Return to Question

1. Questions asking to list specific personal experience in gaming
2. Questions asking to list games according to specific mechanical criteria
3. Questions asking to list specific kinds of features in one or more games
4. Questions asking to list components used for a specific purpose in the gaming craft
5. Questions asking to list strategies used in a specific facet of high level play
6. Questions asking to list modifications to a specific game with a specific goal
7. Questions asking to list games that are like another game

We are suffering a lot of inconsistency in what judgment calls are being made because people are observing the scope differently in different posts. For example, on the topic of recommendations, how much narrower of a scope does "being like another game" compare to "being of this genre"? We have one open recommendation asking for games like a certain train simulation game - the essence of the question asking for train simulation (which is naught but a subgenre of transport simulations), yet we close a question asking for tile-based tactics games on a specific platform. We strike down subjective questions about tools and experiences, but allow subjective questions that are naught but shopping recommendations. What is it that makes some lists more valuable than others?

1. Questions asking to list specific personal experience in gaming
2. Questions asking to list games according to specific mechanical criteria
3. Questions asking to list specific kinds of features in one or more games
4. Questions asking to list components used for a specific purpose in the gaming craft
5. Questions asking to list strategies used in a specific facet of high level play
6. Questions asking to list modifications to a specific game with a specific goal
7. Questions asking to list games that are like another game

We are suffering a lot of inconsistency in what judgment calls are being made because people are observing the scope differently in different posts. For example, on the topic of recommendations, how much narrower of a scope does "being like another game" compare to "being of this genre"? We have one open recommendation asking for games like a certain train simulation game - the essence of the question asking for train simulation (which is naught but a subgenre of transport simulations), yet we close a question asking for tile-based tactics games on a specific platform. We strike down subjective questions about tools and experiences, but allow subjective questions that are naught but shopping recommendations. What is it that makes some lists more valuable than others?

We have a lot of open discussions on the subject of list questions - at least five of them. One conclusion I can draw from analyzing them is that we don't have a conclusion. There seems to be a faint consensus that there is an "acceptable" kind of list, at least within recommendations. But this consensus is very undefined - we don't have anything to measure against except our own opinions. Yes, we are driven by the community and each individual is free to judge these things on their own calls. But a successful system of community moderation involves an actual, concrete substance for us to make our judgment calls off of.

We have a lot of open discussions on the subject of list questions - at least five of them. One conclusion I can draw from analyzing them is that we don't have a conclusion. There seems to be a faint consensus that there is an "acceptable" kind of list, at least within recommendations. But this consensus is very undefined - we don't have anything to measure against except our own opinions. Yes, we are driven by the community and each individual is free to judge these things on their own calls. But a successful system of community moderation involves an actual, concrete substance for us to make our judgment calls off of.

A question on the parent site recently received some close votes with a reasoning of "Way too limited in scope". People can't ask questions that are too wide in scope, yet when they try to narrow the scope we are also blocking them. We are sending horribly mixed signals and making new users jump through really stupid hoops right now. This is going to kill this site if such a thing continues. This is why it is very important that we start to work harder in identifying what this scope is. It needs to be something that, when a user reads our FAQ, they can look at their question and 95% of the time know very clearly whether their question belongs or not.