Too-broaders & off-topiquers

Question

Some of those who actively participate in this site usually complain about the decline is taking the level of questions in favor of the boring step by step of any graphic application.

Some less, among which I include myself, we speak on occasion of the general decline of GD:SE.

Among these, I think I'm one of the few or the only one, who publicly has made a disagreement with the management of this site.

Why or why shouldn't we use the preserves' graphic standards? What could we say to argue in favor of having a different graphic look than the graphic standard? (I changed the end to make it more generic)

This question is off-topic on a site dedicated to answering questions about graphic design! It's a question that any graphic design student can ask his/her teacher in a graphic design school. Particularly I haven't answered this question for X reasons that don't come at the heart of this topic.

What's the real reason why a clear graphic design question is off-topic?

According to what I read:

Solving this problem requires access to a specific setup, file, or interaction with you or your machine.

• What setup?
• What file?
• What interaction with a machine?

The type of answer requested is a list of possible Yes and No. At no time is the OP asking for graphic solutions. It's something as simple for someone who is dedicated to graphic design as writing:

The reasons why standard design guidelines should always be followed are:

1. List item
2. List item
3. List item ...

Possible arguments by which you can avoid such guidelines are:

1. List item
2. List item
3. List item ...

In my opinion it's an answer with a very simple, direct and clear graphic design content.

I could come to understand the tedious TOO BROAD in this case, but not the reason shown as closing the question. This question is not the only case, on other occasions I made a comment or simply let it pass. The tedious TOO BROAD beat my possible desire to comment.

And talking about TOO BROAD, I sometimes imagine myself participating in an oriental medicine site, of which I have no idea. Obviously all the questions will seem TOO BROAD to me, and I would dedicate myself, in case of having enough privileges, to close each question by TOO BROAD. Well, I think the same thing happens in GD:SE. While it's a site open to everyone, having sufficient privileges to close a question doesn't give the facility to decide which question is unattainable to be answered by a graphic design professional. TOO BROAD is still a resource that is used with too much immediacy and ease, unfortunately.

I continue thinking that GD:SE is a site in clear decline, although I also believe that many things could be done to improve this, and without changing any site options or adding any new features. As an example, having a Real Professional Graphic Designer Moderator, who, based on their professional experience, knows how to see these types of situations and explains them at the right time, too-broaders and off-topiquers will gradually diminish and begin to understand what the meaning is of the graphic design profession and consequently the one of this site. Obviously if we try to keep it with a certain level of competitiveness and efficiency. Perhaps I have lost myself along the way and this is not what's intended.

For the moment it seems (to me) the moderators are on other issues that have nothing to do with graphic design.

Answer 1

OK, this is a lot to unpack, and with the comments you keep posting it only gets more. So bear with me.

I will number the different parts to make it easier to refer back to them.

---

1. A suggestion for valuable constructive feedback

First of all, I would like to suggest you create separate Meta questions for each issue you have with how the site works or is moderated. The issue should be focused and actionable. That is the only way you will be able to affect real change in the community, since that is how the SE model works. If the community cannot vote and come to a consensus, then you are just throwing stones in the desert.

---

2. The closure and how to proceed with your disagreement

Now let's speak about the question you linked. It has indeed been closed. You do not agree with that, or at least not with the reason given by the people who closed it. Fair enough, that is your prerogative. I might even agree with you. Or not. Doesn't matter. Point is: there are some steps you can take to address this:

• Ask the closers for some clarification in a comment. It happens often, and is not frowned upon.

• Ask the closers for some clarification in chat. If you want, you can even make a chatroom with only those people for a little privacy and to not pollute the main chatroom.

• Ask a question on Meta about it. Like you did, but without all the extra baggage.

• Vote to reopen. This option is there just for this reason!

These are all valid strategies. No users will be offended if you ask the question genuinely and with an open mindset.

---

3. The reasoning behind the close reasons

Regarding your questions about and criticisms of the close reasons I can only say: we welcome any and all constructive feedback. As evidenced by the fact that the close reasons have been changed many times in the past, and will probably change again in the future.

The SE model dictates that questions can be closed, and that there are to be a number of canned reasons. If you think this is wrong and should not be, please take it up with Stack Overflow The Company (SOTC) either through Big Meta or via the contact form. There is nothing we can do about this.

If you are fine with the possibility of closing questions, but not with the canned reasons, please make a Meta question for each separate reason you want to see changed, and a proposal for a new text. This will enable the community to weigh in via votes, answers and comments.

---

4. Will the real Graphic Designer please stand up?

I take really BIG issue with your comments regarding "real graphic designers".

I mean someone a little more committed to the profession [...]. I know that at least two moderators are not graphic designers because they have made it public. Regarding the others, I think some are, but they do not usually participate very actively in the activity of the site.

While it is true that Graphic Design is not the main part of my daily job, that does not mean I am not committed or am any less a "real" graphic designer. I have the most respect for your abilities and knowledge, and will readily admit you know more of design and which buttons to press than me. That does not mean I will let you look down on me and let you take the piss.

I can only tell you that you seem blinded by your own ego, and knowledge comes in many forms, shapes and sizes. I will not stand by and let you insult or belittle any user. Be forewarned that from now on any comment that only reeks of a condescending tone will by deleted promptly.

---

5. The SE model and the moderators role

As you can clearly tell, none of the people who voted to close on the question you linked are moderators. With reason, because our votes are final, which is why we are very hesitant to use them except in the most obvious of cases. So I fail to see how this question being closed is the fault of any moderator?

You seem to be mistaken about the role of moderators on SE sites. We are not "management", nor are we the GDSE police. Our job is not to check every question and answer to see if everyone is in line with policy.

On the contrary, we try to involve ourselves as little as possible. The whole point of the SE model is that sites are moderated and policed by the users. We assume good intentions and sound judgement from them. Especially those who contribute enough to gain sufficient reputation to comment, vote and review.

It is only when things are outside the norm that we intervene. Spam and nonsense mostly. Sometimes new users who think this is a regular forum and use answer fields for comments, rants against Adobe or general banter. Flags that get raised by the system or by users. And once every blue moon a wall-of-text rant on Meta.

---

6. Whom the cap fits, let him wear it

You have been criticising and condemning for quite some time now. You specifically say the following:

Among these, I think I'm one of the few or the only one, who publicly has made a disagreement with the management of this site.

Apparently, you fail to see that you are the management of the site. Not the mods, not other users, you.

---

A fair warning: I will delete, with extreme prejudice, any comment on this answer that does not pertain to its contents. The discussion is muddied enough as it is, it does not need more distractions. Again, anyone is free to open a new Meta question or a chat room. If you want to discuss anything that was not covered in this answer, please use one of these routes.

Answer 2

Note that if a question is closed and seems problematic, you can vote to reopen. If all else fails, you can discuss the closing of the question in meta.

It's not reasonable to expect moderators to see and act on every question of the site. We are elected to handle human exceptions. Also, because our vote is binding, it wouldn't be fair to the community if we acted on every question.

Answer 3

Danielillo, I think I feel you. I don't know whether the site is in decline, but I do feel that interesting, worthwhile and just plain valid questions get closed with a completely irrelevant reason.

Abuse of the 'needs more focus' (the old 'too broad') and 'off-topic' close reasons is as old as I can remember, even from before I was a mod. There have been multiple threads on this very meta about it, and it doesn't look like the problem is ever going to go away. It's frustrating, it looks like the close voters aren't reading the questions and just click 'close' because they can't easily find an answer. Good questions get silenced this way. Their askers, often new users, get scared away from further interaction.

I would ask you to remember one thing, though, which is one of the Golden Rules of Stack Exchange (and, imho, online interaction in general) and that is to assume good intent with all parties involved. I want to defend these close-voters by asking you assume they are not informed enough, may be tired or distracted at the moment they vote, or maybe as annoyed by some issue as you are now and they thus take a questionable decision.

Please assume that they are fallible, imperfect humans rather than actively malicious and out to harm the site or our profession.

If you find a question that has been closed in error (and yes, there are a lot), please flag it for reopening and leave a comment once it has been. Our mods are a reasonable lot. Which brings me to my next point.

I take a lot of issue with the way you, apparently, assume bad intent with the moderators and curious in particular. I want to assume good intent on your part, but I am having problems not reading your wish for a 'professional graphic designer' as a moderator as a suggestion that the current moderators, in your eyes, are not professional enough for your standards. Knowing what some of our moderators' day jobs are, that makes me feel attacked by proxy.

Let me start out by saying that being a moderator on Stack Exchange is hard. I don't know whether you follow Big Meta, but taking into account what has happened over there the last few months, being a mod has become at least twice as hard over that period. Especially for an unpaid position, taken out of a desire to help others with a time investment not compensated for in any way, being a moderator here is akin to choosing the 'crushing' or 'impossible' difficulties in a video game. I know, I've been there, and I've given up. It was too hard for me.

On top of that, and most importantly, these mod people are, well, people. They can be absent. They can be distracted. They can be tired, annoyed or angry. Just like me and you, they can be human, and thus fallible. Still:

Please assume good intent.

No moderator is out to 'get' you, or is resentful of you. If they are, they would most likely either try and talk things out in a (private) chat, step back, or ask a co-mod to step in and help you out or mediate.

GD.SE, and Stack Exchange, even the Internet as a whole, is an imperfect mess made by imperfect parts. Please accept that imperfection. We can try and make it, little by little, less imperfect every day—together. Pointing accusing fingers and attacking people's professionalism will not help, will not whip people into action to do better. On the contrary, it will alienate them from interaction and demotivate them from doing more.

Once again, I try to assume good intent on your part. I see that you are genuinely concerned for this site's well-being and the quality of its content, and I applaud that level of concern. I think I understand your frustration and anger, and can understand that those can make you say things in a less constructive and less diplomatic way.

I would just ask that you assume good intent as well, and work with everyone else to make this a better place. Renew the close vote queue discussion. Flag to reopen. Try and educate the close voters. Be constructive.

Thank you.