4 replaced http://rpg.stackexchange.com/ with https://rpg.stackexchange.com/
source | link

I get why the rule exists. However when I ask about how healing interactions happen in game, in a very specific format (D&D druid healing in wild shape, if it affects the normal formD&D druid healing in wild shape, if it affects the normal form), those aren't two questions. Those are continuations, and anybody asking the first is definitely wondering about the second. Consider the future readers, would they benefit from having those two very closely related questions together or not?

I truly get the reason for the rule, but this is not the first question I had edited, locked or deleted because of this. It just feels like bureaucracy.

My question is: shouldn't mods consider "hey, would somebody asking the first question benefit from having the second question together in one place", instead of just sticking to rules that are actually counter-intuitive?

I get why the rule exists. However when I ask about how healing interactions happen in game, in a very specific format (D&D druid healing in wild shape, if it affects the normal form), those aren't two questions. Those are continuations, and anybody asking the first is definitely wondering about the second. Consider the future readers, would they benefit from having those two very closely related questions together or not?

I truly get the reason for the rule, but this is not the first question I had edited, locked or deleted because of this. It just feels like bureaucracy.

My question is: shouldn't mods consider "hey, would somebody asking the first question benefit from having the second question together in one place", instead of just sticking to rules that are actually counter-intuitive?

I get why the rule exists. However when I ask about how healing interactions happen in game, in a very specific format (D&D druid healing in wild shape, if it affects the normal form), those aren't two questions. Those are continuations, and anybody asking the first is definitely wondering about the second. Consider the future readers, would they benefit from having those two very closely related questions together or not?

I truly get the reason for the rule, but this is not the first question I had edited, locked or deleted because of this. It just feels like bureaucracy.

My question is: shouldn't mods consider "hey, would somebody asking the first question benefit from having the second question together in one place", instead of just sticking to rules that are actually counter-intuitive?

3 edited title
| link

One-post one-question bureaucracy to the extreme Why'd my second question get removed when surely people would be thinking about both?

    Post Undeleted by Miniman, BESW, doppelgreener
    Post Deleted by user24050
2 added 54 characters in body
source | link

I get why the rule exists. However when I ask about how healing interactions happen in game, in a very specific format (D&D druid healing in wild shape, if it affects the normal formD&D druid healing in wild shape, if it affects the normal form), those aren't two questions. Those are continuations, and anybody asking the first is definitely wondering about the second. Consider the future readers, would they benefit from having those two very closely related questions together or not?

I truly get the reason for the rule, but this is not the first question I had edited, locked or deleted because of this. It just feels like bureaucracy.

My question is: shouldn't mods consider "hey, would somebody asking the first question benefit from having the second question together in one place", instead of just sticking to rules that are actually counter-intuitive?

I get why the rule exists. However when I ask about how healing interactions happen in game, in a very specific format (D&D druid healing in wild shape, if it affects the normal form), those aren't two questions. Those are continuations, and anybody asking the first is definitely wondering about the second. Consider the future readers, would they benefit from having those two very closely related questions together or not?

I truly get the reason for the rule, but this is not the first question I had edited, locked or deleted because of this. It just feels like bureaucracy.

My question is: shouldn't mods consider "hey, would somebody asking the first question benefit from having the second question together in one place", instead of just sticking to rules that are actually counter-intuitive?

I get why the rule exists. However when I ask about how healing interactions happen in game, in a very specific format (D&D druid healing in wild shape, if it affects the normal form), those aren't two questions. Those are continuations, and anybody asking the first is definitely wondering about the second. Consider the future readers, would they benefit from having those two very closely related questions together or not?

I truly get the reason for the rule, but this is not the first question I had edited, locked or deleted because of this. It just feels like bureaucracy.

My question is: shouldn't mods consider "hey, would somebody asking the first question benefit from having the second question together in one place", instead of just sticking to rules that are actually counter-intuitive?

1
source | link