Is EL&U succeeding?

Question

What with all of the hubbub lately, I want to focus on asking one specific question that I think is at the core of the problem/drama: Is EL&U succeeding?

This is fairly open-ended and I think that is fine. The intent is to try and start locating things for us to work on or, at the very least, watch carefully for improvements.

Please add your thoughts on EL&U's current status and quality. In my opinion, we are in an opinion gathering phase. We need data; the first place to get that data is from you, the community.

Answer 1

I guess ultimately it is a question what do you want EL&U to become

• site for real specialists and experts only
• site for both language and linguistics 'newbies' and specialist, professionals, too

I strongly disagree with Jeff's illustration of the low quality questions. Here are some reasons:

1. The top questions do not tell you much

If you compare the quality (usefullness) of top questions at stackoverflow with EL&U, I think you will not find much difference: top questions are intrinsically voted on for their interestingness and not technical quality. This together with the landslide effect (which serves as justification and reinforcement) will bring such questions to the top.

To summarize: objectively best questions will usually have relatively modest scores.

2. Frequent answers do not tell you much

Another issue is the issue of the most common questions - there are and there will be questions that repeat subjects, themes or actual questions word for word. This is rather unavoidable as long as there is no real penalty for not doing basic research.

Here I would like to take opportunity to praise moderators and others in the community for linking to similar questions and very diligently closing real offtopic answers.

3. The examples of 'bad' questions are flawed

Differences between slang words for breasts

Profanities are a part of a language with many linguistically interesting aspects. Learning and clarifying details on the use or the meaning of them is interesting not only to adolescents, but to any user of the language. Here, I presume, the actual objection is to the fact that these questions have such high score and not to the fact that they are asked.

Summary: If there is a consensus such questions could be discouraged by the faq (or forbidden). Until then it should let be.

Don't understand the joke: my milk's gone bad...

Jokes, as a rule, employ very complex literary devices (or rhetorical figures). The whole concept of humor is very closely tied to linguistics and language, as anyone who attempted to translate more than one joke knows very well. I strongly disagree with closing such questions.

Faq says: 'Explain this joke...' is off-topic, unless it employs some subtlety of English language, but I think it is not unreasonable to claim that most jokes employ it and that even cultural references should be explained if asked as they tie into how the joke 'works' (how the literary or rhetorical device becomes really effective).

What is a more common expression in English for "move your bowels"?

Again we have the same problem as with example number one - the question itself is no worse or better than, for example: 'What is a more common expression for "move your car"?', however the two will never get the same score, because one is objectively much more interesting since it looks at language usage in the context of taboos, which by default has potential to be much, much more important as the subject is much more sensitive.

Answer 2

I agree with a lot of what @Unreason has said, so I won't repeat that. But just to give a different perspective on this: @RebeccaChernoff posted a very interesting suggestion in chat:

So, one thing that might be an interesting thing to look at when you're considering the quality of the site: take the titles of 10 questions at random (I'll generate them and give you post ids in a sec) and type each one into google. Are we at the top of the results? If not, is our answer crap compared to a top result?

I went through the ten randomly-selected questions, and compared the top few results from typing each question into Google to the top answer(s) on our site.

In nine out of the ten cases, we were hands down the best: there were some superb answers - most notably from @Kosmonaut, but also from others. Only occasionally did the other Google results come close to answering the question.

In the one case where Google did furnish a decent answer to the question being asked, the quality of the answers was much closer, but the formatting of the non-SO answer made it sufficiently difficult to read to fall within the "otherwise in need of improvement" clause of the simple question flowchart.

Now, that doesn't mean that EL&U is perfect, or that there isn't a lot we might be able to improve. But it does suggest that the impression that some have been giving - that the site has a "serious quality problem", or is "full" of bad questions and answers - is somewhat overstated.

Answer 3

Are we attracting the attention of other high quality English or language sites?

I know from personal email communication with both Doug Harper of Etymonline and Gary Martin of The Phrase Finder (two oft-cited authorities at EL&U) that this site is definitely on their radar. Doug, in particular, has said some nice things about this site. Both have amended entries at their respective sites based on findings here.

Answer 4

I think the site is wonderful and fun, but there are some gaps that could make it more successful. You have brought up some good questions, and they deserve some discussion.

I think we should prioritize our efforts based on maximal effectiveness. To that end, I would suggest this order:

1. Decide how to handle meta. How do we know when an issue is resolved? How do we communicate expected changes in behavior to regular users? When (and how) do we update the FAQ based on these new community resolutions? Meta is where these community discussions will take place, so we must all agree on how the process will be executed. Therefore, this should be our number one priority.

2. Make as clear a distinction as is reasonably possible to divide on-topic from off-topic. Deciding what is on-topic or off-topic is critically important, but not always so simple as reviewing the FAQ. Let's make it clear that questions that are debatable can be discussed in chat or on meta. Again, the meta process is what will support this process, so we must be clear how meta works before this step will function correctly. Also, let's decide when closing is adequate, and when downvoting is necessary. Let's make sure we are consistently kind and explanatory when closing, and that we communicate to the user that they may discuss closure in chat or on meta.

3. Encourage the community to be engaged. The top users will (eventually, I'm confident) get swag, but let's also make sure that we are upvoting good answers, downvoting bad ones, and flagging material that's just not nice. Let's also make a habit of picking up our litter, and making sure that we are accepting good answers on our questions as well as asking good questions. Good questions are on-topic, so obviously, we need step 2 before we can do this well.

If we do these things, we will get happy new users, our community will grow and thrive, and there will be rainbows and sunshine and peace.

Answer 5

Note: This list was originally included in the question body. I moved it here based on comments made in chat. Apologies for any confusion caused.

---

Here is a bullet list of how I interpret this question. I don't necessarily think any of these questions are easy (or even possible) to accurately answer. I put them here in an answer because these aren't really the focus of the question and are mostly rhetorical at this point.

• Are we attracting new users?
• Are we attracting the right kind of new users?
• Are we receiving interesting questions?
• Are good questions voted highly?
• Are bad questions downvoted, closed or deleted?
• Are irrelevant comments being pruned?
• Are offensive comments or remarks being flagged?
• Have we defined topicality in a clear manner?
• Are we consistent in our closing of questions (specifically with regards to General Reference and Off-Topic)?
• How is the community treating its members?
• How is the relationship between the mods and the non-mods?
• Is chat active?
• Are we attracting the attention of other high quality English or language sites?
• Are meta discussions being resolved?
• Are our resolutions being put into practice?
• Is our FAQ accurate?
• Is our FAQ clear?

And so on.

Answer 6

First, I want to be clear that I have what I hope is a shared common goal with everyone on the English.se community:

I want English.se to be great.

Unfortunately, the current reality is kind of...far from that. Almost every time I peek my head into the site, it's filled with puerile stuff like:

• Differences between slang words for breasts

• What does this joke about milk going bad mean?

• More common expression for "move your bowels"

What's worse is that these questions (due to the "tee-hee" nature of them) tend to be the most popular ones on the site and thus are actively broadcast to the rest of the network. I find this sort of content totally unprofessional and quite frankly, completely embarrassing. To the point that I am actually ashamed to be associated with this site.

Now, that doesn't mean that there isn't other great content here—there certainly is— but it is being completely overshadowed by the loss of focus on what was supposed to be a site for English language experts and advanced usage. Not a popular cultural explanation engine, an English As Second Language translation service, or the best possible source for the varied meanings of "boobs" and "poop".

So, to the extent that I expressed my frustration with this depressing, sad state of affairs on English.se—I apologize. But this site has to get a lot stricter and that requires solid action and leadership on the part of the community and the community moderators. The current laissez les bons temps rouler attitude is just not working, and leadership flows from the top down.

The bottom line is that English.se needs to be stricter in what questions it will accept. I am encouraged to see this discussion, and the recent blocking of particularly low-quality users. I also hope to see far more aggressive closing by the community of off-topic, beginner, general reference, and unprofessional questions.