I don't understand Stack Overflow, but the weird negativity over there certainly keeps me from asking or answering questions there or at most of the stack exchange sites.
And i find the "Not Constructive" to be exactly that.
Yes, it can be annoying when a question is closed and you really wanted to discuss it, but the rules are quite clear on what is and is not classified as "Not Constructive", and the discussion should just move to some of the discussion threads instead.
And i don't know what you interpret as negativity? I have never seen unfair or non-objective use of moderator functions?
However, I'd just like to add that I've seen lots of abusive language and misuse of powers to close/put on hold. Flagging of unnecessarily negative/harsh language is not in general followed up, which basically means that it is encouraged.
There's certainly questions on SO that should be moderated away, and WP articles that should be deleted. But there's so many of both kinds that are obviously genuinely good one has to wonder at the motivations of the people closing them.
So you're saying that every question ever closed that you have seen, should not have been closed? Then I think SO's moderators and users are not the problem.
It depends a while lot on your search skills I guess.
Here's the list:
With 822,000 page views, I guess it wasn't hard to get 5 votes to close it.
1. Too broad - There are either too many possible answers, or good answers would be too long for this format. Please add details to narrow the answer set or to isolate an issue that can be answered in a few paragraphs.
2. primarily opinion-based - Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise.
These two close reasons capture the essence of what "Not Constructive" was meant to be, and are both much clearer to boot.
(Disclosure: I'm a diamond moderator on Stack Overflow: http://meta.stackoverflow.com/users/16587/george-stocker )
Yes, we know. Even the SE site created with such questions in mind was screwed over by Atwood's unilateral meddling.
You've mistaken disagreement for ignorance.
* it doesn't get answered
* it gets closed pretty quickly (and usually in an offputting insulting manner)
* it gets changed(!) and a question I didn't ask gets answered
Generally speaking if I'm going to take the time to write a question on SO it's because I can not find the answer already, only to have that question not answered, or worse edited beyond the questions original intent.
Whether your question is closed by a diamond moderator, or by the community, it can be re-opened with five community votes (or another moderator stepping in an re-opening it, which happens).
If your question is deleted by the community, it can be undeleted by the community. The only time a question cannot be undeleted by the community is when it's deleted by a moderator.
There's a difference between moderators, and community moderation. I see people using the word 'moderator' when they mean that five members of the community closed their question, and this isn't really correct (it makes it seem like a band of 12 people runs Stack Overflow, which is the furthest thing from the truth).
In your particular case, if you improve your question to address why it was closed, it will automatically be placed into the review queue to be re-opened. If five members of the community agree, it will be re-opened. If it still doesn't get re-opened, you can always open a meta question about it ( http://meta.stackoverflow.com ).
I wanted to address this because it's incorrect to say, "When a moderator closes a topic, it stays closed." That's just not the case.
If you link me to the question, I'll be happy to take a look at it and re-open it if it should be re-opened.
"Questions asking us to recommend or find a tool, library or favorite off-site resource
are off-topic for Stack Overflow as they tend to attract
opinionated answers and spam. Instead, describe the problem
and what has been done so far to solve it." – George Stocker
But doesn't that illustrate the problem enough? You don't see the history, mod's actions are unknown now. I agree that it can be closed according to the current rules. I was talking only about the deletion.
Companies can either choose to let the community go in whichever direction they want or they can step in and shepherd the community in the direction they want the business to go in.
Apple does this when pick the kind of apps they'll allow in their store, Stack does this with the kind of questions they allow and Etsy does this with the kind of items they allow to be sold.
Allowing the community to follow a natural path isn't without risk, especially as it's often the people at the edge of the community who end up driving the overall community.
For example look at how having at how adoption of Loopt in the gay pickup community affected it's ability to grow as a more general purpose social network or more recently the impact the Indian population is having on Quora.
I stopped seeding after politcorrectness nazis were chasing me because of swear word I used (shouldn't be too much to ask for - Microsoft has done much worse to me). now I'm just a leech there.