23

This discussion is now closed.
Here's phase 1 of what we've decided to do about identification-requests (deprecating).
Here's phase 2 (blacklisting).
Here's phase 3 (delete and lock).


The topic of id-request is a very subjective one. I believe that it's difficult to provide an objective data for analysis. Afterall correlation does not imply causation.

Id-requests are something we struggled with dealing with since they first came up on our site. Objectively on paper, they can make decent questions. But in practice, this is far from true. Some common complaints about these types of question are that:

  • They are too localized and oftentimes vaguely worded, and typically unhelpful to other users. Someone trying to remember the same thing as you might recall certain details more vividly than others, this oftentimes results in different descriptions of the same thing.

    There's no easy way to resolve this. Answering identification question is not unlike giving directions: if you don't give someone good directions they'll have a hard time finding what they are looking for.

    Take a look at this map, made by a directionally-challenged character from a popular manga:

    Ryouga is directionally challenged

    Really challenged

    Would you find what you're looking for or where you need to go? The place you're looking for based off of these directions? Probably not. However more often than not we get users the ask question that feel like these maps, despite our attempts to help them include better details with our guidelines.

  • Users make little effort, but expect the world in return. We've seen a lot of these types of id request questions. Most of them are in the form of image-only id requests, which got out of hand really quick, mostly because the ones asking the question almost never tried doing a reverse image search themselves and expect us to do it and tell them. We're not here to be someone's personal search engine/concierge service, we're here to ask and answer questions about the world and culture of anime and manga. Filling our site with these questions can be as bad as watching filler episodes of a long-running anime. It gets us nowhere.

    Since then we've disallowed media-only (only a link to an image, audio, video) identification questions, but we've made some provisions to allow users to ask questions about identifying specific , , and the rare but occasional , using actual pictures that you've seen or taken yourself.

    As of this post, the help center topic for what's on-topic and our tour page have been updated to note that users should follow these guidelines when asking identification request questions, including our updated stance on media-only identification requests.

  • Rarely do users that ask id-requests stick around or bother to come back. Statistically speaking the retention numbers on id-request askers are low. Not only that, but a fair number of them are asked by unregistered users, whose accounts are cookie-based and volatile, meaning that once they lose their session cookie, they have no way of logging back to this account (without registering that account). This results in many id request questions being essentially abandoned.

While we care about making more of an effort to downvote and close these questions, the fact that these post continue to pop up and with the same issues, is a bit of a cause for concern.

I, for one, do not like to see the current trend of where identification questions are going and would like to start deprecating them. We've made many efforts and guides to help users write better identification questions, but as time goes by, reminding them of such gets pretty tedious. Our previous stance was to downvote and close these questions based on our guidelines. That's all fine and done, but it requires users to actively pay attention to these questions as they come up via the review queue or on the main page. Instead of devoting our time to dealing with these questions, I'd like to see our community's efforts direct to community development between users. We've done gift exchanges, viewing sessions, and even a multi-discipline project like game development: I'd like to see us nurture this spirit more. Therefore, I believe it's in the community's best interest to deprecate and eventually remove identification questions in their entirety from our site.

I do understand that there is opposition to removing the questions completely, which is why I'd like to give them one last chance to not only be heard but also defend their position on this matter and what they believe would help improve the situation of dealing with the influx of low quality and abandoned id-requests. Maybe we've overlooked something, maybe we could have done something better, or maybe we went about things in the wrong manner.

You may discuss or scrutinize the plans as much as you'd like here on meta or in our main chat room. Regardless of how much or how little reputation you have in this community, your proposal will be heard equally, as long as there is consensus on it within the community. However, note that this is likely to be the final time to voice your opinions. I would like us to finally reach a decisive conclusion on this matter once and for all.

You have until May 8th to make your case (for, against, other) and leave any comments.

However, while such question are off-topic on our site, they will still be welcome in our main chat for users with with at least 20 rep (globally on StackExchange).

  • 9
    This is the part where I get to say I TOLD YOU SO. – senshin Apr 21 '16 at 22:02
  • 3
    @senshin Yes, you did. You were right. – кяαzєя Apr 21 '16 at 22:15
  • 4
    here is a picture which pretty much sums up all of the problems with id-requests: postimg link – Armin May 4 '16 at 9:05
  • Why not just do like Arqade and require a screenshot, video, or audio clip? – Mazura Jul 1 '17 at 18:43
  • So... the end result is now that all these questions just end up on scifi.SE, which is probably less-better-equipped to answer them. Personally I would've been much happier to see these type of questions retained and allowed here, but only allowed to remain open if they were of high quality, i.e. had sufficient detail to be answered. – Ian Kemp Dec 1 '17 at 9:24
16

I am against keeping identification question on the site and I believe that there are quite a few users within the community that feel that same way on this matter. I would like to propose the following plan for deprecating and getting rid of them:

  1. Start closing all NEW questions with a modification to the existing off-topic close reason to remind users that all identification questions are off-topic. All users are encouraged to vote to close them as they pop up.

  2. After 30 15 days, blacklist the and associated tag synonyms, close ALL remaining questions, and apply a historical lock to them. This will most likely be done via a to the CMs.

  3. After 60 30 days, delete all questions with a score of 3 or less less than 4, without at least one answer with a score of 3 or more. The ones that remain will serve as a reminder to other (new) users that while we have allowed these question in the past, these question are no longer on-topic on our site. These questions will remain and be and locked permanently. Future questions should not only be locked, but also deleted.

    Doing so will is meant to preserve some of the better identification request questions for purposes of keeping historical artefacts. The three-step process is meant to be less abrupt and ease everyone into the removal of the tag and questions tagged with it.

Removing the tag will most definitely have a rather significant impact on our question and answer count. This is why, in return, I would like to us to start organizing more community events to talk about, recommend, and watch anime in a monthly basis (or weekly, if the initiative gains enough traction).

Some examples would be short weekly collaborative watch sessions for on-going seasonal anime (two sessions, each one for people in different time zones), and a monthly binge session of an entire complete series or set of movies following a theme (there will be 2 time slots to accommodate different time zones as well).

There is also the possibility of hosting themed community events involving asking question on certain tags: we've done similar things in the past, both when with seasonal tags and themed tags.

I'll give you guys until the end of the next month (May 8th) to mull over this, before implementing anything.

This is a modified version of @Makoto's data query that shows the question that will be kept.

However, while such question are off-topic on our site, they are still welcome in our main chat for users with with at least 20 rep (globally on StackExchange).

  • 5
    if we are keeping some of the good id requests then i can't see how we can remove the tag at all – Memor-X Apr 21 '16 at 10:47
  • 1
    @Memor-X We can remove the tag from the questions and lock them with a historical lock. – Madara Uchiha Apr 21 '16 at 11:12
  • 1
    @MadaraUchiha i thought a tag can only be removed if it's not in use – Memor-X Apr 21 '16 at 11:13
  • 3
    @Memor-X since the tag would be blacklisted similar to the anime tag, you would not be able to add the tag to a question – Michael McQuade Apr 21 '16 at 13:19
  • I fear you're being far too optimistic about the quality of these questions, and even more conservative with the bounds you specify. I've created an SEDE query to play around with min question score and min answer score. You can see if there's anything that's exemplary in there, but I'm not as confident. – Makoto Apr 22 '16 at 2:12
  • Also, I see no reason why the blacklist couldn't be instantaneous outside of technical limitations, which would imply that we need more hamsters for the server farm... ;) – Makoto Apr 22 '16 at 2:12
  • 1
    @Maroon that one should have never been tagged with id-req. Id-reqs should never have a series tag. – кяαzєя Apr 22 '16 at 4:18
  • 4
    When will this closure come into effect? We will need a new closure reason – Toshinou Kyouko Apr 25 '16 at 18:06
  • 2
    @ToshinouKyouko well it hasn't been a week since this meta was even posted. i know all out VTC Trigger Fingers are twitching with anticipation we need to give the subject a bit of time so people can have their say – Memor-X Apr 26 '16 at 11:37
  • 2
    @Memor-X indeed - I should have been clearer, I just would like some disambiguity between the "Now" now and the "Now" in the future, so that people aren't confused. – Toshinou Kyouko Apr 26 '16 at 13:06
  • 4
    ++++++1, go forward, so that i can also stole the idea for movies.se and give a successful example of implemented site. – Ankit Sharma Apr 27 '16 at 13:04
  • 1
    You said in the question that we have until May 8 to make our case, but you'll start implementing things after May 1? Suggestions: 1) before implementing anything, it would be courteous to the community to provide in the post a SQL query (probably not the one updated by Ross Ridge) that correctly identifies the questions that would be removed according to the criteria. 2) divide the post removals into phases, so for example you'll delete questions with negative scores with no upvoted answers by date XXX, then you'll delete questions with < 1 score with no answers > 3 scores by date YYY. – Gao Apr 30 '16 at 4:31
  • 2
    I have a slight objection to the criteria. I think if an answer gets >= 3 (or 5) votes on questions with < 3 && >= -1 votes, they should be considered before deleting them right away. 3 is the mark for well-received (or good) posts on SE. Also, is there any way to separate the upvotes from the downvotes? IMO, a post with 3 upvotes and 3 downvotes is different from a post with 0 upvotes and 0 downvotes, although both balance out to be 0 net score. By design, an upvote assigns more reputation than a downvote takes away, so 3/3 is not equivalent to 0/0. – Gao Apr 30 '16 at 4:38
  • 2
    @Gao May 1st is a typo on my part. May 8th is the drop dead date. Using this modified query you can see the questions that will be kept as of this post there are 413, which is still a lot. There are currently about 2,194 id-req questions. I believe that shifting through them is them and removing it bit by bit has no actual benefit. Afterall someone has to spend time sift through these questions and schedule the tasks. – кяαzєя Apr 30 '16 at 5:11
  • 4
    @Gao Just because 3 pp upvote a question, while 3 ppl downvote it doesn't make it a "good" question. It makes the question controversial. We want to leave some of the better examples of id-req as an example of how they should be asked or answered, but at the same time, we don't want too many of them to be left over as they will be tagged as "untagged." – кяαzєя Apr 30 '16 at 5:14
9

Id requests suck, I've been convinced for quite a while that we should get rid of them, and I agree with ʞɹɐzǝɹ's plan to do so.

While there are many reasons they suck, and many reasons to get rid of them, I want to focus on one in particular--it takes way too much time and energy to police them.

On a typical day, I visit the site four or five times. Each of those times, there's usually at least one new id request to look at (I view the site from the "All questions" tab, ordered from newest to oldest). It's usually written as one long sentence all in a single paragraph in shoddy English, with awful punctuation and incomprehensible word use. Sometimes this is because the asker is a non-native speaker of English, but sometimes the asker is a native speaker of English who is just too lazy or ignorant to put any effort into decent writing. I have no way to tell, so I have to go in and make paragraphs and use commas and fix typos to make it minimally presentable. I've also started cutting out all the useless fluff that people add to id requests—"Thanks in advance", "When I was young I saw this show I really liked", "Please excuse my poor English", "I'm going crazy trying to find this", "It was really cute", "It had great art", "I met my spouse because of this manga", etc.

There's also been a rash of users recently who don't understand how tags work for some reason, so they just toss a bunch of random tags on their question instead of tagging it . , , , are all common but I just voted to close a question which had been wrongly tagged . So those have to be changed. (Since so many of our questions are id requests, it boggles my mind that they didn't see another question tagged and figure out how they were supposed to do it. But id questioners do keep finding new, inventive ways to suck.)

Then the question is usually horribly vague, so I leave a comment asking the OP to add more information, like when they saw it, where they saw it, what exact year it was, etc. Typically I also downvote, and sometimes vote to close. Since I like to retract downvotes and close votes if it's justified, I come back later to check on it and see if the OP has done anything to improve the question. Very rarely is that the case. Usually the OP has posted some kind of whiny comment asking why everyone is complaining when that's really all they remember. Sometimes I try to explain to them why their question is bad, but it's usually a waste of time.

This process becomes draining, tedious, and frustrating after a while. I imagine it's also frustrating for the question asker. Also, the time I spend doing this is time I'm on the site, not asking or answering questions--in other words, not actually building up the site, but rather just trying to stop it collapsing under the weight of bad questions. Not making a better site, just trying to prevent it becoming a worse site.

I know it's not just me. I can see other users doing the same thing—users who once contributed great questions and answers, some of the best on the site, now spend all their time on the site sifting through garbage on the off chance of finding, not a diamond, but maybe an AA battery that isn't quite dead yet, or a jar that could make a good container for nuts and bolts and screws. I can see these users making the same edits, leaving the same comments asking for more information, voting to close, arguing with whiny questioners who expect service two hours ago, dammit, and an apology from the manager for the waiter's rudeness.

It's just not worth all this trouble. Whatever value id requests add to the site—and, as we've discussed before, many of us believe they don't add much—that value is not worth all the time it takes to police them according to the strict, baroque guidelines we've set for them. Instead, we could have users out there writing better questions, or answering better questions. If we ban them, they'll keep showing up, and we'll still have to vote to close them, but just automatically casting a vote to close isn't nearly as draining, tedious, and frustrating as that entire process of trying to goad an unwilling OP into writing a decent question.

  • If it's taking too much time to police them, maybe we're doing it wrong. Just downvote anything that looks remotely horrendous and move on, after having also casted a close vote. What I propose we do instead is refine the close reasons and classify/clarify them better so that we don't have to explain in the comment everytime why the questions are being closed. If the id-asker still complains, they aren't welcome anyway, since they can't read. – Gao Apr 23 '16 at 10:44
  • 4
    @Gao that's what we do on Stack Overflow. I don't want us to moderate our content like we do on Stack Overflow. We're not nearly at that scale to make it justified. – Madara Uchiha Apr 23 '16 at 10:46
  • @MadaraUchiha But if we remove ids, aren't we also moderating content, a priori? We would piss people off either way. – Gao Apr 23 '16 at 10:51
  • 5
    There's a big difference between saying "We, as a community, don't like those, and don't allow them anymore", and "We like them, but we'll downvote everything and never come back to them, to check for improvements" – Madara Uchiha Apr 23 '16 at 10:52
  • If the OP improves (hopefully) the post, it will enter the review queue anyway, so we will check them (hopefully). Just an observation: Arqade allows only ids with concrete screenshot. We disallow ids with concrete screenshot/images (except merchandise) and allow text-only ids. Interesting? – Gao Apr 23 '16 at 10:57
  • 2
    @Gao That's basically what we've been doing: "clarifying" our guidelines (i.e. making them more and more byzantine, with more and more exceptions, subheadings, and articles) and writing new meta posts every so often, stating the same guidelines in different ways, in the hopes that new users will see it. But people keep asking the same kind of questions and coming back with the defense "But that's all I remember!". I suspect many of them do read the guidelines, but because the guidelines are so complex and so subjective, they can't really tell if their question is okay, so they just post. – Torisuda Apr 24 '16 at 18:41
6

Originally I would be for keeping on-topic on the grounds that it can be a good starting point for new users.

HOWEVER!

I have now changed my stance. I am in agreement with making them off-topic and the removal of low scoring questions.

My original view was that making an id-request question wasn't hard, and that new users would be able to post good quality questions. However this has not been the case, and the community has had to

in an attempt to try and improve the quality, but it appears that new users — and sometimes normal users who never used the tag before — seem to ignore all of these.

However, we can't put all the blame on questions. Stack Exchange is a Question and Answer Site. Making a lot of high quality questions is one thing, but we also want high quality answers too.

Like questions, I thought that new users could easily answer an id-request and get some rep — since 1 upvote = 10 rep, and accept = 15 rep, compared to questions which were 1 upvote = 5 rep. And writing a good answer to an id-request isn't hard: you name a title you believe that matches, give a description of the title then list how the title matches and possibly what parts may have been misremembered.

However, too many times, when I see an answer to an id-request by a new user, they are just one-liners, sometimes with a link, sometimes an illegal site and sometimes with padding crap like:

it's Sakamoto desu ga!!!!!!!!!......................need 150 characters1

and even when the community posts a comment notifying them of this, it usually falls on deaf ears and another user has to use their time to edit the answer to include even a description of the mentioned title.

While other users editing answer isn't new, it's normally formatting, re-organizing text to flow better and removing banter. But for id-requests, users are more than often editing answers to add in new information (such as the case with this answer). Aside from the fact that the editing user is giving up time for another user who clearly doesn't want to put any effort into their own post, a third-party adding in more info into an answer is traditionally an edit rejection on the ground of conflicting with the author's intent (with the exception to quoting content from links).


Another thing is that id-requests are also the only tag which one can't ask and answer at the same time. Sometimes when a user discovers something interesting they post a good question and answer it, sharing their knowledge with the community.

However with id-requests you can't do that. As per what Krazer has said in the question and in JNat's comment, how one person might recall a title could be very different from how anyone else might do it. Self-answering an id-request doesn't really add any valuable knowledge when compared to this self answered question.

Even when the user doesn't abandon the question, when they ended up finding the titles they wanted identified they end up self-answering with a one-liner, which is one of the problems.


1: can't remember if it was 150 characters or not, but you get the idea

1

I'm on the fence about this but because no one has posted a contrary opinion yet, I'll offer this up. I'm uncertain about this because as I see it, there's one good reason why identification questions should be a banned, and few admittedly not as good reasons why they should be allowed. Given the balance between the two, I'm of the opinion we should err on the side of caution and so continue to allow identification requests.

One good reason to get rid of them

Identification requests have one fundamental problem, and it's a pretty damning one. It unlikely that when answered they'll be all that helpful to anyone other than person asking the question. That's not what these Stack Exchange sites are supposed to be about. If questions only helped the asker then it wouldn't be worth the expense of running a site like this. The value in these sites comes from the fact that one question can end up helping a lot of people.

Now, I'm not saying questions should judged based on how many people they might help. There is a good reason why the old "too localized" close reason was removed, there just isn't a good way to set objective criteria for judging whether individual posts could help "enough" people. This is different though, this is an entire class of questions that don't seem to add much value to the site. That's a reasonable justification for not allowing them.

A few reasons to keep them

The one saving grace here is that while identification requests are unlikely to be helpful to someone else trying to identify something, they still are of some value to people browsing the site. I read them to see if they mention anything interesting, some show that I never heard of and may like. It's not big thing but they do seem to gather views at rate similar to other kinds of posts, so they must have some value beyond helping the person asking the question.

What I think is the most compelling reason to keep them is that we seem to do a relatively good job of answering them. There doesn't seem to be another place that does a better job. It's not a question of the site lacking the expertise. There's also nothing that makes these questions fundamentally unanswerable or outside the scope of the site. This isn't a case where these questions don't fit the Q/A format. They aren't ones we can say are better suited to a more traditional discussion forum.

While this doesn't matter much as it used to, getting rid of identification requests would take a big chuck out of the activity on this site. The good thing is that since this site is no longer in beta, there's no fear of closure as a result (plus they changed graduation criteria so it's no longer activity based anyways). Still, it's not obvious this would help improve the overall health of the site. It's easy to say that people asking identification requests almost never post again and aren't contributing to the site, so banning them won't hurt, but that is actually hard to measure. While it's true not many accounts post again, it's hard to say how many people are posting using new accounts, having forgotten or lost the old one.

The lowered activity can have snowball affect as well. People who see a less active site are not as likely to become active. If you're someone like me, who isn't interested in shounen fighting anime, then this site effectively becomes a lot less active. I've probably read more identification questions here than not. Active users may end up becoming less active.

So I think there's actually some risk to banning these questions. There's lots of hard to predict ways their absence could negatively affect activity, like less word of mouth, lower search rankings, and the site not showing up in the "Hot Network Questions" list as much (though this site's id requests don't seem to show up there as much as other sites).

Finally, another reason to keep them is the fact that things have actually gotten better. The site now has better criteria for closing bad identification questions. The growth in these questions has plateaued, and no longer threaten to take over the site. So, just when they've gotten under control they should now be eliminated completely?

  • 1
    +1 for raising the possible snowball effect and not knowing if id askers return and registered for new account. As to how helpful ids are, I liken them to questions on code review. Unless you're reviewing code for a popular project, they aren't likely to help many people, yet code review exists as an SE subnetwork. – Gao Apr 22 '16 at 10:08
  • 1
    It actually is easy to say that users that post identification requests don't contribute to the site. The activity from users asking identification requests here is sporadic and not long lasting, and if we're basing our participation on one of those statistics alone, then we're in a pretty bad spot. – Makoto Apr 22 '16 at 15:27
  • 2
    I like the point that these questions can be interesting to read, but lately, I frankly haven't really enjoyed reading the questions that have popped up, so this doesn't really help me enjoy the site more (even though as of right now, I'm not interested in most of the anime that has been asked about on the front page). – Maroon Apr 22 '16 at 17:52
  • 5
    "There doesn't seem to be another place that does a better job." - my house could, in principle, serve as a venue for persons looking for a place to fling excrement at the walls, and I'm sure I cpuld outfit my house to serve that purpose quite well. And yet I somehow manage to resist the urge to invite excrement-flingers to my home. – senshin Apr 23 '16 at 2:37
  • 3
    @senshin You've taken that out of context, it's not just this place does a better job, it's also that we do a good job of it, and the questions fit the scope and format of the site. It's like a zoo getting rid of it's monkeys because they behave like monkeys. – Ross Ridge Apr 23 '16 at 3:36
  • 3
    @Evilloli Well, let me put it another way. You would expect a zoo to have monkeys. You would expect a Anime & Manga Q&A site to be able to identify an anime or manga. Banning id-request isn't going to change that expectation, not if the people who ask these questions only ever post one question and never return. They'll never get the chance to learn differently. So these posts won't stop, they'll just be all closed now. Kids will still come to the zoo expecting to see monkeys. Maybe they'll spread the word that zoo doesn't have monkeys anymore, more likely they'll tell everyone that zoo sucks. – Ross Ridge Apr 23 '16 at 6:10
  • 3
    Re: the fact that ID requests fit the site, and that we answer them well. Low-effort "translation" ("what does this Chinese text mean") or reference ("how do I pronounce this word") questions are usually not allowed on language SE's, even though top users tend to be pretty good at answering those. – Maroon Apr 23 '16 at 18:42
  • 2
    Why is the fact that we seem to be the place that identifies anime better of any importance here? We can still keep doing that in chat, and don't need to fill our front page with crap just because we seem to be the best community in the 'net doing it. Is it worth filling our site with low-quality questions, prone to be abandoned by the hit-and-run users who ask them, just because we appear to be able to do it better than anyone else? What benefit to they bring to the table? Do they help other users? Is anyone going to remember the same anime in the same way and find it through that... – JNat Apr 25 '16 at 14:40
  • 2
    (cont'd) same question? Are the users even sticking around to help us grow and to help others after they get their answer? Do they even care if we downvote and close their questions, and come back to edit and improve them? These put a great toll on our community, as part of it spends time and effort trying to help a single person, and not the community — in that sense, id-requests do not fit well into our format: they may fit well into the Q&A format, but not into the SE philosphy. – JNat Apr 25 '16 at 14:40
  • 2
    We're better off motivating users to positively contribute to our community, so they earn enough rep to go to chat and ask about the anime they're looking for there — win-win situation: we can still be the top place in the 'net to get your anime identified, and we rid our front page of this disease while helping our community grow. – JNat Apr 25 '16 at 14:43
  • 3
    You mention "the questions fit the Stack Exchange Q/A format" — I disagree with this statement. As I said before, they a Q/A format, but if they fit the Stack Exchange Q/A format, it's just barely. And I agree that your last sentence may end up being true: in fact, I might have said it myself, and added "and we don't lose much (if anything at all) from that." – JNat Apr 25 '16 at 17:03
  • 2
    @RossRidge "the fact that we have a community of experts that are good at answering the questions" with other kinds of questions yes but with id requests the number of users who can produce high quality answers diminish considerably and most answers end up being one liners which look nothing short from a random guess. while they might answer the question in the end the answer is still crap and ends up being deleted because of a high number of downvotes – Memor-X Apr 26 '16 at 6:30
  • 7
    @RossRidge "if people making id-requests never stick around as you suggest, not even to see their questions downvoted, closed and/or edited, then they're not going to stick around to see their questions closed now. They're never going to gain the reputation necessary to ask their question on chat instead." they can by asking/answering other kinds of questions. we're Anime and Manga not Anime and Manga Identification Request – Memor-X Apr 26 '16 at 6:34
  • 4
    @RossRidge which then brings us to what Krazer said in the question "We're not here to be someone's personal search engine/concierge service, we're here to ask and answer questions about the world and culture of anime and manga.". if a user comes here just to ask id request questions then they are just proving him right in thinking they are only using us as their personal search engine. – Memor-X Apr 26 '16 at 7:06
  • 2
    @Pwassonne some people have felt the same but the problem remains when the questions and answers just bad and are taking away too much time from the community to fix. personally while i would love to discover new Shoujo Ai/Yuri titles through ID Requests but i feel that it's a disservice for them when we have a horrible id request for a hentai about a shouta having sex with multiple lolis says it's yuri when nothing they describe even hints at it – Memor-X May 2 '16 at 14:09
-6

Just my 2 Cents.

1 - This was a ridiculous small time frame. For a matter of this magnitude you should have allowed at least six months discussion

2 - ID requests are basically all I'm interested in answering on this site, since the rest of the questions seem of even lower quality, like questions about some boring stuff from Naruto, Bleach, One Piece or whatever kids watch these days.

  • 10
    If you aren't aware, the ongoing discussion on id-req questions has been is a long standing one, spanning nearly three years, so having to go through it for another 6 months seems unreasonable to me. If you feel that the varieties of question on the site are "questions about some boring stuff from Naruto, Bleach, One Piece or whatever kids watch these days," please feel to leave some feedback on meta, so we can make an attempt to keep your interest. We can't help you if you don't speak up and tell us. – кяαzєя May 13 '16 at 21:47
  • 2
    in regards to point 1 we had this meta post on the FEATURED ON META section in the question lists and pinned on chat not to mention it was at the top of the meta question list almost the entire time so 2 weeks to me seem enough time for anyone who could participate in the meta post their opinion. it wasn't like we hid it so no one could post their opinion – Memor-X May 17 '16 at 11:28
  • 1
    Two weeks maybe enough for people that visit regularly. Which seems fairly unnecessary seeing how few questions get asked anyway. I liked, for example, this question anime.stackexchange.com/questions/34223 but it got closed for dubious reasons. – Ocean Aug 6 '16 at 13:59
  • Just my two cents as well: comments like "like questions about some boring stuff from Naruto, Bleach, One Piece or whatever kids watch these days" doesn't seem to........how do I put it? What exactly makes a high quality question? Anyway, I totally agree that there needs to be some way of making sure questions are not the "Zomg, there was a pink haired girl who was she?" variety. Maybe there could be a monthly pizza/caffeine prize for "highest number of grammatical/sentence structure edits?" – NZKshatriya Sep 25 '16 at 8:18

You must log in to answer this question.

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