6
$\begingroup$

There are questions like this and this which provide a lot of extra information and does not look good. If I were to Google a similar question and find the one on the CV, I would probably skip it due to its crowded look despite of how simple the actual question is.

So, should I warn the user with a comment or should I report it to a moderator or leave it as is?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Longer code snippets or data dumps can be pasted e.g. on gist.github.com (does not require registration; really simple interface) and then it's enough to put a link in the question. In particularly severe cases I guess one can do if for the OP. $\endgroup$ – amoeba says Reinstate Monica Nov 7 '17 at 12:25
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ I disagree strongly about these examples. I think they're model questions with a story, data, graphs and code and I just upvoted them as such. But if anyone is too busy to read them, that's understood as always. I don't think they raise any points of principle at all. On a different note, almost anyone can comment suggesting cuts of unnecessary material. I and others will often edit for style cutting out unnecessary verbiage especially "I need your help" "My question is" "I am from Mars and new here" (not an issue here). $\endgroup$ – Nick Cox Nov 8 '17 at 8:39
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ There sometimes are long rambling questions that go on and on, but asking a poor question is not something to flag to moderators! If it were, their load would go up by a large factor. Comment and vote! For example, "In my view, this question is too long for people to want to read or to understand easily. You might be better off trying to cut this down." As in my previous comment, you may be on to something, but your examples don't convince. If someone wrote a long question, they may be very unfocused or confused, but they tried. $\endgroup$ – Nick Cox Nov 8 '17 at 8:48
  • $\begingroup$ I agree on the "good intention" part however some parts can get repetitive, redundant or unnecessary. For example OP provided both the graph AND the data of it where the graph alone is certainly enough. I think this distractions can decrease the effectiveness of both the question and the answer thus reaching to potentially less people. That is my main concern. $\endgroup$ – theGD Nov 8 '17 at 10:56
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ One could argue that it is better to provide too much than do what so many of our questioners do and provide far too little. $\endgroup$ – mdewey Nov 8 '17 at 11:55
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ What is repetitive, redundant or unnecessary (the last word is sufficient) can be skimmed or edited. Often I want the graph to see what is going on and the data to explore and evaluate other analyses. Sometimes the graph is enough but "certainly enough" is just not correct. I've seen many threads where people ask for data even though a graph is provided. You can ignore anything whose style irritates you; it is one of the best principles there is. $\endgroup$ – Nick Cox Nov 8 '17 at 13:36
4
$\begingroup$

It seems that at StackOverflow.com you can use code snippets that can be hidden. Maybe we could use it as well for hidding things like data dumps? At this moment it does not seem to work on CV.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Following your link I see a feature request, but it does not look like it's implemented. I don't think this feature is available on SO. $\endgroup$ – amoeba says Reinstate Monica Nov 7 '17 at 12:21
  • $\begingroup$ @amoeba one of the answers has working example, so it seems it is implemented. $\endgroup$ – Tim Nov 7 '17 at 12:24
  • $\begingroup$ Hmm. I don't see a working example. $\endgroup$ – amoeba says Reinstate Monica Nov 7 '17 at 12:47
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry, I meant also this meta.stackoverflow.com/a/270973/3986320 $\endgroup$ – Tim Nov 7 '17 at 13:11
  • $\begingroup$ Nice! But apparently (meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/269753) only supports HTML, CSS, and JS. $\endgroup$ – amoeba says Reinstate Monica Nov 7 '17 at 13:16
  • $\begingroup$ @amoeba maybe we could request for it, so it'd be a feature similar to spoilers feature? $\endgroup$ – Tim Nov 7 '17 at 13:19
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ This has been discussed multiple times on Meta.SE and has status-declined. meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5199. Too bad. $\endgroup$ – amoeba says Reinstate Monica Nov 7 '17 at 13:25
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Not against this, but keeping questions self-contained and complete is a strong positive. Once anyone says their code is to be found elsewhere I usually bail out straight away. On Stack Overflow, there is an ideal of a minimal, complete, verifiable example stackoverflow.com/help/mcve, most of which carries over to any kind of technical question. Any question on CV that hinges on very long code segments is likely to be off-topic any way. Large datasets can be highly problematic but more commonly showing a modest amount of example data is usually helpful and often sufficient. $\endgroup$ – Nick Cox Nov 8 '17 at 8:59
  • $\begingroup$ I think the new users tend to provide whatever they have including long codes and complete output of the script etc. Reducing the question to what actually matters requires some effort and possibly a little bit deeper understanding of what they are trying do. Again, if they have no clue, they seem to copy paste everything they have. I don't think one can blame them for it. So I agree that the shrinkable snippets can actually be useful for a clearer look. $\endgroup$ – theGD Nov 8 '17 at 11:05
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Anyone capable of grasping the idea of MCVE and providing one is probably close to answering their problem. Most discussions of similar ideas stress that stripping your problem down is a good way to solve it and thus make a post unnecessary. $\endgroup$ – Nick Cox Nov 8 '17 at 13:42

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .