-2
$\begingroup$

Since it is possible here to present puzzles, which you know the solution to, as chellenge for others quality standards must be changed, because not it is impossible to post short puzzle conditions. The following massage appears:

This question body does not meet our quality standards. Please make sure that it completely describes your problem - including what you have already tried - and is written using proper grammar.

This has no sense for challenge-question.


Since the other question, about slightly different, but much more important for me aspect, was closed as duplicate I add second part to this question:

  1. Please see highlighted phrases above. They disagree with each other. Will you do something about this disagreement? If not, how I must interpret it?

  2. How should puzzles, which I know solution to and are challenge for other, be presented here? What is format?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ If you're complaining about a question you tried to post, include the exact question body here. $\endgroup$ – Gilles Jun 14 '14 at 13:32
4
$\begingroup$

No. A good question should have at least (emphasis on "at least"):

  • Information about the puzzle for people who don't know about this puzzle or puzzle genre
  • A description of the puzzle
  • A full definition of the puzzle's restrictions, conditions, and specification
  • Criteria for a valid solution
  • What you have tried already to find a solution (research, etc.)
  • Proper spelling, grammar, punctuation, capitalization, etc.

"Puzzle dump" questions that are essentially

I have this puzzle:

<image or copy/pasted paragraph>

How do I solve it?

are very low quality and should not be posted until enough detail is added.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I don't understand. Doesn't this site imply that puzzles here can be posted as a challenge to others? What is a point to say what I did to solve a puzzle if I solved it and others to have fun doing this? $\endgroup$ – klm123 Jun 14 '14 at 14:12
  • $\begingroup$ @klm123 As in posting a puzzle you already know the answer to? In that case, I suppose that item would not be applicable, but it's still no excuse to post a low-quality puzzle dump. $\endgroup$ – Doorknob Jun 14 '14 at 14:15
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes. And I am asking Exactly about This case and Only about it (see the question). And I would like to get an answer to this very confusing moment, but you do not give it here and closed the other related question: meta.puzzling.stackexchange.com/questions/1278/… $\endgroup$ – klm123 Jun 14 '14 at 14:18
  • $\begingroup$ @klm123 The other question has essentially the same answer as this one. Just because you already know the answer isn't an excuse to dump a puzzle with no further description or explanation. $\endgroup$ – Doorknob Jun 14 '14 at 14:20
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ ok, but I do not see the answer in your answer and comments. They do not explain mentioned disagreement (see highlighted phrase in my question), but completely ignore it. $\endgroup$ – klm123 Jun 14 '14 at 14:24
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @klm123 Again, if you already know the answer, what you have already tried would not apply, but you still have to post a high-quality question. $\endgroup$ – Doorknob Jun 14 '14 at 14:27
0
$\begingroup$

I strongly disagree. If the puzzle you're posting is so short that it gets automatically rejected, then I'm sure it's severely underspecified, and very likely to be an off-topic riddle. Not to mention that the question should generally explain how you tried to solve the puzzle.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

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