-8

The question in question. It's a general reference question. It shows no research. It's pretty terrible content all the way around. So can somebody explain why it's open and generating rep?

and yes I am aware that the sarcastic answer I posted to it was poor form, which is why I flagged it a few minutes later. I just feel like none of the high rep users of this site are being content watchdogs, which is quite frustrating.

| |
  • It may well be a bad question, but it has an excellent answer. – TRiG Jan 20 '13 at 18:46
  • 1
    I don't think it's a terrible question, but it does appear to be off-topic, which is reason enough to close it. Is "Hunted" a fantasy or SF show? It doesn't look like it, judging from its synopsis in Wikipedia. – Andres F. Jan 23 '13 at 1:56
  • I would like to point out to any future visitors that the initial complaint that I posted this under has been answered to my satisfaction. While I think that this communities specific guideline for what should constitute GR is misguided, it is clear that the community has embraced them as a valid question. Additionally, this particular question would not be breaking the community rules at all, now that the pertinent discussion has been pointed out to me. – sarge_smith Jan 23 '13 at 4:35
4

I just feel like none of the high rep users of this site are being content watchdogs, which is quite frustrating.

Acting as a "content watchdog" is not something that is strictly the responsibility of high rep users.

There are several tools available to users without sufficient reputation to vote to close.

You can (and should) downvote questions you feel are low quality.

If you feel a question should be closed, but don't have the reputation to cast such a vote, you can flag it for moderator attention.

Finally, if you feel the question isn't very good, you can try to edit it to make it better.

It is important to remember that not everyone will judge content the same way. It may seem like a terrible question to you, but that is a subjective call, not an objective one. While the low quality of the question may be obvious to you, it may not to others.

As has already been mentioned, General Reference is no longer a valid close reason. As to why it is still listed as an option, check the accepted answer to that meta question for more details.

Since you mentioned the FAQ, please note that according to the question linked in that faq, Google is not a valid reference site, so even if General Reference were still valid, this question would not fall under it.

As to why more people aren't acting on the question... I know I haven't voted on it simply because I'm not familiar with the show in question. Without knowing the context (how the dam relates to the show, the sci-fi elements, etc.), I am not going to downvote something simply because it is a short question. Neither am I going to upvote it. I don't believe this means I'm not "doing my job", but rather the opposite: I'm reserving my high reputation privileges for actions that I am confident that any decision I make will be informed.

Given that the show appears to be only 3 months old, it is not terribly surprising to me that not many people have voted one way or another.

| |
2

Regardless of the general 'content watchdog'iness of high-rep users, I've migrated this specific question to Movies & TV.SE. Doing a read of Hunted's Wikipedia page didn't show any fantastical elements. This appears to be a spy show set in present day. Given that it lacks fantasy, science-fiction, and speculative fiction elements, I think it's a better fit over at Movies.SE.

| |
1

This appears to be a legitimate, albeit short, question. General reference is no longer a basis for closing questions. I noted that you yourself have enough rep (if I read the FAQ correctly) to vote to close this question if you genuinely feel closure is warranted; as it stands right now, the question doesn't appear to have any votes for closure. Regarding voting, the question has one upvote. I would not exactly call one upvote generating rep at the speed of light.

No user -- low, medium, or high rep -- is on the computer 24-7. It looks like the question has already been reviewed by one of the moderators (Keen) and has been allowed to remain on the site.

| |
  • 1
    VTC is a 3k right. If general reference is removed as indicated, then perhaps you guys should remove it from the FAQ as a clear example of what not to ask. Or downvote it as that meta question clearly indicates is this communities accepted practice. Instead, two upvotes to the one downvote that I cast. I understand that no particular user is online at any particular time, but there are a number of high rep users on line at any given time, who should be enforcing community standards better. – sarge_smith Jan 20 '13 at 3:42
  • 1
    Hmm, I thought it said 250 for VTC, so I must have misread it. Anyway, general reference was removed only fairly recently -- I hope they will remove it from the FAQ as well, but I don't have any control over that. I'm a SE user, just like you -- I don't have the power to change the FAQ. Please consider that perhaps high-rep users have not taken any action on that question because they don't feel any is warranted. People have different views. What sucks as a question to you might be intriguing to someone else. It's impossible to force users to close a question they feel is valid. – Slytherincess Jan 20 '13 at 4:01
  • Oh I know. I'm just seeing a huge uptick in crappy questions that nobody seems to be doing anything about. As a community member that has been around since the doors opened, it is of some concern to me. BTW, the consensus wasn't that we should allow general reference, but that general reference could be and would be handled with down votes. That doesn't appear to be happening. – sarge_smith Jan 20 '13 at 4:07
  • 2
    @sarge_smith The FAQ change is in the plans (GR will be removed as part of a larger rewording of close reasons). If you don't think this question is interesting, downvote it. I don't see why you'd want to close it, even as GR (while it's easy to see that there's no dam by that name, this doesn't tell you whether the dam pictured in the show might exist by another name). – user56 Jan 20 '13 at 14:08
1

I honestly don't see anything wrong with the question.

Even if GR was still a valid close reason, the fact is, that question is not GR. I was going to request that you include the relevant information from your link in your answer, as is the standard practice here, but when I followed it I noticed that your answer wasn't even correct. The Khyber Dam that your Google search brings up isn't even on the right continent. And there is no "list of all of the dams in Pakistan" that I could find, and I looked (because I suspected there might actually have been an "Upper Khyber Dam" built in response to the Indus River floods in 2010 and 2011).

Had I not already known enough about the geography around the Pakistani/Afghani border to recognize some of the names, I doubt I would have been able to provide a good answer to that question.

| |

You must log in to answer this question.

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