-7

This question started with an assertion protein rich is required to maintain muscle.

For those of us with access to a base camp and wish to maintain an element of muscle mass (or even hypertrophy) what are you recommendations for protein or fat rich foods

Comments ensued on the necessity of protein rich to maintain muscle. After several comments that was edited out.

But diet was quickly reintroduced by OP:

Edit: I can now see that someone has voted to close this question because they disagree with high protein diets.

Comment were moved to chat based on:

No - discussion about particular ideas of high protein is not on topic...do that in the chat.

I get taking diet out scope. But high protein diet is still in the question. How can high protein diet be still in scope for a question but out of scope for a comment?

Further, how is editorial commentary appropriate in a question?

I can now see that someone has voted to close

-

I would encourage people focus on the actual question and not on their personal dietary evangelism.

1
  • 3
    I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is just a rant about comments being moved to chat
    – user2766
    Commented Jan 26, 2017 at 10:46

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
6

To answer your literal question, imagine I asked for suggestions about coat materials that did not include down because as a vegan I can't have a down coat. [Imagine. I'm not actually a vegan.] Endless comments about whether being vegan is good or not, or whether using byproducts helps "use all" of an animal that is being killed anyway, sidetracks about leather, and so on are all off topic here on TGO. The question may have included this little detail for background, or to stave off "actually nothing is better than down, go with down" answers, but that doesn't mean we can now debate the accuracy of that background statement all day.

So if someone wants a high protein food you can carry into the backcountry and consume there, that's on topic. Thy may tell you their reason (muscles etc) but that doesn't mean it's now fair game to discuss whether or not a high protein diet is needed for muscles. You just need to answer the actual question which is foods that would be high protein and suitable for a trip like that. And back and forthing in comments rejecting the premise of the question, or engaging in edit wars, is never going to be the right thing even if the content was on topic.

4

Paparazzi - various comments were made, and some were constructive, and helped the OP improve the question. You made some unconstructive comments, which continued after the edits were made, and also after I moved the whole bunch to chat.

I would imagine the OP's comment about restricting the focus to the core question comes from the same frustration. There is a perfectly valid question in there, with some good answers.

If the question needs a bit of tweaking at the start, let's help the OP do that, rather than nitpicking about things that actually don't matter in context of the question. Even if there are some slight issues at the start, once the OP fixes them, move on.

The core issue here is not this particular instance, it is actually a bit of a theme we have had to speak to you about on various occasions. I'd like to see you work with people to improve posts, rather than bring them down with arguments that don't help the post.

6
  • Rory I see the reference to nutrition was removed.
    – paparazzo
    Commented Jan 25, 2017 at 20:25
  • 5
    @Paparazzi The reference to nutrition was removed prior to your final comments on it. I just now removed the comment asking for focus as it is no longer needed. But once again you are making comments that are unconstructive and would only have the result of annoying people or belittling them. There was no good reason for you to leave me that comment.
    – Rory Alsop Mod
    Commented Jan 25, 2017 at 20:28
  • Roy if you are going to take "I see the reference to nutrition was removed" as annoying, belittling, and not good reason then that is on you. I post a question and rather than address the actual question you chose to criticize me. I simply acknowledged the core of my actual question had been addressed. I did not follow a time line and I will review my comments.
    – paparazzo
    Commented Jan 25, 2017 at 20:55
  • 4
    You do need to follow a time line, and you need to be aware of how the tone and content of your comments affect especially new visitors. You also need to pay attention to guidance, commentary and flags. I had already told you the comment was removed, and that it was inappropriate and unconstructive to continue. This is just one further example of what you have been warned for many times.
    – Rory Alsop Mod
    Commented Jan 25, 2017 at 21:02
  • Roy would you slow down and address words I use and take the words I use at face value. In the question I see the reference to nutrition has been removed and I acknowledged. MY issue has been addressed. No, you had not told me the reference in the question had been removed - you only referred to comments. Even your comment back to me that I had been told referred to comment.
    – paparazzo
    Commented Jan 25, 2017 at 21:25
  • 4
    Paparazzi - no. This is something you need to do. You were told 5 hours ago that it was removed. You continued. Comments were moved to chat and you were told to take it to chat. You continued. Your question here even rebuilt the pieces you were told to stop as it was already sorted.
    – Rory Alsop Mod
    Commented Jan 25, 2017 at 21:31

You must log in to answer this question.

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