8

My understanding of the Jargon policy is that the answers are to the level of the question. Complex "insider-baseball" questions get quite tedious to answer in the Queen's English. But if the level of the question is one coming from someone who just isn't up to the technical terms, I try my best to translate everything, communicate using English idioms and ...


8

All 8 of your recent answers are to questions from the same one user. That user has nearly 20,000 reputation, yet his average answer score is negative and his average question score is barely over 1. This does indicate that one can post mediocre or worse content (as defined by post score) and still wind up with lots of reputation by churning out enough ...


7

This is a good issue to raise, and I think there is a simple approach to deal with the problem: All questions and answers should ideally be as good as possible. Whether a question is old or new is not so relevant. If you see a post that is deficient, you can do any of the following: Downvote it Leave a comment expressing the problems Edit it to improve it ...


6

I am under the impression that the question title is supposed to be a summary, and the question body is supposed to be a complete question. I can't now find evidence on Meta.SE of a formal guideline to this effect, but I would like to see us (continue to) operate under this guideline, editing as necessary to fix questions that don't contain all the ...


6

I think that this change was made for an other type of site, not for Mi Yodeya. I can easily understand that in a professional site as StackOverflow, a good question is easily defined. For a community of developers, a good question is not somewhat easy to ask, not somewhat based on a lack of knowledge, somewhat based on false premises. A good question can ...


5

Reputation is gained by participation in the site, and to a lesser extent, by quality of posts. The reputation system gives more reputation for better answers. But if a significant minority who choose to vote find a user's questions to be good (>1 upvoter for every 5 downvoters), there will be a net gain in reputation, and it will only increase with volume ...


5

I agree with Monica Cellio's answer In addition, I agree with msh210 in the question that "a written work [should] be self-contained (to the extent possible) and not dependent on its title, of all things." I find that whenever I encounter a question post whose body, for whatever reason, doesn't clearly express what question it's asking, my brain has to do ...


4

Sometimes what's Googlable for one person isn't for another: the person doesn't know what to search for. Sometimes the answer is Googlable, but there is misinformation on the 'Net (or the asker may think there is) and the asker doesn't know what's Judaism-sourced and what's not. Those are both sufficient reasons to ask on-site, I think. If the question ...


3

Yes. In my opinion, pretty much all non-fiction writing, including here, should follow my academic mentor's response when he was asked how long he was expecting papers with for his classes to be: just long enough to clearly and completely respond to the assignment's requirements. The FAQ links in msh210's answer provide general "requirements" for good ...


3

This is just my opinion, not any kind of official statement. There are a number of factors that go into a good post. Some of these are delineated at https://judaism.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-ask and https://judaism.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic and https://judaism.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-answer. Some others, here on Meta, are linked to from ...


3

Am I required to cite my sources? Sources are extremely important in Judaism, as (almost) every Halacha or Minhag (custom) has a clear source. Judaism places sources and tradition in very high regard; our Sages teach (Avos 6:6), "One who says something in the name of the one who said it brings redemption to the world." When are sources absolutely required ...


3

If you can improve a question without invalidating it, please do. Questions are more visible than answers; a well-asked question benefits everyone. Adding specific sources to replace "I heard somewhere" and clarifying jargon are especially helpful. In some cases, doing this would break the question -- the question asks for a source or an explanation of a ...


2

If you still can't provide any sources whatsoever for your answer, you should still post so long as you can provide some substance (not just a one-liner). You should acknowledge the lack of sources, and if you intend to add them within a reasonable amount of time (say a day), you should say that, but if you're planning to add them "when you get around to it,"...


2

I think that just asking nicely does the trick. As you did most recently to this question. i usually do take the time out to translate and use jargon which is "shaveh lechol nefesh" - common to all, but sometimes its just too difficult. But because you prodded me nicely, I took the time out to do so. Maybe in the question add in italics and bold in the ...


1

I think that without motivation, the question is unclear, and i also tend to downvote stuff like that. It's unclear, because we can't be expected to know why you think a source might say that. It's not even too hard to make it an acceptable question: Just say: "I read here that xyz says abc. Where does xyz say that?"


1

Perhaps we should encourage downvoting answers that don't translate jargon with a comment saying we are downvoting for that reason, and then once the jargon has been translated, we remove our downvotes? We would have to do this even in cases where the OP doesn't ask for jargon assistance, because we want to encourage everyone to translate at all times, ...


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