This is something that we have done on as ad hoc basis up until now, but I think we might need to take a step back and look at the problem again together.

A quick recap.

In certain instances, community leaders (mods and higher-rep users) have organized the composition of "canonical" questions and answers: high-signal "exhaustive" responses to a question we see repeatedly being raised, perhaps in subtly varying forms.

The first time we did this, I believe, was in response to a glut of queries about the utility (and sometimes, somewhat more cynically, about the cash-value) of studying philosophy. The wise and benevolent @stoicfury took a constructive leadership role here; he formulated the question as straightforwardly as possible and composed a clear, crisp, well-researched response. We now had a master question to refer people to when the concern inevitably came up again.

My major purpose here is to get a little more formality and transparency around this process, as well as permit the main body of the community to shoulder some of the burden of composing canonical Q&As.

What might be some good candidates for this "canonicalization" process? (Currently I am thinking about "who is a philosopher?" and "how to become a student of philosophy?", both of which have several instances floating around. What others might be ought there that you noticed?)

This is something that we have done on as ad hoc basis up until now, but I think we might need to take a step back and look at the problem again together.

A quick recap.

In certain instances, community leaders (mods and higher-rep users) have organized the composition of "canonical" questions and answers: high-signal "exhaustive" responses to a question we see repeatedly being raised, perhaps in subtly varying forms.

The first time we did this, I believe, was in response to a glut of queries about the utility (and sometimes, somewhat more cynically, about the cash-value) of studying philosophy. The wise and benevolent @stoicfury took a constructive leadership role here; he formulated the question as straightforwardly as possible and composed a clear, crisp, well-researched response. We now had a master question to refer people to when the concern inevitably came up again.

My major purpose here is to get a little more formality and transparency around this process, as well as permit the main body of the community to shoulder some of the burden of composing canonical Q&As.

What might be some good candidates for this "canonicalization" process? (Currently I am thinking about "who is a philosopher?" and "how to become a student of philosophy?", both of which have several instances floating around. What others might be out there?)

This is something that we have done on as ad hoc basis up until now, but I think we might need to take a step back and look at the problem again together.

A quick recap.

In certain instances, community leaders (mods and higher-rep users) have organized the composition of "canonical" questions and answers: high-signal "exhaustive" responses to a question we see repeatedly being raised, perhaps in subtly varying forms.

The first time we did this, I believe, was in response to a glut of queries about the utility (and sometimes, somewhat more cynically, about the cash-value) of studying philosophy. The wise and benevolent @stoicfury took a constructive leadership role here (where I was unfortunately more inclined to aggressive abruptness in responding, at least to the copycat questions); he formulated the question as straightforwardly as possible and composed a clear, crisp, well-researched response. We now had a master question to refer people to when the concern inevitably came up again.

My major purpose here is to get a little more formality and transparency around this process, as well as permit the main body of the community to shoulder some of the burden of composing canonical Q&As.

What might be some good candidates for this "canonicalization" process? (Currently I am thinking about "who is a philosopher?" and "how to become a student of philosophy?", both of which have several instances floating around. What others might be ought there that you noticed?)

This is something that we have done on as ad hoc basis up until now, but I think we might need to take a step back and look at the problem again together.

A quick recap.

In certain instances, community leaders (mods and higher-rep users) have organized the composition of "canonical" questions and answers: high-signal "exhaustive" responses to a question we see repeatedly being raised, perhaps in subtly varying forms.

The first time we did this, I believe, was in response to a glut of queries about the utility (and sometimes, somewhat more cynically, about the cash-value) of studying philosophy. The wise and benevolent @stoicfury took a constructive leadership role here; he formulated the question as straightforwardly as possible and composed a clear, crisp, well-researched response. We now had a master question to refer people to when the concern inevitably came up again.

My major purpose here is to get a little more formality and transparency around this process, as well as permit the main body of the community to shoulder some of the burden of composing canonical Q&As.

What might be some good candidates for this "canonicalization" process? (Currently I am thinking about "who is a philosopher?" and "how to become a student of philosophy?", both of which have several instances floating around. What others might be ought there that you noticed?)