11

Who is flagging all the short questions of odddeer. They are short but imo not bad questions at all. And he seems to be mainly interested in arching and brings good value/traffic to the page.

If so, what are the problems with his questions? If we look at questions 2 or 3 years ago, they are mainly short and received therefore a lot of attention.

  • 5
    Good question. I think their posts are absolutely fine, and a good influx of new topics. If you see flags you disagree with, you can always reject them :-) – Rory Alsop Nov 26 '15 at 10:01
  • @RoryAlsop Yes I vote to leave them open ofc. But still, this morning I already saw 2 close-vots because "length and content" on this question. I just hope there is no abuse or whatever. Rory can you see who calls the votes? Is it always the same person? Otherwise we should just discuss reasons here... – Wills Nov 26 '15 at 10:14
  • If they are votes to close, then yes we can see once closed (as can all users). With these ones, I'm sorry to say I have no visibility (mods typically don't get to see things unless there is a situation that requires it - it avoids us having to worry about mod-abuse etc) For that specific question, the vote appears to be 'unclear what the question is asking' and I guess @Aravona's comment on it is a good one - a bit more info would help that one. – Rory Alsop Nov 26 '15 at 10:32
  • @Rory there were 2 more votes for "length and content". Aras suggestion makes sense of course but has nothing to do with a lot of "length and content" votes for the short questions of odddeer. – Wills Nov 26 '15 at 10:35
  • 5
    There is an automated bot that will flag very short posts - so it may well be the Community bot that is doing this. In which case, just a quick check of the question to see if it is fine, and then reject as needed. – Rory Alsop Nov 26 '15 at 10:37
  • 2
    Doesn't the system automatically flag very short posts? – gerrit Nov 26 '15 at 11:06
8

Short questions (and in some cases answers!) are perfectly acceptable. My latest Sloe / Foraging question was super short. However with some of the influx of new archery questions there's been a lot of short hand writing which from a new person to an activities point of view can be confusing and unclear.

In the same way that we always ask people to give full locations for United States trails as not everyone will know all the US short-hand state codes, like FL, CA etc. Those are always happily expanded. It's just some short hands are mis-leading to some/new people. This is similar to how confusing colloquialisms can be - like where I'm from a horses bit can have biscuits on. Doesn't make much sense if you're not experienced in that field.

I don't think the issue with those questions from OddDeer are length, I think just we tend to request some assumptions like that to be expanded for ease of reading. It's probably just coincidence that these are turning up on his shorter posts.

As a note I've also commented on one of his questions with the same shorthand as the # in the UK is not commonly called the pound sign (he's using it to reference poundage) as we have £ as a pound sign. In the UK the # is actually called the number sign (or more recently a bloody hash tag) - so in cases like this being fuller is probably better.

(Also as Rory said it maybe the Community bot!)

  • 5
    Thanks for your inputs btw. I've happily edited things like the pound sign (and hopefully made things clear for novice archers). – OddDeer Nov 28 '15 at 9:40

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .