We’re rewarding the question askers & reputations are being recalculated! Read more.
11

I liked the answer by @EmilioPisanty but I wanted to simplify the language a little bit (after all, there are a lot of non-native speakers and younger people active on the site) and clarify the last sentence. I used this tool to "optimise" the readability of the text. Homework-like questions and check-my-work questions are considered off-topic on this ...


8

Our homework policy is mostly about asking homework-like questions, but there is a policy for how to answer them as well near the end of it: Why don't you provide a complete answer to homework questions? This is pretty well covered by a discussion on the Math Stack Exchange site. Providing an answer that doesn't help a student learn is ...


7

My personal opinion is that questions of the style "can you disprove this" or "Can you construct an example (or counterexample) of this or that" are actually open ended bait questions that are asking to start a debate and an argument rather than solicit an answer. I highly dislike this kind of question. I do not know if I downvoted any of yours (I probably ...


6

In general, it's highly discouraged to post the same question on multiple sites. But when people say that, they're usually talking about copying and pasting the same question from one site to the other. If you edit the question and adapt it to each site, then it might be okay. It would be even better if you focus each version of the question on what another ...


6

I think the main effect by which the HNQ questions harm our site is completely disconnected from their quality: They drown out smaller topics, and they favour questions with non-technical answers. Their topics are either classical/quantum mechanics at (at most) undergraduate level, questions about everyday life situations or something some pop-science ...


6

Whatever our opinion, it should be based on actual data, i.e., on the full set of questions from this site that get promoted on the HNQ sidebar. Luckily, the update to the HNQ mechanisms from March of this year finally (after years of asking for it) allowed us to track what does and does not get on that sidebar, exposing this aspect of question history both ...


5

Only the person who downvoted knows why they did so. There's no way of knowing their reason unless they choose to reveal it. (Note that technically, even if someone claims to be the downvoter, it is possible they could be lying.) I don't see anything about your answer that sticks out as a likely reason for it being downvoted. Perhaps someone thought it wasn'...


5

There is no reason to expect the same question to get the same reaction in two different Stack Exchange sites. Different sites have different members with different ideas about what makes a suitable question for their particular site. Upvoting and downvoting on SE is inherently subjective, not objective, by design. This is a feature, not a bug. Unless ...


4

history is not a defunct tag. History questions that require physical expertise to answer are still on-topic here, cf. the FAQ answer on this topic. That most of these questions are now also on-topic on another SE site is immaterial, since there is no requirement that any given question must be on-topic only on exactly one SE site.


4

I don't think there is much you can do beyond what you have discussed and what is already in place. You just have to trust the users looking at the question to be responsible to look for duplicates first (this one is hard to trust at times), give good answers, vote appropriately, and go through the close vote queues to agree on duplicate votes already cast. ...


3

As mentioned in the comments, this has already been explored in the Meta Stack Exchange. There already is a site that incorporates the bulk of what you're proposing, and ─ as you just found out ─ the MSE suggestion that your site proposal would get closed as a duplicate of the existing Earth Science site was dead accurate. You might want to argue that the ...


3

Phys.SE has a central/primary Book recommendations, although it is currently closed and locked. The reason for the latter is partly because maintenance takes a lot of time. Currently Phys.SE has also more than 1500 secondary res. recom. qs. Online resources are viewed as part of res. recommendations, cf. its tag wiki. However, Phys.SE usually does not ...


3

I see when somebody dislikes any, it is straightforwardly downvoted − probably by somebody else. The diamond moderators have some tools to look at voting patterns, and it doesn't seem like there are any users who are specifically targeting you with up- or down-votes. It's much more labor-intensive to look into the timing of votes, so I haven't done that, ...


2

I have seen that many of your answer either homework type, or similar to this, which should be avoided, secondly if someone has down voted your answer, ask gently the reason for down voting, it not improves question quality, but their also increase the knowledge. I think you are not serially down voted.


2

Yes, as user David Z said, voting identity is kept private. Only the user who has voted does know the reason. Moreover as users downvote an answer, each vote costs the down-voter $1$ reputation point so that they don't do that just for fun or revenge. We should really down-vote only when the answer is very unclear or incorrect or both and mention the ...


2

I would also like to eliminate the word “homework” from the name of the policy as it creates an unnecessary emphasis on how you came to the question rather than the intrinsics of the question. I also think that you should give some understanding of why in this sort of policy. Here is a 486-character rephrasing that illustrates what I would find preferable: ...


1

To leave comments anonymously, choose a pseudonym for your display name. (As you have figured out, I think: I assume your display name is a reference to the famous Ramanujan, rather than your own name.) Requirements that comments must accompany votes have been proposed and rejected numerous times network-wide.


1

I think the answer supplied by David Z is a great way to proceed. IMHO I don't think this surface area question belongs on Physics SE as it stands though. I think it belongs on Engineering SE. It would be more suited for Physics SE if it asked about what many people are debating in the comments and in the answers, which is how "fractal-like" a stone really ...


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