4
\$\begingroup\$

https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/9048/do-you-know-a-good-sound-effect-library vs How do I find artwork to inspire adventure design?

So, asking for pictures is fine, asking for sound is not... Why?

From the FAQ, I believe that my question fits "Tools and equipment used while playing table-top RPGs" and "Techniques for running or playing RPGs". I do not wish to start a flame war, I am just confused...

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Although I will note the artwork question has also been closed. \$\endgroup\$ – mxyzplk says reinstate Monica Jul 23 '11 at 22:43
  • \$\begingroup\$ It was not closed for a long time... Anyway, it is moot now. \$\endgroup\$ – Sardathrion - Reinstate Monica Jul 26 '11 at 9:07
6
\$\begingroup\$

My problems with the sound effect library question:

Due Diligence and standing.

Due Diligence: you've given no evidence that you haven't done a trivial google search for sound effects.

Standing: Your question is: "Where can I find a sound library?" for a bunch of generic sounds. While these are certainly related to RPGs, they're in no way restricted to RPGs, nor inform the design of an adventure. One test for sounding: Is this just as valid on another SE site, like sci-fi? (Yes: you are asking for fantasy sounds, this is just as valid on sci-fi, therefore it lacks standing)

The artwork question is a significantly harder question in terms of due diligence, and since he's looking to structure adventures around it, has RPG standing. To be fair, I'm not especially happy with the artwork question either, but I didn't see it.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ also perhaps relevant, proper scoping of questions: i.stack.imgur.com/BngZk.png \$\endgroup\$ – Jeff Atwood Jul 20 '11 at 15:58
  • \$\begingroup\$ @JeffAtwood Thanks, that's a great image! \$\endgroup\$ – C. Ross Jul 20 '11 at 20:55
3
\$\begingroup\$

I think the question linked is on topic - but way too broad. "I want links to all kind of sound libraries! With raindrops and gunshots and whatnot!" I have closed it on those grounds.

\$\endgroup\$
-1
\$\begingroup\$

I reopened the question because I strongly disagree it is overly broad. It about a specific technique used into tabletop gaming. The answers would be very useful to somebody coming onto this site for the first time. Particularly as a google search would turn up thousands of of hits on sound effect libraries. Here the answer would be given from a gamer's perspective.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ I realize I am not overly active however it is not because I don't follow the site. It is because 95% of the issues are handled by the time I do see them and I don't disagree with action. Given my opinion and the fact there was one reopen vote at the time, I felt reopening the question was the right thing to do. \$\endgroup\$ – RS Conley Jul 21 '11 at 4:51
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ What I would personally like to see out of both of these questions (and, from the comments, what I think others would as well), is for the question to be rephrased in a way that encourages answers beyond the recommendations. Perhaps something as simple as "How can I put together a soundtrack for <mood>" would do it... \$\endgroup\$ – AceCalhoon Jul 21 '11 at 15:05
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ RSConley I believe this question falls into the section of the FAQ that says avoid asking subjective questions where: every answer is equally valid: “What’s your favorite ______?”. Almost any sound effect library you want to list would have been a valid answer to the original question, and voting would have simply been on preference. @AceCalhoon's edit is significantly better, and arguably a different question altogether. \$\endgroup\$ – C. Ross Jul 22 '11 at 12:12
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ The FAQ recommendation is a useful starting point. In this case I disagree it applies. It is a gamer asking other gamers asking which sound libraries are out there to use while running a tabletop session. By it's nature it is a broad question. A person taking time to answer will point out libraries that are particularly useful to gaming. In addition yes the question could have been edited better but I strongly disagree that it should be closed. It is not obvious to the average user of this site which of the multitude of sound libraries on a google search is the most useful to rpgs. \$\endgroup\$ – RS Conley Jul 22 '11 at 13:46
  • \$\begingroup\$ @RSConley For my part, it isn't that the question is broad (I think that can be fine) as it is that questions of this type consistently produce very shallow answers. The top-voted answer on the linked images thread for example, is just a list of popular image sites. \$\endgroup\$ – AceCalhoon Jul 22 '11 at 14:42
-1
\$\begingroup\$

I have a suggestion. Rather than closing questions that are on the edge, why not tag them? We could have a standard set of Objections then people that don't like specific sorts of questions could just ignore them. That way those that dislike specific sort of questions will know to stear clear and the management have made there point but can allow others that disagree to still make a contribution to controversial subjects. We could also use the down vote system, if a large number of people are prepared to down vote and the total gets to -10 then may be a question should be closed.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Well, the down-vote system is basically a harsher version of what we have now. What we have now triggers on accumulated close-votes rather than down-votes... So the main difference is that if we switched to down-votes having a question closed would be a big rep-hit. Mods DO short-circuit the system, but I don't really see that changing with a change in system. \$\endgroup\$ – AceCalhoon Jul 22 '11 at 13:15
  • \$\begingroup\$ As to the "objections" tags... It's an interesting idea, but we'd need programming support from the main SE team. If we tried to implement it ourselves, the Objections tags would be on for all users by default... Meaning anyone who wasn't a hardcore user (e.g. new users) would see the worst possible version of the site. \$\endgroup\$ – AceCalhoon Jul 22 '11 at 13:18
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @AceCalhoon: not sure I agree with your last point, it seams that hardcore users are the ones that complain the most about new users posting what they think are off topic questions, not the other-way around. \$\endgroup\$ – David Allan Finch Jul 22 '11 at 15:01
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @AceCalhoon: I thought the point of the down vote system was, if you care enough to down vote you take the hit, unless you get to the point where one or two point don't matter any more and now you can do it for free. May be close and open votes should cost. \$\endgroup\$ – David Allan Finch Jul 22 '11 at 15:03
  • \$\begingroup\$ The downvote penalty I was referring to was for the person asking the question. Under your system, anyone whose question was closed would also be taking a -20 rep hit. \$\endgroup\$ – AceCalhoon Jul 22 '11 at 15:08
  • \$\begingroup\$ And yes, it is the hardcore who analyze and complain. And often new users who post poor questions. That is the way of things. But people react to the content of the site regardless of whether or not they actively analyze and discuss it. I would posit that the site is more interesting when it focuses on questions that require either factual or detailed answers, and less interesting when it is flooded with lists of the best image galleries on the 'net. \$\endgroup\$ – AceCalhoon Jul 22 '11 at 15:11
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ I would say that the site is less interesting to newbie is it is seen to be unfriendly. There needs to be a better solution to this. May be probation questions where the can be helped? Closed for Improvement! \$\endgroup\$ – David Allan Finch Jul 27 '11 at 7:35
  • \$\begingroup\$ Agreed! Editing to improve questions is something we should be thinking of more often. But that runs into man power issues (number of people willing to improve questions). \$\endgroup\$ – AceCalhoon Jul 27 '11 at 12:55
  • \$\begingroup\$ We already have an objections system: close votes. And a "closed for improvements" policy is already the norm. \$\endgroup\$ – SevenSidedDie Aug 25 '11 at 5:07
  • \$\begingroup\$ If the /Close/ was a /Closed for Improvements/ then I would agree with you but it does not say that it says /Closed/. It says we did not like your question, we have closed it. \$\endgroup\$ – David Allan Finch Aug 25 '11 at 8:48

You must log in to answer this question.

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