4 replaced http://meta.gaming.stackexchange.com/ with https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/
source | link
3 replaced http://meta.gaming.stackexchange.com/ with https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/
source | link
2 replaced http://meta.gaming.stackexchange.com/ with https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/
source | link

While we have severalseveral questionquestion threadsthreads regarding the [game-rec] issue, we don't have a separate commentary for this one. I believe that this underlying issue is one that directly influences the [game-rec] issue, but we haven't specifically outlined our goals for it yet. I think that this is an important discussion that we need to find some consensus on. I wanted to open this up to discussion.

As per the comments hereAs per the comments here, I had been under the impression that we weren't aiming to be elitist to the point of exclusion at this point. There have been some discussions in the chat about the goals of the site in this regard, but we haven't come to any conclusions. These are some of the subjects that have come up:

  • The definition of an "expert"
  • What types of questions attract/repel "experts"
  • Whether [game-rec] questions require "expert" knowledge or not

I think this is the main problem that we've been indirectly struggling with in our efforts to figure out the [game-rec] problem. How exclusive/exclusionary do we want to be in building this site? I have heard that Jeff has expressed uncertainty about the future of the site as a whole. We still have a couple more months to go in the open beta. Personally, I feel that being too exclusionary at this point in the site's timeline runs the risk of alienating potential users of the site, though I also realize that opening the floodgates and trying to close them again is nigh impossible.

However, that is also the nature of communities. No matter what we do, we will not have complete control over the types of users we get here. Trying to shoehorn things too hard in one direction can often end up backfiring, especially when it comes to social rules. While I really want this site succeed and preferably with an emphasis on "quality over quantity," I feel we may first have to have that quantity in order to make it out of public beta successfully.

What do we feel is best for the site at this point in time?

While we have several question threads regarding the [game-rec] issue, we don't have a separate commentary for this one. I believe that this underlying issue is one that directly influences the [game-rec] issue, but we haven't specifically outlined our goals for it yet. I think that this is an important discussion that we need to find some consensus on. I wanted to open this up to discussion.

As per the comments here, I had been under the impression that we weren't aiming to be elitist to the point of exclusion at this point. There have been some discussions in the chat about the goals of the site in this regard, but we haven't come to any conclusions. These are some of the subjects that have come up:

  • The definition of an "expert"
  • What types of questions attract/repel "experts"
  • Whether [game-rec] questions require "expert" knowledge or not

I think this is the main problem that we've been indirectly struggling with in our efforts to figure out the [game-rec] problem. How exclusive/exclusionary do we want to be in building this site? I have heard that Jeff has expressed uncertainty about the future of the site as a whole. We still have a couple more months to go in the open beta. Personally, I feel that being too exclusionary at this point in the site's timeline runs the risk of alienating potential users of the site, though I also realize that opening the floodgates and trying to close them again is nigh impossible.

However, that is also the nature of communities. No matter what we do, we will not have complete control over the types of users we get here. Trying to shoehorn things too hard in one direction can often end up backfiring, especially when it comes to social rules. While I really want this site succeed and preferably with an emphasis on "quality over quantity," I feel we may first have to have that quantity in order to make it out of public beta successfully.

What do we feel is best for the site at this point in time?

While we have several question threads regarding the [game-rec] issue, we don't have a separate commentary for this one. I believe that this underlying issue is one that directly influences the [game-rec] issue, but we haven't specifically outlined our goals for it yet. I think that this is an important discussion that we need to find some consensus on. I wanted to open this up to discussion.

As per the comments here, I had been under the impression that we weren't aiming to be elitist to the point of exclusion at this point. There have been some discussions in the chat about the goals of the site in this regard, but we haven't come to any conclusions. These are some of the subjects that have come up:

  • The definition of an "expert"
  • What types of questions attract/repel "experts"
  • Whether [game-rec] questions require "expert" knowledge or not

I think this is the main problem that we've been indirectly struggling with in our efforts to figure out the [game-rec] problem. How exclusive/exclusionary do we want to be in building this site? I have heard that Jeff has expressed uncertainty about the future of the site as a whole. We still have a couple more months to go in the open beta. Personally, I feel that being too exclusionary at this point in the site's timeline runs the risk of alienating potential users of the site, though I also realize that opening the floodgates and trying to close them again is nigh impossible.

However, that is also the nature of communities. No matter what we do, we will not have complete control over the types of users we get here. Trying to shoehorn things too hard in one direction can often end up backfiring, especially when it comes to social rules. While I really want this site succeed and preferably with an emphasis on "quality over quantity," I feel we may first have to have that quantity in order to make it out of public beta successfully.

What do we feel is best for the site at this point in time?

1
source | link