1
$\begingroup$

I have meta meta question.

There are a lot of questions on meta like "Is it allowed to do BlaBla?", which have answers.

What one should do with them? If one persons says "allowed" and gets 10 votes, another "not allowed" and gets 9 votes, another "allowed with next conditions ..." and gets 8 votes, another "allowed with next, next and next conditions ..." and gets 2 votes. What should the used do with all this answers? Can he do BlaBla or he cann't?

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

I'm not sure there's a good way to answer this question, beyond "the community decides via the voting process."

Whenever issues like these arise and someone asks on Meta, typically there either is or is not enough information to come to a consensus. If there is, one answer will stand out: the one which leads to consensus.

If there isn't, two things can happen. If people don't feel they understand the issue well enough, then what I've seen is that the answers don't accrue many votes. If people feel strongly about it, sometimes what you're saying can happen (though I have yet to see it on Puzzling, and even then it generally doesn't happen).

In both these situations, contentious questions like these are important. Especially during beta, we want questions which are, well, questionable: they allow us to gather the information we need to refine the site scope.

For instance, Doorknob and I had a decently-sized conversation yesterday about adding a new close reason for abstract challenges. Many questions had previously been asked on Meta, most of which had a good number of votes, but no conclusive answer. At the time, there wasn't enough information to determine what we should do - but suddenly, there was. These contentious questions help us and others gain a better sense of what the community wants as a whole.

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ Can I summarise it as "The answers on meta are not rules, they just Help user to predict the reaction of other people on their questions on the main site. But user never can be sure."? $\endgroup$
    – klm123
    Jun 8 '14 at 13:57
  • $\begingroup$ @klm Not quite - until it's consensus, effectively yes, but at some point it either is or is not on-topic. I like to think about it in terms of the state of the community - we either agree or not, and it's up to voting to show that. $\endgroup$
    – user20
    Jun 8 '14 at 14:31
  • $\begingroup$ How do you draw the line between consensus and not consensus? What is objective definition of the consensus in meta-question? $\endgroup$
    – klm123
    Jun 8 '14 at 14:35
  • $\begingroup$ @klm Voting is our main feedback, both with close votes and meta votes. Precedent is what makes it consensus. $\endgroup$
    – user20
    Jun 8 '14 at 14:38
  • $\begingroup$ No, I mean, how can different people (newcomers) understand whether it is consensus or not in the exactly same way as others do? $\endgroup$
    – klm123
    Jun 8 '14 at 14:48
  • $\begingroup$ @klm That's a harder question to answer. In cases which fall out of the site scope, we can put questions on hold - that is our primary feedback in these cases. Though, to be honest, I don't see that happening too often. We want to stay intuitive: "is it a puzzle? Okay, it's on topic" - but there will be edge cases, and that's what close votes and comments are for. $\endgroup$
    – user20
    Jun 8 '14 at 14:50

You must log in to answer this question.

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