Timeline for Why are so quick to kill posts that could be legitimate with a little bit of rewording?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 11, 2013 at 19:38 | comment | added | shigeta | I posted a beginner question last year, it did get closed but then reopened. Finding the discussion more rationalism than evidence driven. | |
| Jun 11, 2013 at 13:03 | comment | added | Mad Scientist Mod | SO has changed significantly over time, your impression might be based on older questions that would not be allowed today. Our moderation is not stricter than SO. | |
| Jun 11, 2013 at 12:43 | comment | added | shigeta | I'm not sure that your estimate of the statistics are accurate. stackoverflow routinely has discussions, highly cited opinions, amateurs, and more interesting posts that might have also closed here. Could it also be that our site is in the bottom quartile for pedantism and over-regulation? There are also more authoritative places for biology reference than this site. There are more than one right kind of stackexchange site. And if I may, inflexibility and rigidity is not rigor; increasing public engagement is not stooping. | |
| Jun 11, 2013 at 9:01 | history | answered | Mad ScientistMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |