23

That's Unfriendly and Unhelpful We come here to solve problems. We give answers to questions that include explanations or backing. When a homebrewer asks a review question, it is implicit that 'is it balanced' should not be answered by a mere 'yes/no', but also have the reasoning for why something is or isn't OK. A generic answer by definition doesn't ...


18

Community Wiki seems pointless. After reading through the history of CW on RPG.SE, and the blog post about CW, it seems like there really isn't much use for Community Wiki here. The main arguments that I have for this actually come straight from that blog post: If a question is valuable enough that you believe it belongs on the site, chances are you don'...


15

I think this might be a good use of a single-answer Community Wiki, as the list would be relatively stable and wouldn't change simply by a drive-by reader's opinion, and would only need to be updated when new material is released. Having it be a CW would make it easier for low-rep users to do that updating, and also give a stronger signal that anonymous ...


15

Looking over the comments and replies and etcetera, I'm going to say go for it on a trial basis. It sounds like you have enough familiarity with the format that inexperience isn't actually an issue we need to worry about, so it will come down to nuance in how it's done rather than clumsy inappropriateness like a new user might do. To judge nuance, it's ...


13

I think we'd be open to specific designated "fun" questions as long as people don't suddenly open others and flood us with low qual questions. We could do something like this as part of a specific initiative. How would you propose a charsheet show-off to work, just posting an image of the sheet (probably with a max size, so one person's 6 page char sheet ...


12

I agree totally with DuckTapeAl's proposals. CW's just about pointless for questions and answers, shouldn't be used, and CW material should be held to the same standards as anything else. However, CW-ing answers is available, so I'd like to provide some guidance on where it might actually have some relevance. Answers should nearly always not use Community ...


10

I'm kinda ambivalent about this one. I'm not sure this thread really represents a direct analogy to the Tex.SE "fun" threads. My understanding is that the Tex.SE showcase threads are, in part, about teaching. Each of the answers is implicitly saying "Here is a cool trick I know," or "Let me teach you about writing elegant code." That makes them potentially ...


10

Ideally, you mark the answer that you used to solve your problem as the accepted answer. So, suppose you get three answers: An answer that's correct, but just doesn't work for you. An answer that's less general, but which you ultimately use to solve your problem. An answer that looks good, but you never got around to trying (because the problem's already ...


8

No, resource questions—that aren't inherently too broad—should be normal, non-CW questions and their answers should almost always be normal, non-CW answers. We're actually okay with lists—so long as they are closed lists of reasonable length, such that one expert user could compile an answer that will stay good for a long time. The Amn question is a good ...


6

Personally, I've soured on CW answers after my brief dalliance with them. I'd be more interested in seeing you assemble the parts into one comprehensive answer, with attribution liberally sprinkled about. Nobody's likely to accuse a top-20 name in the reputation league of trying to pad their stats, and they'd be wrong if they did. I don't think either way's ...


5

At this point, the mods' position is that we'll review old CW posts as they come to our attention (which usually means "make the front page"). None of us have the time or interest to go through the full backlog of CW posts. So what does happen when we become aware of one of these legacy posts? I generally look at a few criteria before deciding whether or ...


5

If the questions you have in mind are legitimate, answerable questions that meet the standards of any other question on the site, then go for it. I would recommend moving slowly. As @Brian noted in a comment, you don't want to annoy people by flooding the front page. I would caution against using Community Wiki's ... they tend to congregate around ...


5

I think a small number of questions of this type, reasonably curated, is beneficial. What is the benefit of having them here rather than somewhere else: Build Community. We want out people on this site, thinking about each other, and as a group. Knowing what cool things people have done, helps build a sense of community. Attract Experts. We want ...


4

Upon further thinking... This really does not solve the inherent problem. ... And the solution (which keeps them as a single question) requires code changes. The real problem is two-fold: the querent is allowed the pick a top answer that will live on in perpetuity, and you cannot down-vote an answer you have already up voted, unless it's been edited. ...


3

I really liked this idea. We are here for our hobbies, so why not show what we have done for our hobbies on our tabbles? Also, after I looked at that Ars Magica character sheet, I became really curious about the system. While advertising is not the focus, a topic like this one could spark our curiosity to try new systems and taste a bit of new things. I ...


2

Well, I'm torn on this one. On the one hand, "question seeding" is usually not good - that is, asking a question you don't really want the answer to. But this seems like a generally good use. It should properly be Q/A, Q/A however, which concerns me about how many questions this faq consists of. If you actually linked it we'd be able to better guide you.


2

I think there are some exploratory "list" questions that are a good fit. There's "laundry" lists, which are just long lists of simple game names or whatever. Then there's design exploration questions like Brian's Useful mental frameworks during character creation seem like perfectly good content for the site. Design exploration falls under "by experts for ...


2

Well, so let's see. I understand Pat's action. I haven't closed a lot of the old ones I run across, mainly when they are a legitimate question that was CW-ed because people were CW-happy back in the day and you can't un-CW a question. I don't think we should close an existing one (and likely open a new one) in that case - may as well have the legit ...


2

I think it's off topic due to not having a best answer.


2

Maybe. This provides a solution to a problem, but comes very close to ticking on very bad box: Unilateral conversion of posts to community wikis. This is immensely unpopular, and for a good reason - it strips users of whatever fake internet points they earned. Unilateral conversion can make users hesitant to answer these types of questions on the basis ...


1

I agree this seems like a decent use case for Community Wiki. I'd also like to see a comprehensive answer that's verifiable and not just "maybe it's this?". I've posted a Community Wiki answer with numbering: https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/120494/1204 Thanks to a later edit by TDW, #2 is the only one left without a conclusive answer. If anyone knows for ...


1

It appears this question was quietly closed and locked some time ago. Did the opinion on whether or not this was an appropriate question change somewhere along the line?


1

I'd like to answer your question with another question: Is answering questions about the current state of transient things in line with this site's intended purpose and function? I say it isn't. After all, "We don't want the information on our site to become obsolete, and so we try not to ask questions whose answers may change with time." Questions about ...


1

Attempting to generalize from one action taken isn't wise. That said, any CW question that ends up on the front page is far more likely to receive scrutiny to see if it currently matches the StackExchange community standards and our FAQ. Just because a question was acceptable a year ago does not mean that it continues to be so. The StackExchange platform ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible