Waste of time

[studiot]

This suggestion was inspired by the recent strengthening of the control over spurious threads and the waste of time they generate.

Whilst I fully endorse that, I would like to note another perennial timewaster for consideration.

(Too) Many original posters think we are mind readers or whatever and supply far too little or too sloppy information instead of a properly thought out question.
 

Sometimes a simple "Does the bathwater always spin round the same way as it empties down the plughole ?"  is all that is necessary.
But already this morning I see at least two questions with insufficient information to frame a proper answer.

If the OP expects us to put careful thought into answering, do they not owe it to others to put the same into their question?

I don't want to discourage people but how can we encourage them to asked posed questions?

[Strange]

I can think of a couple of ideas:

1. ask them to provide a clearer question and provide any missing detail

2. if that doesn't produce anything clearer, then report the post and ask a moderator to make that request (with the threat/promise that the thread will be closed down if a useful question is not forthcoming)

If someone persists in asking vague, even evasive, questions and appears to shifts the topic with every response, then that seem to be exactly the sort of thing the "good faith" rules is intended to cover.

(The same applies to people who have a habit of replying with answers like "Do you know there are two ways of solving this?" but don't explain any further what those "two ways" are.)

[studiot]

1 hour ago, Strange said:

I can think of a couple of ideas:

Thanks.

I was wondering about first timers who seem particularly prone to this.

I believe some sort of information appears about their first 5 posts ?

Perhaps some extra guidance could be issued with that ?

 

[dimreepr]

1 hour ago, studiot said:

Thanks.

I was wondering about first timers who seem particularly prone to this.

I believe some sort of information appears about their first 5 posts ?

Perhaps some extra guidance could be issued with that ?

 

I think, for the best results, they learn for themselves; it worked for me...

[Strange]

1 hour ago, studiot said:

Thanks.

I was wondering about first timers who seem particularly prone to this.

I believe some sort of information appears about their first 5 posts ?

Perhaps some extra guidance could be issued with that ?

 

Feels like it might be overkill for something that is only a problem with a small proportion of posters.

[Phi for All]

1 hour ago, studiot said:

Thanks.

I was wondering about first timers who seem particularly prone to this.

I believe some sort of information appears about their first 5 posts ?

Perhaps some extra guidance could be issued with that ?

What we've found is that the new members who read the rules aren't prone to this type of behavior in the first place. The folks who don't acknowledge what an argument in good faith is also don't tend to read rules. 

Also, this might be a problem of not knowing what you don't know. If someone is lacking in understanding due to gaps in their knowledge, it's sometimes difficult to know how to correct that. Many don't know the right way to ask, rather than being too lazy to ask the right way.

[Strange]

3 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

Many don't know the right way to ask, rather than being too lazy to ask the right way.

Indeed. I think threads that start out with a poorly posed question can go one of two ways: with a bit of prompting, the OP might say, "yes, that is exactly what I am trying to say" and then it leads on to a productive discussion. Or they might respond to any requests for clarification with further vague questions or assertions with no obvious connection between them. I think (and hope) that the former are far more common.

[MigL]

Expanding on Phi's thoughts, most people are here to learn.
And a lot of people learn by making 'mistakes'.
We can't expect everyone to know all pertinent information before properly formulating a question.

That being said, I sometimes get frustrated too, but we have to cut newcomers some slack.
I'm sure I frustrated a few people when I first came on board.

[dimreepr]

10 minutes ago, MigL said:

Expanding on Phi's thoughts, most people are here to learn.
And a lot of people learn by making 'mistakes'.
We can't expect everyone to know all pertinent information before properly formulating a question.

That being said, I sometimes get frustrated too, but we have to cut newcomers some slack.
I'm sure I frustrated a few people when I first came on board.

What am I now? Huggable or... 

[Phi for All]

15 minutes ago, MigL said:

Expanding on Phi's thoughts, most people are here to learn.
And a lot of people learn by making 'mistakes'.
We can't expect everyone to know all pertinent information before properly formulating a question.

And not everyone has practice with critical thinking. Growing up, I loved reading mystery fiction, and I think it taught me a better framework for approaching my inquiries. It's not just the pertinent information you gather, it's also how you apply an ordered methodology to organize it in your own mind. 

[Strange]

31 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

And not everyone has practice with critical thinking. Growing up, I loved reading mystery fiction, and I think it taught me a better framework for approaching my inquiries. It's not just the pertinent information you gather, it's also how you apply an ordered methodology to organize it in your own mind. 

For me it was working in test and maintenance. If I was on call, I would spend the journey to work working through possible causes and matching them up against the symptoms described. Sometimes I would be able to narrow it down to two hypotheses and a test to distinguish them. It felt good to walk in and say, "what happens when you press the 'pause' button? ... OK, in that case this module needs to be replaced" and then be on my way home again in 10 minutes.

[studiot]

I seem to remember a thread? a few years back where there was a summary

How to write an effective opening question.

Not long but a sticky paragraph that  someone could point to.

 

48 minutes ago, Strange said:

For me it was working in test and maintenance. If I was on call, I would spend the journey to work working through possible causes and matching them up against the symptoms described

Yes I agree such an environment forms an excellent training ground. +1

 

For all the good it does, critical thinking has long been part of the national Curriculum in the UK

Edited February 28, 2020 by studiot

[Strange]

34 minutes ago, studiot said:

I seem to remember a thread? a few years back where there was a summary

How to write an effective opening question.

Not long but a sticky paragraph that  someone could point to.

Sounds familiar, but I don't know where it is!

[Ghideon]

Here is my opinion after thinking about the above.

I can definitely see @studiot's point of view, it is very familiar to me from some of my attempts at providing answers here on the forum. But personally I do often find that the interesting but badly stated questions are triggering me to think outside the box. My attempts at figuring out the question is often contributing to enhancing my knowledge just as much as my tries to provide an answer. But I think that those discussions are sometimes (often?) not very interesting for others to follow so in the general case it may not add much value to the site even if I personally enjoy that kind of topics.

I have some vague idea about some kind of a "questions about questions" or "help me improve my question" or "How would a scientist ask"-section where one could submit a vague question and get help to enhance the question it until it can be properly addressed from a scientific point of view. "Bad" question could be moved to that section until "good enough". But I'm not sure it will help. Those in need of the section may be offended by a move or be discouraged from further questions. And it maybe it adds unnecessary work for moderators to move stuff around.