Plenty of posts - most often from junior "scientists" (yes, in quotes!) throwing out their questions to the world, hoping for a catch in any direction - at RG are vague, incomplete, and seem to be the effect of a question from an advisor, tired of a PhD student asking too many questions.
What to do with them, when there is very little to go by?
Michael Patriksson Good question and I agree with the sentiments behind it. This is a regular theme where it's obvious that the poster hasn't done any preliminary work, asked colleagues, or even corrected the grammatical, spelling, and English errors. Further, a subset of these questions appear via the private messaging mechanism so that the question(s) are not even posted publicly.
I see when answers are posted that (sometimes) the poster doesn't come back for weeks or even not at all. This is downright rude to say the least and debases the contribution from the person that's answered.
There are also questions that rely on opinion rather than a scientific discussion based on factual data and these seem to attract a lot of 'devotees' and large numbers of recommendations for answers such as 'Following', 'Yes', 'I agree' etc.
I feel that the RG administrators should try and keep a scientific theme.
Michael Patriksson Good question and I agree with the sentiments behind it. This is a regular theme where it's obvious that the poster hasn't done any preliminary work, asked colleagues, or even corrected the grammatical, spelling, and English errors. Further, a subset of these questions appear via the private messaging mechanism so that the question(s) are not even posted publicly.
I see when answers are posted that (sometimes) the poster doesn't come back for weeks or even not at all. This is downright rude to say the least and debases the contribution from the person that's answered.
There are also questions that rely on opinion rather than a scientific discussion based on factual data and these seem to attract a lot of 'devotees' and large numbers of recommendations for answers such as 'Following', 'Yes', 'I agree' etc.
I feel that the RG administrators should try and keep a scientific theme.
There used to be a way to delete questions from the RG readers listing. RG question list needs to have a trashcan so each reader can delete questions from their listing. If something is really poor, RG could have a flag to encourage RG to remove the question from public post, and if appropriate, RG respond to author that question is being removed and give them basic advice on what types of questions are acceptable. Questioners with more than two warnings of poor content or syntax would automatically be referred to RG review team before they are allowed to go public, or otherwise if generated at University or company level, must be reviewed by someone on their staff before entered into the public post. Reponding to questions is at the disgression of the responder, but agree that some system that after you read a question, it could go to a trashcan, flag, if you want to cull out a question, or if nothing selected, automatically saved for future return. Agree, sticking to science is best, but also sometimes advice to budding or junior scientists can help them learn things, eg., like a scientist will learn statistics and data analysis techniques and/or consult with or have review by statistician before designing study and collecting data. Just grabbing public data and attempting to analyze it is not really scientific. But, I do assume that most of us have been in those same shoes, perhaps under water or overwhelmed, and it may have been a mentor, advisor or collegue, or critical publication review team that brought us back to reality of what is required or expected. Hopefully we learn, improve, share.
William F. Hansen One can still 'unfollow' a question and it won't pop up in your feed - but that means you have to follow it first..
Some of them seems to be the homework itself, from classes people are taking...
- Badges
- Science topic