Bugs and existence of fixes off-topic here?

Question

I've received some polite assistance in comments about how to keep my questions here on-topic. Reading the guidelines though, it wasn't obvious to me at all that what I asked was off-topic.

One question I had was whether or not something was a bug. I was told I couldn't ask that question, because it's asking about "developer intent".

In another question I asked, regarding another bug that I couldn't directly ask if it was a bug, if a mod existed to fix it. That is also frowned upon because it's "asking for a recommendation".

I don't know about everyone else, but these seem to be the biggest categories of question there are to ask about games in general: 1. "is this broken", and 2. "what, if any, fixes exist"?

Is there an area I can read more in depth about this site's guidelines, case studies, rationales, than what's available in the help area?

Oh, and is this question on-topic for meta? In that case, is there a meta-meta site?

Answer 1

Your questions are on-topic, but, as users pointed out in comments, they were some parts that might lead some users to vote to close, even if it might be incorrect to do so.

The first question's "issue" was mostly just word choice. You asked if something was by design, which, in some sense, wouldn't be known for sure without developer insight. The words "by design" imply developer intent, which is off-topic, and thus a reason to be closed. Although asking if something is a bug is practically the same thing, it doesn't cause people to associate it with being developer intent. Your edit to slightly change the wording simply prevented your question's topicality from being questioned.

The second question involves an issue that has actually very recently been discussed and it, too, involves word choice. Basically, asking for a solution is okay and answers can suggest mods or plugins. However, asking specifically for a mod or plugin as a solution is considered off-topic for being an external recommendation request. I think DCShannon's answer appropriately describes the reasoning behind this.

Answer 2

While Vemonus did a good job explaining about your two questions, and I agree with him, he did not address the last part of your question here. This question is definitely on-topic for meta. If you read here you can find a brief overview of what meta is and it's purpose, but I will summarize a few pertinent points.

• Arqade users to communicate with each other about Arqade (asking questions about how the websites work, or about policies and community decisions)
• Arqade users to communicate with Stack Overflow the company (posting bugs, suggesting improvements, or proposing new features)

So, there isn't a Meta-meta site per say, as you can ask here what's on topic on meta on meta. It wouldn't really make sense to have a meta site for meta, because then we would have to have a meta site for the meta-meta site and so on and so forth.

And finally, to find a place to read a more in depth about this site's guidelines, reading through the meta site is a pretty good place to do that. Looking at older questions and answers can help you figure out what is on topic and what isn't and our reasonings behind it. Note that if the topic is a lot older, things may have changed between then and now. If in doubt you can always ask again, or come to chat and ask there as a number of active members of the community that are high rep or mods and active on meta are there chatting most of the time.