5

Yes, we should have such threads Sometimes good posts (questions and answers alike) are forgotten and never appear in the review queue after closure or deletion (there needs to be at least one vote for reopening/undeletion for that). And even if it is in the review queue, this queue in particular rarely gets the attention it deserves so that we rarely have ...


5

This is one of two answers (the other one will follow later this day). This one focuses on StackExchange and its nature. It think the OP contains the background content of assumptions about SE and how it can/should be used and specific discussion points on top of that. I think it's important that these layers are kept apart with regards to votes and ...


4

To be honest, we do have such a mechanism: Open a Meta discussion, offer several (diametrical or at least competing) views in answers, and count the votes. The art of using meta that way is to have a particular proposal in the OP (answers basically being "Yes", "No", or "Yes, but with this change/addition") or in answers, where ...


3

As of the first question, I suggested what the problem may be in a comment. I think what happened here is that we have a lot of text and a lot of thought going on which basically blurs the question proper, which gets drowned and fuzzier. This is probably why it ended up closed as off-topic since it is not clear what the actual question is when you give ...


3

From our help center You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face. This does not fit well with what is usually called "philosophical questions". Actually, it shows that this site is part of the StackOverflow/StackExchange network and not some random philosophy forum. Thus, I would say that if your ...


3

This is my other answer. I hope it does not sound overly apologetic, harsh, or reactionary. I simply want to have the discussion going and give my personal view on these points. Discussions are welcome. Ad 1 As should be obvious from my other answer, I do agree with Yechiam here that I see no problem in that the post was deliberately titled not as a question,...


3

I do not think it should belong here. This question is essentially about website mechanics, not about philosophy. That is reflected in the place where your question was migrated to: super user is about general system mechanics in IT. I think there is even a question on grading philosophical essays which I once answered, so our scope is really broad in ...


2

Joke? No. It's the Dunning-Kruger effect. I once watched a thread of a self-claimed physicist who ran an experimental apparatus in his garage claim he had empirical proof that the conservation of angular momentum as understood was flawed. Completely resistant to argument after argument that undermined the claim. He simply lacked the ability to understand he ...


2

The question was flagged as 'not an answer'. The standard system-side procedure when moderators approve that kind of flag is deletion. So why did I delete this answer? Firstly because it is, other than you imply, quite opinionated. Good as rational is one view among others and in contemporary philosophy certainly not the most discussed one. You even state ...


2

Answer I would say that such a question should be allowed because it is on its face a question about the history of philosophy. What better place to ask about what Camus or Husserl said than Philosophy Stack Exchange? But I believe in the broader vision of philosophy and am at odds with other contributors who don't favor the use of editorial discretion. If ...


2

I'd say questions like that would be okay if they are tightly scoped to one particular philsophical school: "What does it mean in existentialism to "be yourself"?" "What would Nietzsche say it meant to "be yourself"?" If it's not scoped like that, then such a question is just an open-ended invitation to pontificate on ...


1

I flagged one of the "answers" on this question as it did not answer the question and contained vaccine-related health misinformation. The moderators marked my flag as "helpful," yet their only action was to remove the comments someone else had posted raising concerns about misinformation. I'm not sure the question belongs here at all, ...


1

It is not possible to pin questions from the main site, but there are two mechanisms to "pin" questions from the meta site in a way that makes the visible on the main site (at least in desktop browsers): Adding the tag featured to the question. Only moderators can do this. The tag is automatically removed after some time, i.e. roughly one month.. ...


1

In the spirit of refinement and rigour, your (@Philip Klöcking) statement that: "Thus, I would say that if your goal is to ask (=discuss) philosophical questions, this site is not the best place to do so." seems somewhat undermined or at least effectively challenged by a very popular question on the forum this morning, entitled: "Is it ...


1

A bit late for the party, I'd like to address several points. Actually to start from the end of the post: After all: friends, are we not philosophers? As one of the legendary moderators of this site said in the past: no, we are not philosophers (and I don't like that you've edit the post with a question mark; it defeats the whole point of the post). Yes, ...


1

Here are my 2c on this: often users asking these ask for proofs using a specific set of rules "allowed" in a specific book or implemented in a piece of software. The catch is that answerers will most often than not not have access to that precise book or software. Questions seldom if ever post the exact table of rules allowed together with the ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible