I have spent hours reading, formulating practice questions, using grammar check, and studying research papers.   I have taken a break from Stack Exchange for probably 4 days, hoping that this will refresh the quality in my questions. But, this strategy has failed.  I'm baffled right now, because I took into consideration of what other users have mentioned.  And, it indeed improved my question quality.    Question  What other strategies should be used as this strategy no longer works?
117
If you are reading this, you may have been affected by one of our post quality bans. If so, it is important that you  to understand what has happened and how to regain the permissions that you lost. While trying to ask a question, one could see:  We are no longer accepting questions from this account. See  to learn more.  Likewise, for answers:  We are no longer accepting answers from this account. See  to learn more.   Why am I getting this message? Are deleted posts taken into account too? Is a question/answer ban the same as a suspension? How do I avoid getting a question ban? How long do I have to wait before I can post again? What can I do to release the ban? How can I reactivate my account? Can I simply create a new account? I'll just ask somewhere else on the SE network, and they'll migrate my question to the correct site! Will a ban on one Stack Exchange site affect my standing on other sites in the network? Does this apply to meta sites too? My account is in good standing. Why am I still blocked?
103702
There are numerous (, , ) questions concerning this problem. I realize this is a borderline duplicate, but I'll re-iterate the futility of this particular filter and why it should be outright removed from Stack Overflow.  Do you know how effective this is in preventing users who just don't care from posting questions with bad titles? 100% ineffective. What do these users do?   Replace it with a synonym: "issue," "trouble," "predicament," "botheration" or what have you. Or worse, they simply work around the filter by deliberately misspelling the word or inserting space or punctuation:    () ?    and the coup de grâce:      I mean, even Jeff . This adds zero value to the title. In fact, it looks worse. Why, oh why are people  to scrap a bad feature? All this does is:   Prevent people who have a  to use the word "problem" in the title from posting questions with an appropriate title. Break the search feature because of workarounds or the need to use less descriptive titles than the error itself   This is an extraordinarily useless (and harmful) feature. Please, for the love of Cthulhu,  remove, eliminate, abolish, eradicate, extirpate this "feature" from Stack Overflow.    Bonus:     So I can't mention the Halting Problem in the title? – Keith Thompson Nov 1 at 19:05      @KeithThompson Maybe it's a "Halting Issue". Or "Need help with Halting". Or the "Halting thing in Computability Theory". – slhck Nov 1 at 19:14
78182
I ask a lot of question on SO, so this recommendation/idea comes from that experience. I'm not really sure how this would fit in with the current structure of SE.   Oftentimes after asking a question, maybe after an hour or so, I end up finding the answer I needed somewhere. And it comes time for me to answer the most difficult question of all: do I delete this question, or do I keep it in case someone answers and others may benefit from it. The problem is, if I don't delete it and no one answers, my acceptance rate goes down. So usually I'll just delete it.  However, sometimes I fear that someone is typing a really really long answer to my question since itäs only been an hour, and so I imagine the nightmare that person experiences when they find out their essay will be gone to waste. Overall, this never-to-be-seen-again answer could have benefitted many people had the question remained.  Since SE has gone "live-happy" lately, where answers and comments refresh live, I thought it might be interesting if the original asker of the question (or anyone else for that matter) could see how many people are currently responding to the question (just count, not necessary to display their names). This way, if I know someone is replying, I won't delete the question, and others can benefit from it.
38982
Before marking this post duplicate or voting to get it closed (the reason for which I simply don't get just because it is a grammar forum after all! If I am seeking recommendation for a book that means I will be coming back someday to the same site for my doubts also provided I get a not so harsh reply!), please read this and help this MBA aspirant.   A little about myself and my research so far. I am a very critical reader of English Grammar and the kind of person who aims at perfection.  Currently, I am keen on taking on English grammar again after a certain gap. Well, I am aiming for MBA, so preparing for entrance exams for the same.  I bought the religiously followed Wren and Martin and started studying it chapter by chapter. I was surprised when I read the pronouns chapter. I studied all the rules given and then started practising but it came as surprise when I found when many of the attempted questions were wrong. The reason simply being the rules for those specific sentences were not given.   For example:     We scored as many goals as they/them?    According to me, the answer should be they, but it's them according to the solution manual. Worse still, the solution manual offers no explanation for this.  So after a chat with my teachers I was suggested to follow the blogs of grammarians and look for any rules for the sentences that have contradictory answers!  I did so and was clarified by  post of pronouns, Rule 5.  Then I saw a book by the same author. I was momentarily happy. It was Momentarily because the reviews on Amazon were too bad about this book. After reading a couple of forums about the book I found a common statement saying that no grammar book is exhaustive.  So, it's okay for me to have more than one. And my simple question is what will be a good and almost exhaustive (if not fully exhaustive) book of English grammar to help get through the subtle usages of English in my management entrances  which is crisp and to the point and yet covers all important rules and syntax, and most importantly having practice tests at the end with solutions and explanations?
13361
Often you have a question, you can't find the answer on Stack Overflow so you search for it (or think a bit more). Having found the answer you'd like to keep a record so you can find it again later.  Before Stack Overflow I would write a blog post so I could search for it later. Jeff and Joel, I think, specifically said SO is a good place to replace these blog posts. So what is the best etiquette for adding your answer?   Just ask the question, then post your answer immediately and let voting sort the answers out. This is okay, but it looks like you are just trying to generate reputation, and other people often don't vote or answer, and a lot of the SO information is lost. Provide the answer in the question and ask the question phrased as "is there a better answer". This allows others to gain reputation, and doesn't look so greedy but makes your answer harder to vote on. Post your question, let others answer it. If no-one puts the answer you already found, then add it an hour or so later. If someone else gets it then accept their answer (or the best one). This is more selfless with reputation, but makes other people do work you have already done which feels a bit lazy and a waste of everyone's time.   Or maybe there is another way?
112264
I'm looking at , which was closed as off-topic a few days ago. Just a few minutes ago, the OP radically revised it; it doesn't even resemble the original question anymore. In fact, the two versions only share about seven words and some punctuation. Here's a screenshot of the most recent revision:    So, the question for the community is this: Is this proper, or should it be rolled back?  Edit: I went ahead and rolled it back because it has a couple of answers already (responding to the old version). But I would still like to know the community consensus on this.
57833
There is a certain amount of questions that are absolutely trivial in nature: How to format a date, how to concatenate a string, et cetera. Questions that could be solved by taking a look into the manual.  Random examples from the tags I frequent:                What those OPs need is a link to the right manual, which we should give them. But the question serves no purpose. They don't even have a use by being searchable,  because any sane search query would lead to the actual manual as the first hit.  Jeff discusses the possibility of introducing a new close reason for this over at  According to Robert's suggestion there, it could go like this:     general reference: this question is too basic; the answer is indexed in any number of general internet reference sources designed specifically to find that type of information.   Please please implement this.  Add a field (like the "enter duplicate ID here" popup) for users to suggest the correct manual link:    The suggested links would then be shown in a block in the top section of the question, like duplicate links.   Also, the amount of reputation earnable from these trivial questions is appalling. I'm sure a great portion of most high-rep users' points (including mine) is from answering "what was that function for replacing a string again?" type questions. This dilutes the value of reputation as a measure of true expertise a great deal.  I would suggest that answers to questions that get closed as "general reference" are made community wiki retroactively, taking away any reputation earned.
71271
The way the askers write questions is a factor in determining how good the answers we get are. Obviously, if you ask a clear, direct question it is easier for a someone to answer you.  But, sometimes I've done that and my questions have still been overlooked.  I've noticed some question-posting methods that aren't exactly obvious, but do help me get better answers.    Some tricks I've learned...   Even if my question is very complicated, I try to write a short question.  People get turned off by longer questions, probably because they think its not worth their time (relative to other questions with equal reputation potential).  After I get some traffic and votes on my question, and maybe some comments like "Can you post the code?" or "Clarify this..." I might post more, but by then I am already getting attention to my question.  So, in summary, even if I know the answer requires a long question, I don't make it long until I've already gotten people to look at it. I use more generic tags when possible.  People are more likely to have c# and linq as a favorite tag, than MethodCallExpression, and I tend to get more views if I use at least one or two general purpose tags along with my more specific tags. I've noticed that if I give my question the performance tag, then SO heavy-weights like Marc Gravell, Jon Skeet and Eric Lippert are more likely to answer my question (especially if I use it in conjunction with a C# tag).  Since having this realization, if I can think of a way to rephrase my question to sound like it is related to C# performance, I will word it as such and tag it accordingly.   "Be polite. SO Users HATE when people be impatient, rude or impolite." - Benny   So,  Does anyone else have any tips for getting better answers and question-recognition on SO?  I think it would be really helpful if everyone contributed their own observations and techniques here.  P.S. This question is probably too long.
43140
I've written a few questions on Stack Overflow before that have been closed due to being "not constructive" or "not a real question".  Now, after scanning the FAQ for the site a few times, I understand that my questions were indeed closed for good reason.  However, even after reading the FAQ, I still don't understand why a question of "what's the best practice here?" is a bad thing.  I feel as though if you properly explain your situation as thoroughly as possible, then it shouldn't be a bad question at all.  Questions like "what's the best language?" or "which framework should I use?" are indeed bad questions initially, but I feel if you specify in the post (or preferably in the title itself) what the context is, shouldn't that be deserving of some kind of an answer?  In  I asked what would be "best practice", and naturally my question was closed.  So I read the FAQ and learned how to make a more constructive question, of which I've now re-edited in an attempt to be less vague.  I understand the desire to avoid debate and lengthy discussion over a question, but I also feel as though sometimes there are certain questions which should be asked if proper context is given.  Why is a question over "best practice" always a bad question to ask?
85723
I use StackOverflow as a core learning tool and questions posted by others(as well as comments) have much-sought information and nuances.Also,the questions posted by me are likely to increase in numbers with time.I already have nearly a hundred favorite questions despite all attempts to be highly selective in favoriting questions.Taking out hard-prints or pdf prints makes categorizing and searching much more tiresome. I just don't know how to categorize my favorite questions based on aspects of a language like functions,global variables,recursion,syntax and other categories. It is really going to be a headache as I find good questions to add to the list everyday.Due to time constraints I can't read and assimilate the answers rightaway and have to bookmark/favorite them for later reference. I am sure it's common problem and there must be a solution for this on StackOveflow.I tried looking for it and couldn't find.So please suggest me the best option available to users for this issue.
36225
The blog post  sheds a little light on how the current process for making changes on Stack Exchange works.  Today, our research process might look something like this for a high-impact, high-cost project.     What's our current research approach? Strategy (Survey; User interview; Comparative site analysis; Historical context research; Data analysis), Design (User interviews), Build (User interviews), Ship (Survey; A/B tests; Meta feedback)  And later on it says:  Meta feedback. We monitor Meta for bug reports and small usability/copy issues after shipping changes to the site.  Now, as was mentioned in the blog post, this is a marked departure from how things worked in the past.   What was our past research approach? Strategy (Meta feedback), Design (Meta feedback), Build (Meta feedback), Ship (Experiments)  Before, every stage of the process was simply &quot;Meta feedback&quot;. Now, the Meta feedback has been relegated to... bug reports and usability issues. Please consider gathering Meta feedback earlier in the process. Meta feedback is important.  Now, as an avid Meta user, I may be biased. However, Meta represents the most engaged users - the ones who have been here for years in most cases, often current or former moderators on the network, and those who are, most importantly, the ones that the site most heavily relies on for moderation. Meta feedback represents the feedback of those most engaged users. The feedback of your most engaged users, especially on a &quot;high impact&quot; project, is important. Those users are in the best position to tell you how it well affect their use of the site as someone who uses it very regularly, and they may let you know about something that is very important to them but less so to other people. I'm thinking of cases such as the incident where the Worldbuilding.SE robot, Slartibotfast, was going to be removed due to the design changes to the site. Due to  from those most invested in the community, the robot was saved and an important part of the site identity was preserved. Journeyman Geek put it nicely in :  I'd also like to point out that, well, the designer is not going to have the same grasp of a site's &quot;uniqueness&quot; as someone who has been on it a while will have.  As I mentioned before, this is a marked departure from how SE worked in the past. You are taking a group who has, for ten years+, been deeply involved in every stage of a change, and suddenly telling them &quot;you're only giving feedback after it's done and we won't be making any big changes because of your feedback. Sorry!&quot;  That's not going to go over well. Especially in the current climate of the community having broadly lost trust in the company, removing their feedback from any changes is only going to serve to further deteriorate any remaining trust.  On the other hand, including them in the process and working with the community will massively help improve trust and relations between the engaged community and the company. We, the Meta community, are the people most invested in these sites. The way our feedback is treated should reflect that. Please consider gathering Meta feedback earlier in the process for making &quot;high-impact&quot; changes.
122603
I just went to post a question on another Stack Exchange site and my spell checker is telling me that asker is incorrect but answerer is correct.  Is asker wrong? What should I use instead?
82402
Notes:  Answers will occasionally be moved to the  when there are too many of them. When using them to report bugs, keep an eye on the post.    This site, Meta Stack Exchange, is usually used as a &quot;test bed&quot; for pending changes happening to the way text is rendered on all network sites. Changes to text rendering that are going to be rolled out to the network are usually deployed here first to test them out and fix any potential glitches. Currently, there are no such changes pending, but if there were, keep in mind that text posted here may render differently from the other sites until the changes roll out to them as well.    As per Jeff's suggestion in : You can use this question as a formatting sandbox. You can:  edit  itself ( questions such as this one require only 100 reputation to edit instead of 2,000) post answers to this question (This question might be , requiring earning 10 reputation on this site to answer) post comments to this question or its answers test suspected bugs with the editor or the rendering post ponies (only when mods are asleep)   Beware that since the  in December 2010, and  added in March 2011, no syntax highlighting is applied unless the question's tags or an inline hint enable it. So, to test highlighting here in the sandbox:  , you can use GitHub-flavor fenced code blocks in your posts, specifying the language after the opening fence: ```html While not hinted otherwise: &lt;html&gt;&lt;/html&gt; source &lt;b&gt;goes&lt;/b&gt; &quot;here&quot;. ```  ```js var a = 3; while (not (a &gt; 0)) {     alert(&quot;JavaScript code &lt;b&gt;goes&lt;/b&gt; here.&quot;); } ```   Or:  Create code blocks in any way (using the fence notation above, the four-space indent form, or using HTML &lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt; tags).  Save your post.  Use your browser's developer tools to edit the resulting HTML. To open developer tools, press F12, or ⌥⌘ I on Mac.  Find the &lt;pre&gt; element and add the attribute class=&quot;prettyprint&quot;, or change it into one of the valid syntax hints linked above, like class=&quot;lang-vb prettyprint&quot;.  Run the following in the location bar: javascript:prettyPrint(); or prettyPrint() in the console.     Answers that are considered annoying or obnoxious, or that cause breakage for users, will be deleted. This is .
94659
Someone seems to be playing with the Stackexchange Hot Question algorithm:    This question seems to be the coordinated work of about a dozen entirely new users (created today) to post a "question" that gets a high "hotness" score.  I don't know any Chinese and Google Translate is imperfect, but it seems to be entirely content-free (having only meta-content) and should only exist on their meta site (if there is a reason for it to exist at all).  The fact that all participating users seem to be entirely new and are up-voting is rather strange as well (and borders on cheating, in my book).
124294
Right now,  carry automatic downvotes.  The  for this was largely to enforce specific quality bans in part because people were not down voting questions. Now that question down votes are free on questions and it seems to be pretty commonplace for question quality bans to trigger, even without the automatic votes from closure, and we have completely revamped the closure system. Is it time to reevaluate whether or not these automatic votes are still a good idea?  What benefits do the automatic votes provide and have they effectively run their course?
117887
just wanted to report a problem with Data Explorer and realized I was banned from asking questions on meta. Probably because I .  Reading through the :   to prevent help vampires users who can't be bothered to form sentences users who don't do the most basic kinds of research themselves users who barely even explain what it is they are trying to do etc., etc. &hellip;   Nothing of this applies to my case. Here on meta, , so I think this should be reflected in the policy for question banning.
60377
Today I had some time and felt like writing a relatively good answer on Stack Overflow; explaining both the underlying mechanisms and good practices, unlike usual declarative answers in a "do that" style.  It took me like an hour of time, $50 if I were free lance. It'll bring me nothing but 3-5 occasional views, and - if I get lucky - some ignorant comments.  You know, it's quite discouraging.  Instead of pride for the job that was done, I feel frustrated. I know, this answer may offer help to the OP, if he ever notices it (being already satisfied with other answers).  So the only fate the answer will meet is to sink forever, below thousands other questions, falling like snow.  So, being a programmer, I am thinking of efficiency. It's a waste of time to spend so much effort to answer one question when there is no way to [actually] reuse it. So, I wouldn't do it again but just turn back into short answers mode without explanations.       Seeing other answers, I don't think I am only one with such feeling.  The current policy is driving knowledgeable and educational users away, yet it attracts inexperienced ones in numbers. Ones who will tell you to use [some technology] which they never have laid their hands upon. Ones who write answers just because they have learned some "good practice" from other questions, and this "knowledge" becomes an endless source of rep points.  The idea of Stack Overflow is rotten. It was excellent when trees were high and traffic was low.  It turned bad now; it has become a honeypot for all the "enthusiast programmers" of the world, eager to share their 2 cents faster than you can say the word "close".  You're killing a great resource. Despite all the nice words and proper declarations, it discourages the reuse of the knowledge. And encourages fast on-site answers.  Of course, the rules will tell you contrary. It's all nice and proper (if you don't mind it's strict mutual exclusivity). But mechanically, technologically it works in the way I described.  I tried to write a tag wiki. You know, it was biggest waste of time in my life. As a matter of fact, it is not a wiki at all; you can't even link to a certain section. Not to mention that nobody ever has the idea to read tag wikis.  Reference questions? Don't make me laugh. There is no good mechanism to store and categorize links. Favorites, although intended for the different purpose, are a chunk of crap when you want to use it as a reference. So, you can't compete with 30-seconds answers: a question will get 5 answers before you can even find an appropriate link.  Okay, I can organize links myself but, there are some problems:   I am just a human. I cannot remember everything I am just a human and I cannot answer questions at rate of 1 qpm. One person cannot fight the Tide. It's helpless. When technology makes people writing fast [incomplete] answers -  no good will of proper declarations can do a thing.  Even if a question gets finally closed, it won't hurt anyone - the hydra grew two more already.   You'll call me a brute for insulting honest users and innocent volunteers, but that's fact: There are much more inexperienced users than experienced ones. And inexperienced users have much more spare time to hang over than experts who have their job to do. So, from that fact we can conclude that most of the answers on Stack Overflow have a low quality. Nobody cares. But I do.   There should be a technical way to limit the activity of not-so-knowledgeable-yet-eager-to-answer users. There should be a technical preference for the closing a question over answering it (have a silly answer for the silly question? welcome to comments). There should be a technical solution to accumulate and structure knowledge, a system that lets you choose a good answer instead of writing it by hand.   That's the only way. Otherwise Stack Overflow will remain an automated dispenser of bad practices.  Well, I just felt like letting it out again. Thank you for reading.