I just opened up Skeptics Stack Exchange, and expected some sort of science-based questioning. (A vaccine question led me here.) Instead, I'm faced with the same sort of randomness I see on Quora. What is this?
-
I've tagged this wrong.– user1605665Commented Jan 22, 2016 at 0:46
-
3This should be posted on the meta page.– ssbCommented Jan 22, 2016 at 0:56
-
@ssb I don't have enough reputation to ask on meta, do you know where can find this info– user1605665Commented Jan 22, 2016 at 1:01
-
skeptics.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic– ssbCommented Jan 22, 2016 at 1:02
-
Can you give some examples of what you mean by "the same sort of randomness I see on Quora"?– user56reinstatemonica8Commented Jan 26, 2016 at 8:44
-
1When i saw skeptic i assumed it would be scientific style questions, but then saw a question like this one skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/31529/… which my assumption is would be answered with some pointless opinionated but entertaining c...p. After a closer look I now realise the differences is in the permitted quality of the answer.– user1605665Commented Jan 26, 2016 at 22:33
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
Mmmm, I loved the smell of trolling in the morning.
The help page, which you should have read before you posted explains what we are about.
The Welcome to New Users page, which is commonly found around the site, would give you more information.
If you are looking for science-based information about vaccines, check out the vaccine tag.
If you look just a little closer, you will notice some differences from Quora.
Your inappropriate question was moved to the appropriate site. We allow a certain randomness in the domain in the questions, but they still have to follow our on-topic rules. Claims need to be notable; we get questions worth answering, not just idle speculation.
Your spelling and grammar was fixed up for you. Generally, you'll find a higher standard of English, and a higher standard of argument, than on Quora.
References are required; we don't allow people to spout off in their answers.
While Quora does get the occasional good answer, I would happily square off our database of questions versus theirs using any reasonable metric of quality.
answered Jan 22, 2016 at 1:49
-
1Other difference from the OP mentioned random site is that the stack exchange process allows users to vote on both answers and questions enabling those users to earn reputation points in the form of gamification. So that raises the value of the answer or question based on the exchange rules. Even if the user has high reputation points, his or her question or answer can be voted down in skeptics stack exchange until the voters agree on the appropriate references if it is an answer or notability if it is a question. This kind of peer review may not be present in the random site mentioned! Commented Jan 22, 2016 at 7:42
-
Quality of the reference source should also be noted when one compares the OP mentioned random site with Skeptics Stack since Skeptics Stack Exchange follows excellent standards mentioned here-meta.skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/132/… and here-meta.skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/519/… for all answers which are up voted when appropriately referenced by other users and down voted when citing wrong and invalid references ! Commented Jan 22, 2016 at 10:07
-
Thanks for moving and answering the question. Without your links i would not have found those pages. Commented Jan 23, 2016 at 2:52