Skip to main content
Hardware Recommendations Meta

Return to Answer

replaced http://hardwarerecs.stackexchange.com/ with https://hardwarerecs.stackexchange.com/
Source Link
Community Bot
Community Bot
  • 1

I agree, that the community should be the ones casting close/reopen votes themselves: it's a community-driven site after all. However, I want to throw a couple arguments that I think are important, and missing. Here are some examples:

Hardware Recommendations is for... Recommendations.

I think the main reasons why these questions have been closed is because they don't explicitly ask for a recommendation. Instead, they really seem to be asking whether a certain feature or component of hardware is worth having. This is arguably not a recommendation: the community can't recommend a product.

But isn't this implicit?

I would like to believe that it is. My question, which is the first mentioned above in the examples, isn't explicit asking the community to recommend a processor. However, I think that it more asks the community to recommend why I should have a processor. I stand on the argument that although the community doesn't recommend a hardware product, it recommends for/against the use of a specific feature that is specific to a hardware product.

Should these "implicit questions" be allowed if they don't ask for a product?

Quite personally, I'm not sure where I stand on this issue in particular. I feel like questions can assist askers to determine the nit-bits of a product that they want. For example:

Should I find a fridge to keep things cold? Of course you should!
What's a good fridge to keep things cold? There's this and that fridge!

I can see these "smaller" questions becoming excellent questions in the end, when the author has full information on what they want.

Aren't we making Software Recs a model here?

I think this is another important issue to consider here, that is potentially extremely relevant to this situation. I'm not active on Software Recs, so I don't want to make a definitive argument here, but I feel that we made be trying to hard to make a near exact replica of the SR model. This is good and all, but it's like this site should be closed as an "exact duplicate", if you catch my drift. If the reason why the "implicit recommendation" questions are closed, then is it a result of the SR scope? Like I said, I'm not trying to discourage any efforts, but I think this is a valid point to consider when looking for barriers in the community-determined scope.

I agree, that the community should be the ones casting close/reopen votes themselves: it's a community-driven site after all. However, I want to throw a couple arguments that I think are important, and missing. Here are some examples:

Hardware Recommendations is for... Recommendations.

I think the main reasons why these questions have been closed is because they don't explicitly ask for a recommendation. Instead, they really seem to be asking whether a certain feature or component of hardware is worth having. This is arguably not a recommendation: the community can't recommend a product.

But isn't this implicit?

I would like to believe that it is. My question, which is the first mentioned above in the examples, isn't explicit asking the community to recommend a processor. However, I think that it more asks the community to recommend why I should have a processor. I stand on the argument that although the community doesn't recommend a hardware product, it recommends for/against the use of a specific feature that is specific to a hardware product.

Should these "implicit questions" be allowed if they don't ask for a product?

Quite personally, I'm not sure where I stand on this issue in particular. I feel like questions can assist askers to determine the nit-bits of a product that they want. For example:

Should I find a fridge to keep things cold? Of course you should!
What's a good fridge to keep things cold? There's this and that fridge!

I can see these "smaller" questions becoming excellent questions in the end, when the author has full information on what they want.

Aren't we making Software Recs a model here?

I think this is another important issue to consider here, that is potentially extremely relevant to this situation. I'm not active on Software Recs, so I don't want to make a definitive argument here, but I feel that we made be trying to hard to make a near exact replica of the SR model. This is good and all, but it's like this site should be closed as an "exact duplicate", if you catch my drift. If the reason why the "implicit recommendation" questions are closed, then is it a result of the SR scope? Like I said, I'm not trying to discourage any efforts, but I think this is a valid point to consider when looking for barriers in the community-determined scope.

I agree, that the community should be the ones casting close/reopen votes themselves: it's a community-driven site after all. However, I want to throw a couple arguments that I think are important, and missing. Here are some examples:

Hardware Recommendations is for... Recommendations.

I think the main reasons why these questions have been closed is because they don't explicitly ask for a recommendation. Instead, they really seem to be asking whether a certain feature or component of hardware is worth having. This is arguably not a recommendation: the community can't recommend a product.

But isn't this implicit?

I would like to believe that it is. My question, which is the first mentioned above in the examples, isn't explicit asking the community to recommend a processor. However, I think that it more asks the community to recommend why I should have a processor. I stand on the argument that although the community doesn't recommend a hardware product, it recommends for/against the use of a specific feature that is specific to a hardware product.

Should these "implicit questions" be allowed if they don't ask for a product?

Quite personally, I'm not sure where I stand on this issue in particular. I feel like questions can assist askers to determine the nit-bits of a product that they want. For example:

Should I find a fridge to keep things cold? Of course you should!
What's a good fridge to keep things cold? There's this and that fridge!

I can see these "smaller" questions becoming excellent questions in the end, when the author has full information on what they want.

Aren't we making Software Recs a model here?

I think this is another important issue to consider here, that is potentially extremely relevant to this situation. I'm not active on Software Recs, so I don't want to make a definitive argument here, but I feel that we made be trying to hard to make a near exact replica of the SR model. This is good and all, but it's like this site should be closed as an "exact duplicate", if you catch my drift. If the reason why the "implicit recommendation" questions are closed, then is it a result of the SR scope? Like I said, I'm not trying to discourage any efforts, but I think this is a valid point to consider when looking for barriers in the community-determined scope.

Source Link
Zizouz212
Zizouz212
  • 876
  • 4
  • 10

I agree, that the community should be the ones casting close/reopen votes themselves: it's a community-driven site after all. However, I want to throw a couple arguments that I think are important, and missing. Here are some examples:

Hardware Recommendations is for... Recommendations.

I think the main reasons why these questions have been closed is because they don't explicitly ask for a recommendation. Instead, they really seem to be asking whether a certain feature or component of hardware is worth having. This is arguably not a recommendation: the community can't recommend a product.

But isn't this implicit?

I would like to believe that it is. My question, which is the first mentioned above in the examples, isn't explicit asking the community to recommend a processor. However, I think that it more asks the community to recommend why I should have a processor. I stand on the argument that although the community doesn't recommend a hardware product, it recommends for/against the use of a specific feature that is specific to a hardware product.

Should these "implicit questions" be allowed if they don't ask for a product?

Quite personally, I'm not sure where I stand on this issue in particular. I feel like questions can assist askers to determine the nit-bits of a product that they want. For example:

Should I find a fridge to keep things cold? Of course you should!
What's a good fridge to keep things cold? There's this and that fridge!

I can see these "smaller" questions becoming excellent questions in the end, when the author has full information on what they want.

Aren't we making Software Recs a model here?

I think this is another important issue to consider here, that is potentially extremely relevant to this situation. I'm not active on Software Recs, so I don't want to make a definitive argument here, but I feel that we made be trying to hard to make a near exact replica of the SR model. This is good and all, but it's like this site should be closed as an "exact duplicate", if you catch my drift. If the reason why the "implicit recommendation" questions are closed, then is it a result of the SR scope? Like I said, I'm not trying to discourage any efforts, but I think this is a valid point to consider when looking for barriers in the community-determined scope.