6 ms·

No... Just answer the question. You’re not there to babysit the question asker or convince them to change their approach/hair style/choice of library. I know

No... Just answer the question. You’re not there to babysit the question asker or convince them to change their approach/hair style/choice of library. I know it’s frustrating to see people doing something wrong, or that you don’t agree with, but you know what you can do? Just... don’t get involved if you can’t answer the actual question that was asked, and if it’s a bad question, let it die a natural death.

dirkt 7y ago
If Y actually has an answer - but often enough Y is so convoluted that it just won't work. Asking the poster about X, and offering a solution Y' which will solve X should at least be attempted. If the poster insists on Y, then he'll also have to accept the answer "sorry, you can't do it that way, for the following reasons".
- rusk 7y ago
  Yeah, I know that this is the rationale for the rule ... but it really has become an excuse to close a question as duplicate just because one of the X solutions might "in theory" solve your problem, even if they don't. Even if you've stipulated in your question why, because you've anticipated all those alternative answers yourself, already.
- wokwokwok 7y ago
  > Asking the poster about X, and offering a solution Y' which will solve X should at least be attempted. No! Goodness me, why is this so difficult? It should not be attempted. That’s an arbitrary expression of your opinion on the poster. If the question can’t be solved in the way it’s asked let it die gracefully with a “no you can’t do it that why” and suck up the down votes when someone comes along and proves yes you actually can. I know it’s frustrating for you, but asking a question isn’t about you. It’s a glib response to suggest that this is just done when Y is a terrible question for new users. It’s also very common when Y is a very good just very difficult or obscure question. I think it’s quite clear that a common sense approach isn’t working on this topic. The solution really is, if you have nothing meaningful on topic to contribute, then don’t. There really needs to be a way to make this behaviour on SO punitive somehow, giving people points for it results in the current situation.
  - hombre_fatal 7y ago
    Well, I disagree despite the condescension (which isn't as disarming as you think, btw). Qs on a Q&A site become a sort of permanent record that other people stumble across, not just a wham bam thankya ma'am transaction that only the Q-asker sees. By revealing XY problems, a better service is provided for everyone who stumbles upon the Q. > Goodness me, why is this so difficult? Because not everyone agrees with you. This faction war has been going on at SE forever.
    - ratww 7y ago
      > Qs on a Q&A site become a sort of permanent record that other people stumble across The fact that it is a permanent record that lives on is another argument in favor of the "just answer the damn question". Context changes. Requirements change. Someone in the future might need the exact answer for some reason, but instead they get some useless back-and-forth and low-effort condescending answers that is super-specific to that asker. Asking for more context, adding disclaimers before answering or linking to alternative solutions in the comments is fine, but it's a pain in the ass when the answers doesn't match the questions.
    - rusk 7y ago
      I think you've illustrated the grandparent's point perfectly! (in a pleasingly condescending manner too - I might add!)
  - twic 7y ago
    Applying the XY transform to the question is often a good way to help the user asking the question. It's very rarely a good way to build up a bank of generally useful questions and answers, because it attaches answers to very specific problems to much more general questions.
  - jasode 7y ago
    >I know it’s frustrating for you, but asking a question _isn’t about you_. Well, if StackOveflow/StackExchange is still following Jeff Atwood's philosophy, asking a question isn't necessarily about the questioner either. The question & the answer is for the community more than questioner.[0] Understandably, most question askers see Stack Overflow as a "Siri/Alexa" type of resource to ask a question. E.g. If I ask Siri voice AI, "where's the nearest Starbucks?", she doesn't talk back about any X/Y problem such as "Is your actual problem that you're not getting enough sleep and therefore you're really asking how to cure insomnia instead of a caffeine fix?" No, Siri just responds with the address of the closest Starbucks. Why can't Stack Overflow be just like that?!? The above "Siri" type perspective is a huge misunderstanding because the messaging from founders Atwood/Spolsky about Stack Overflow's editorial purpose is very nuanced and difficult to grasp. It's been 11 years since 2008 and that "wiki" intention is still drowned out by the frustrated by users who simply want any of their questions answered: they don't care if it's a duplicate; they don't want pushback on X/Y; they don't want their question downvoted/closed/deleted. In contrast, the moderators (a.k.a. the high rep fellow users) of Stack Overflow are definitely not in the mode of mimicking Siri/Alexa. They're humans and they definitely will "talk back" to you and ask, "what exactly are you trying to accomplish?" Heck, the famous blog by Microsoft's Raymond Chen (The Old New Thing) is basically a collection of essays about various "X/Y Problem" submitted by customers. (To downvoters... I don't mind the downvotes but please help with quality of this discussion: If there's a public statement from Stack Overflow explaining its true intended purpose that contradicts my cite, please reply with a reference to it for the benefit of readers of this thread.) [0] https://twitter.com/codinghorror/status/991082088689381376?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E991082088689381376&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fblog.codinghorror.com%2Fwhat-does-stack-overflow-want-to-be-when-it-grows-up%2F https://twitter.com/codinghorror/status/991082088689381376?r...
ceejayoz 7y ago
> if it’s a bad question, let it die a natural death This is... weird, IMO. I'd much prefer as a new user "I think I know what you're trying to do, your way is gonna cause you a bunch of pain, there's a better way, and here's why" to zero answers and a dead question.
- ratww 7y ago
  I think it's better than having answers that doesn't match the questions. This makes for a terrible experience for future users. IMO it ok to suggest alternatives in the comments though. Alternatively, you can open a new question, answer it yourself and link to it on the old answer... I think it's allowed, but who knows.
  - Gibbon1 7y ago
    Seems to make having a body of information that has real answers to edge cases and obscure problems is better than one that's just non answers and thinly veiled insults.
enraged_camel 7y ago
You can actually do both. Indeed, the most popular and heavily upvoted answers on SO tend to do just that, in the form of "here's the answer to the question you asked, and btw, I think this other thing here might be a better way to go about solving your broader problem and maybe avoiding the issue in your question altogether!".
- mark-r 7y ago
  There's one answer I had to do that with, simply because the title of the question didn't match the body of the question. I kept getting downvotes from people who came to the question via Google and found my answer didn't match their question.
- non-entity 7y ago
  This is what I've tried to do in many cases, because, on one hand, if there are potential ramifications of X (security, etc.) it's good to educate, not just OP, but anyone else who may stumble on the same question. However, I've been on the other side too, and have written knowingly strage, contrived code for the purpose of teaching myself a concept, and it's frustrating when people just say "no".
Izkata 7y ago
I think you're underestimating the level of crap StackOverflow attracts: https://www.google.com/search?q=stackoverflow+concatenate+strings+with+jquery https://www.google.com/search?q=stackoverflow+concatenate+st... (My favorite is the one where they were actually asking about PHP)

dirkt 7y ago

If Y actually has an answer - but often enough Y is so convoluted that it just won't work. Asking the poster about X, and offering a solution Y' which will solve X should at least be attempted. If the poster insists on Y, then he'll also have to accept the answer "sorry, you can't do it that way, for the following reasons".

rusk 7y ago
Yeah, I know that this is the rationale for the rule ... but it really has become an excuse to close a question as duplicate just because one of the X solutions might "in theory" solve your problem, even if they don't. Even if you've stipulated in your question why, because you've anticipated all those alternative answers yourself, already.
wokwokwok 7y ago
> Asking the poster about X, and offering a solution Y' which will solve X should at least be attempted. No! Goodness me, why is this so difficult? It should not be attempted. That’s an arbitrary expression of your opinion on the poster. If the question can’t be solved in the way it’s asked let it die gracefully with a “no you can’t do it that why” and suck up the down votes when someone comes along and proves yes you actually can. I know it’s frustrating for you, but asking a question isn’t about you. It’s a glib response to suggest that this is just done when Y is a terrible question for new users. It’s also very common when Y is a very good just very difficult or obscure question. I think it’s quite clear that a common sense approach isn’t working on this topic. The solution really is, if you have nothing meaningful on topic to contribute, then don’t. There really needs to be a way to make this behaviour on SO punitive somehow, giving people points for it results in the current situation.
- hombre_fatal 7y ago
  Well, I disagree despite the condescension (which isn't as disarming as you think, btw). Qs on a Q&A site become a sort of permanent record that other people stumble across, not just a wham bam thankya ma'am transaction that only the Q-asker sees. By revealing XY problems, a better service is provided for everyone who stumbles upon the Q. > Goodness me, why is this so difficult? Because not everyone agrees with you. This faction war has been going on at SE forever.
  - ratww 7y ago
    > Qs on a Q&A site become a sort of permanent record that other people stumble across The fact that it is a permanent record that lives on is another argument in favor of the "just answer the damn question". Context changes. Requirements change. Someone in the future might need the exact answer for some reason, but instead they get some useless back-and-forth and low-effort condescending answers that is super-specific to that asker. Asking for more context, adding disclaimers before answering or linking to alternative solutions in the comments is fine, but it's a pain in the ass when the answers doesn't match the questions.
  - rusk 7y ago
    I think you've illustrated the grandparent's point perfectly! (in a pleasingly condescending manner too - I might add!)
- twic 7y ago
  Applying the XY transform to the question is often a good way to help the user asking the question. It's very rarely a good way to build up a bank of generally useful questions and answers, because it attaches answers to very specific problems to much more general questions.
- jasode 7y ago
  >I know it’s frustrating for you, but asking a question _isn’t about you_. Well, if StackOveflow/StackExchange is still following Jeff Atwood's philosophy, asking a question isn't necessarily about the questioner either. The question & the answer is for the community more than questioner.[0] Understandably, most question askers see Stack Overflow as a "Siri/Alexa" type of resource to ask a question. E.g. If I ask Siri voice AI, "where's the nearest Starbucks?", she doesn't talk back about any X/Y problem such as "Is your actual problem that you're not getting enough sleep and therefore you're really asking how to cure insomnia instead of a caffeine fix?" No, Siri just responds with the address of the closest Starbucks. Why can't Stack Overflow be just like that?!? The above "Siri" type perspective is a huge misunderstanding because the messaging from founders Atwood/Spolsky about Stack Overflow's editorial purpose is very nuanced and difficult to grasp. It's been 11 years since 2008 and that "wiki" intention is still drowned out by the frustrated by users who simply want any of their questions answered: they don't care if it's a duplicate; they don't want pushback on X/Y; they don't want their question downvoted/closed/deleted. In contrast, the moderators (a.k.a. the high rep fellow users) of Stack Overflow are definitely not in the mode of mimicking Siri/Alexa. They're humans and they definitely will "talk back" to you and ask, "what exactly are you trying to accomplish?" Heck, the famous blog by Microsoft's Raymond Chen (The Old New Thing) is basically a collection of essays about various "X/Y Problem" submitted by customers. (To downvoters... I don't mind the downvotes but please help with quality of this discussion: If there's a public statement from Stack Overflow explaining its true intended purpose that contradicts my cite, please reply with a reference to it for the benefit of readers of this thread.) [0] https://twitter.com/codinghorror/status/991082088689381376?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E991082088689381376&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fblog.codinghorror.com%2Fwhat-does-stack-overflow-want-to-be-when-it-grows-up%2F https://twitter.com/codinghorror/status/991082088689381376?r...

ceejayoz 7y ago

> if it’s a bad question, let it die a natural death This is... weird, IMO. I'd much prefer as a new user "I think I know what you're trying to do, your way is gonna cause you a bunch of pain, there's a better way, and here's why" to zero answers and a dead question.

ratww 7y ago
I think it's better than having answers that doesn't match the questions. This makes for a terrible experience for future users. IMO it ok to suggest alternatives in the comments though. Alternatively, you can open a new question, answer it yourself and link to it on the old answer... I think it's allowed, but who knows.
- Gibbon1 7y ago
  Seems to make having a body of information that has real answers to edge cases and obscure problems is better than one that's just non answers and thinly veiled insults.

enraged_camel 7y ago

You can actually do both. Indeed, the most popular and heavily upvoted answers on SO tend to do just that, in the form of "here's the answer to the question you asked, and btw, I think this other thing here might be a better way to go about solving your broader problem and maybe avoiding the issue in your question altogether!".

mark-r 7y ago
There's one answer I had to do that with, simply because the title of the question didn't match the body of the question. I kept getting downvotes from people who came to the question via Google and found my answer didn't match their question.
non-entity 7y ago
This is what I've tried to do in many cases, because, on one hand, if there are potential ramifications of X (security, etc.) it's good to educate, not just OP, but anyone else who may stumble on the same question. However, I've been on the other side too, and have written knowingly strage, contrived code for the purpose of teaching myself a concept, and it's frustrating when people just say "no".

Izkata 7y ago

I think you're underestimating the level of crap StackOverflow attracts: https://www.google.com/search?q=stackoverflow+concatenate+strings+with+jquery https://www.google.com/search?q=stackoverflow+concatenate+st... (My favorite is the one where they were actually asking about PHP)