Timeline for What do we do with questions that ask you to describe a game?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
18 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 15, 2020 at 8:58 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:09 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://gaming.stackexchange.com/ with https://gaming.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Oct 23, 2015 at 22:51 | comment | added | Trisped | @Sterno The link you refer to is a meta post, and is there for the opinion of those who wrote answers. As such it is not the definitive reason for the rule. That said, my point was not that it might help someone make a shopping decision. My point was that they are probably trying to get around the no shopping advice question by asking another poor question. | |
| Oct 23, 2015 at 20:12 | comment | added | Sterno | @Trisped I feel the need to point out that "shopping advice" questions are not off topic because they give advice about shopping. We don't have anything against the fundamental idea of helping people make decisions when shopping. When "shopping advice" is mentioned, it's meant to describe a certain category of questions that are problematic. Just because the answer to a question might help someone make a shopping decision does not mean it's a "shopping advice" question that should be closed. | |
| Oct 9, 2015 at 23:20 | comment | added | two bugs | @Tripsed As others have noted, your evidence does not carry the weight you seem to believe. You're saying that this question can only exist for one reason: shopping advice. This is, quite frankly, ridiculous. It's very easy to imagine someone who simply says "Hey, I've heard about this Terraria game, but I don't know what it is. I know, I'll ask a site that I didn't read the help page for!" - Maybe they'll buy it eventually, but they don't know. This is setting a very ridiculous precedent - that if the asker might make a purchase based off of a question, it's off topic. | |
| Oct 9, 2015 at 22:53 | comment | added | Frank | Your stance has absolutely no backing. You're taking an extremely narrow view of our rules, and I don't know how else to tell you what we've tried to, over and over: Your reading of our rules is incorrect. You've provided nothing in the way of an actual argument, and you refuse to actually account for evidence to the contrary of your position. | |
| Oct 9, 2015 at 21:02 | comment | added | Trisped | @twobugs I have provided links which indicate that it is breaking site rules, so I do not understand why you think I am "taking a very naive view of this". Strict, yes, but not naive. If you have something to back up your assertion, please add it to the chat. | |
| Oct 9, 2015 at 19:46 | comment | added | two bugs | You're taking a very naive view of this. It's entirely possible someone is just trying to figure out what a game is before they do anything else. This is not a good question, but you can have bad questions which don't explicitly break any rules. | |
| Oct 9, 2015 at 19:06 | history | edited | Trisped | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added additional information as needed.
|
| Oct 8, 2015 at 0:51 | comment | added | Trisped | For those who do not want to read the chat: My point is "It is not specifically included, and does not directly relate to gaming (not to be confused with "directly related to video games"), it is too close to the "Shopping advice and recommendations" denied topic (why else would you be asking for the description? Either you have the game and will play it, or you heard about the game and want to know if you should get it.), that it is opinion based or copy/pasted from top search results, and the question itself shows no research effort.” | |
| Oct 7, 2015 at 22:21 | comment | added | Unionhawk Mod | I disagree. If anything you're arguing for "primarily opinion based", which would be a stretch at best. The information being asked for is objective in this specific case, and, even though said information can probably be found on the first Google result, that is an indication of no research effort, which is a reason to downvote a question, not close it. | |
| Oct 7, 2015 at 22:12 | comment | added | Frank | Based on the chat discussion, I have to disagree with this reasoning, as it doesn't adequately explain itself, nor is based on any existing SE policies. It is essentially, "It's off-topic because I said so". Not that I wouldn't mind closing it, but the closure has to be based in reality. | |
| Oct 7, 2015 at 19:43 | comment | added | Trisped | @Frank This is getting chatty, so we can continue in chat if you have additional comments. My point is that the information which will be provided in the answers will be one of the two items, the first usually found with an easy google search, the second is opinion ("It is a fun shooter with lots of guns and quests" which has opinions "fun" and 'lots" and facts from a search). | |
| Oct 7, 2015 at 19:02 | comment | added | Frank | In what manner is describing a game an opinion based question? I'm having trouble seeing that argument. There being more than one way to describe a game doesn't make it opinion based at all. | |
| Oct 7, 2015 at 18:13 | comment | added | Trisped | @Frank To prevent your question from being flagged and possibly removed, avoid asking subjective questions where every answer is equally valid I am not sure why it does not help. All answers would be equally valid. This is the problem with opinion based questions, there is no way of indicating which answer is correct or more correct then the others. | |
| Oct 7, 2015 at 12:03 | comment | added | Frank | I agree that they should be closed, but your reasoning is rather suspect. I'm seeing no compelling argument, and the quoted section isn't actually helping your argument. | |
| Oct 7, 2015 at 0:18 | history | edited | Trisped | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Link to form guidlines
|
| Oct 7, 2015 at 0:06 | history | answered | Trisped | CC BY-SA 3.0 |