, religious beliefs, etc.) why one might wish to avoid it, regardless of how strongly they believe it to be the case:</p>\n\n<ol>\n<li><p>The practical reason is to avoid lawsuits.</p></li>\n<li><p>The historical reason is that it is a natural extension of the mid 80's and onward culture/mentality that everyone is \"special\", and that there are many kinds of intelligence, not just academic intelligence. Interestingly, people have come to interpret this as \"everyone is special, hence everyone is intelligent\". It is raw human bias, because people never want to admit what the perceive as their own shortcomings (like we don't like being called fat, or short, or bald), and distort other theories and facts to satisfy themselves. In defense of this position, note how different the culture was before the 90s, where negative reinforcement was the norm. While I disagree with the reason, society is experiencing a shift towards positive reinforcement, and that is a good thing.</p></li>\n<li><p>The social reason is that language has power. Saying things out loud, makes them true, to an extent. For instance, in English, German, and many other languages assume a male gender for many professions, such as policeman, fireman, cameraman. As trivial as it may seem, things like this have been shown to cause subconscious bias in the entirety of society in the long-term. By changing how we use the language, we modify how the population who use it perceive things after 1-2 generations.</p></li>\n</ol>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3644", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/63231/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3654, "author": "Shog9", "author_id": 78, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/78", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Visible on the question right now:</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/1q9D4.png\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/1q9D4.png\" alt=\"bumped to the homepage by Community 13 hours ago\" /></a></p>\n<p>The system automatically &quot;bumps&quot; questions that have answers where some are sitting at a score of 0 and none are accepted or score <em>more</em> than 0. This gives folks a chance to review the answers and vote on them or post better ones.</p>\n<p>In this case, it worked - over the past 13 hours, one of the answers has been upvoted.</p>\n<h3>See also: <a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/279203/how-can-we-make-the-purpose-of-community-bumping-more-obvious\">How can we make the purpose of Community &quot;bumping&quot; more obvious?</a></h3>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3655, "author": "aparente001", "author_id": 32436, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/32436", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>As pointed out by @zaq in a comment to an answer that has since been deleted, <a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/184511/287826\">this answer</a> explains that to be automatically bumped, a question should</p>\n\n<ul>\n<li><p>be open (not locked or closed)</p></li>\n<li><p>score no less than zero</p></li>\n<li><p>have been inactive for 30 days</p></li>\n<li><p>have no accepted answer, no answer scoring more than zero, and at least one non-deleted answer with a score of 0</p></li>\n</ul>\n\n<p>Automatic bumping cannot occur more frequently than one per hour.</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3652", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/32436/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3662, "author": "Grace Note", "author_id": 72, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/72", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"https://twitter.com/StackAcademia\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/wLQrl.png\" alt=\"Help this community grow -- follow us on twitter!\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3665, "author": "Dilaton", "author_id": 5904, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/5904", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"http://www.physicsoverflow.org/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/Pqs48.png\" alt=\"www.physicsoverflow.org\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3669, "author": "Sepideh Abadpour", "author_id": 11734, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11734", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/90327/geomatics-and-remote-sensing?referrer=8G2asYAyI_To9RoVf1VtPg2\"><img src=\"http://area51.stackexchange.com/ads/proposal/90327.png\" alt=\"Check out the Area 51 Remote Sensing Proposal\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3675, "author": "Cullub", "author_id": 48806, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/48806", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"http://writers.stackexchange.com\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/fRxr2.png\" alt=\"Writers SE\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3681, "author": "Martin - マーチン", "author_id": 13372, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/13372", "pm_score": 4, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"http://chemistry.stackexchange.com\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/noaFv.png\" alt=\"Haikus are awesome/ Chemistry is more so/ Ask straight away!\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3728, "author": "e-sushi", "author_id": 8031, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/8031", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"https://orcid.org/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/6BIAm.png\" alt=\"ORCID\"></a></p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3734, "author": "thesecretmaster", "author_id": 74265, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/74265", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p><a href=\"https://cseducators.stackexchange.com\"><img src=\"https://i.stack.imgur.com/JFwCm.png\" alt=\"You can also join us in the CS room, http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/59701/join-cs-educators\"></a></p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3661", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/72/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3673, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>It says in the lock notice:</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>This post has been locked due to the high amount of off-topic comments generated. For extended discussions, please use chat.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>That question in particular was locked due to (now-deleted) comments that degenerated into schoolyard name-calling. (The downvotes may have been a reaction to those same comments.)</p>\n\n<p>The lock will automatically expire in five days, and you can edit it then. </p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3674, "author": "StrongBad", "author_id": 929, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p>It is locked for 5 days to let things cool down. Specifically the number of off topic comments. After the timeout it will automatically unlock. At that point you will be able to edit it. </p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3672", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/529/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3735, "author": "Niko", "author_id": 23257, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/23257", "pm_score": -1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>Most of these questions should be closed as off topic.</p>\n\n<p>\"How to write an email\" kind of questions are not actually about academia, they are basically <a href=\"https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/14470/what-is-the-boat-programming-meme-about\">boat programming questions</a> asking \"how to communicate with other people?\". These questions are additionally often very specific to a certain situation and unlikely to be helpful to other people. Valid questions would rather be more general and ask for example if and how communication is different in academia.</p>\n\n<p>Academia.SE is also not an email writing service, we should not offer help with wording emails etc at all.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3736, "author": "jakebeal", "author_id": 22733, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/22733", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>This sounds to me like a good opportunity to create a community wiki question with a name like: \"What should I do if I am feeling anxious about communicating with my professor?\"</p>\n\n<p>This would be a good one for marking all of the general \"What are the magic words?\" questions as duplicates.</p>\n\n<p>Another large family of communication questions, however, are really not about the communication but about diagnosing and addressing problems in professional relationships. Those generally merit individual consideration and answers, and it would be important to <em>not</em> consider them as duplicates. After all, \"Professors are human too\" also covers quite a wide range of complicated problems.</p>\n\n<hr>\n\n<p>Edit: I've now created a draft Q&amp;A for this; please feel free to improve:</p>\n\n<p><a href=\"https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/90725/how-should-phrase-an-important-question-that-i-need-to-ask-a-professor/90726#90726\">How should I phrase an important question that I need to ask a professor?</a></p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3688", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/1010/" ]

[ { "answer_id": 3691, "author": "gerrit", "author_id": 1033, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/1033", "pm_score": 2, "selected": false, "text": "<p><strong>Yes, we should.</strong></p>\n\n<p>It is somewhat political in nature, but it has been endorsed by major organisations, such as the AAAS (which publishes Science magazine) and the <a href=\"https://eos.org/agu-news/agu-endorses-the-march-for-science-in-washington-d-c\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">American Geophysical Union</a> (AGU), and the American Statistical Association (ASA):</p>\n\n<p><a href=\"http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/02/will-they-or-won-t-they-what-science-groups-are-saying-about-joining-march-science\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\"><em>Major U.S. science groups endorse March for Science</em></a>, Feb. 23, 2017, Science, DOI:10.1126/science.aal0697.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3693, "author": "ff524", "author_id": 11365, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/11365", "pm_score": 3, "selected": false, "text": "<p>I don't think this warrants a community event countdown. That feature is intended for Academia.SE chat events, not just events of interest.</p>\n\n<p>I think a regular <a href=\"https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3661/community-promotion-ads-2017/3692#3692\">community ad</a> is a much better way to promote this kind of event.</p>\n" }, { "answer_id": 3696, "author": "Franck Dernoncourt", "author_id": 452, "author_profile": "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/452", "pm_score": 1, "selected": false, "text": "<p>The main issue I have with this march is that I don't understand to whom the protest is addressed. Going through marchforscience.com, it seems to be mostly geared toward governments, especially the newly elected US government, but when I read the <a href=\"https://web.archive.org/web/20170227165517/https://www.marchforscience.com/mission-and-vision/\" rel=\"nofollow noreferrer\">Our Principles and Goals page of the march</a> it looks to me that most of the issues being raised are caused by researchers themselves.</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Science that serves the common good: Scientists work to build a better understanding of the world around us. Science is a process, not a product -- a tool of discovery that allows us to constantly expand and revise our knowledge of the universe. In doing so, science serves the interests of all humans, not just those in power. We must protect the rights of every person to engage with, learn from, and help shape science, free from manipulation by special interests.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>How can every person engage with, learn from, and help shape science, given that most papers, code and data isn't freely publicly available? That's the responsibility of researchers.</p>\n\n<p>OK for the \"free from manipulation\" part, thouh governments are just one of many entities that may try to manipulate researchers' results.</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Cutting-edge science education: We support science education that teaches children and adults to think critically, ask questions, and evaluate truth based on the weight of evidence. Science is not a field that should be understood only by a small few -- every person, from every background, deserves an education that encourages scientific learning alongside the arts and humanities. Science works best when scientists come from diverse perspectives, and we must work to encourage and support a new generation of scientists that increasingly includes historically underrepresented groups.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>The US government is not responsible for the insane tuition fees that the private universities charge in the US.</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Open and honest science communication and inclusive public outreach: Gag rules on scientists in government and environmental organizations impede access to information that is a public right. Our tax dollars support this scientific research and withholding their results limits the public’s ability to learn from the important developments and discoveries that we have come to expect from our scientists. In addition, scientists often rely on the public to help identify new questions that need to be answered.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>If researchers want to make the research funded by the taxpayers available to the taxpayers they should quit publishing in paywalled venues.</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Evidence-based policy and regulations in the public interest\n Science observes and asks questions about the world. Our understanding is constantly changing, presenting us with new questions and answers. Science gives us the ability to examine these questions, enabling us to craft improved policies and regulations that serve our best interests. Political decision-making that affects the lives of Americans and the world at large should make use of peer-reviewed evidence and scientific consensus, not personal whims and decrees. </p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>OK.</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Funding for scientific research and its applications: \n De-funding and hiring freezes in the sciences are against any country’s best interests. We believe that the federal budget should reflect the powerful and vital role that science plays in supporting our democracy. We advocate federal funding in support of research, scientific hiring, and agency application of science to management. This funding cannot be limited to environmental and medical fields -- scientific support must be inclusive of diverse disciplines.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>OK but keep in mind hundreds of millions wasted by researchers every year just to pay for paywalls, because researchers keep publishing in paywalled venues.</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Humanize science: Science is first and foremost a human process -- it is conducted, applied, and supported by a diverse body of people. Scientific inquiry is not an abstract process that happens independent of culture and community. It is an enterprise carried out by people who seek to expand our knowledge of the world in the hope of building a better, more informed society.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Since the goals are redundant, I'll also repeat myself: if researchers want a \"better, more informed society\", they should make their research output (papers/code/data) freely and publicly available.</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Partner with the public: We join together as scientists and supporters of science to embody the importance of partnerships formed between scientists and the broader community. Science works best when scientists share our findings with and engage the communities we serve in shaping, sharing, and participating in the research process. We also look to the public for inspiration about what new questions need to be asked about the world around us. The lines of communication must go in both directions. If scientists hope to discuss their work with the public, they must also listen to the public's thoughts and opinions on science and research. Progress can only be made by mutual respect.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>I don't think the government's intervention is necessary here.</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Advocate for open, inclusive, and accessible science: We strive to break down barriers in our own community. A career in science should be an option for anyone and everyone who is passionate about discovery. Likewise, the process and results of scientific inquiry should be open to all. Science can ably and accurately inform the decision-making of all people, from the choices we make as consumers to the policies we adopt through public debate. By bringing scientists to “teach-in” at the National Mall and in public spaces around the globe, we voice our support for science being freely available.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Again, the lack of openness is mostly an issue caused by researchers, not the governments.</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Support scientists: We gather together to stand up for scientists, including those in public service. We pledge to speak up for them when they are silenced, to protect them when they are threatened and to provide them with support when they feel they can no longer serve their institutions. Scientists in both public and private sectors must be allowed to communicate their results freely, without misrepresentation or distortion and without the fear of retribution.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>OK</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n <p>Affirm science as a democratic value: Science is a vital feature of a working democracy, spurring innovation, critical thinking, increased understanding, and better, healthier lives for all people. By marching in Washington, DC and around the world, we take one of many steps to become more active in our communities and in democratic life. We hold our leaders -- both in science and in politics -- accountable to the highest standards of honesty, fairness, and integrity. We gather together to send a message: we will all work to ensure that the scientific community is making our democracy stronger.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>OK. (finally they indicate that leaders in science - not just politics - are also responsible)</p>\n" } ]

[ "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3690", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com", "https://academia.meta.stackexchange.com/users/929/" ]