ReAskMe?

July 24, 2007 10:56 AM

If you asked a question on AskMe a while ago and got not-so-good* answers, would it be bad form to ask the same question again? Should it be disguised so as to not seem to be the same question? * to put it politely.
posted by signal to Etiquette/Policy at 10:56 AM (45 comments total)

If it really is the same question, you should link to the original, and perhaps provide more guidance/clarity as to what kind of information you are looking for.
posted by Manjusri at 11:02 AM on July 24, 2007

If it's you asking AS you both times you should definitely link to the original question, explain why the answers were not what you had hoped that would be, hopefully ask the question in a way that will lead to better answers, and cross your fingers.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 11:03 AM on July 24, 2007

In the cases I'm thinking of, the questions where very precise and well defined, yet got meandering, tangential, or emotional responses.
posted by signal at 11:04 AM on July 24, 2007

My point is that the previous questions' answers where just so much noise, so linking to them might generate more noise for the reposting of the questions.
posted by signal at 11:05 AM on July 24, 2007

Bad signal to noise ratio, huh?
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 11:06 AM on July 24, 2007 [5 favorites]

maybe you should ask somewhere else if you're not getting good answers here ... some things just don't work at this site
posted by pyramid termite at 11:07 AM on July 24, 2007

linking to them might generate more noise for the reposting of the questions.

Not if you linked to them as specifically not the sort of answers you were looking for.
posted by dersins at 11:12 AM on July 24, 2007

You're asking the same people, so unless you point out what went wrong the first time, I can't think of any reason to not expect an exact repeat of what you didn't like.
posted by mendel at 11:21 AM on July 24, 2007

You're asking the same people, so unless you point out what went wrong the first time, I can't think of any reason to not expect an exact repeat of what you didn't like.

I actually disagree with this because of the traffic volume on AskMe. Ultimately, you're not really asking the same people.

Who reads and responds to your post is often quite different because there's so many new questions they disappear from the front page so fast. So, if you post on a Wednesday at 2pm you're likely to get a totally different group of readers / answerers than if you posted on a Thursday at 1am...
posted by twiggy at 11:25 AM on July 24, 2007

Also you may want to watch out for setting up too many hurdles for people. I've seen some questions tank badly because the person who asked them basically made one of a few (to me) mistakes

1. set up limits for question answering that were basically impossible and pissed off everyone early (i.e. "I need a solution for charging my car battery in the winter, answer can not involve electricity")

2. set up a series of limits that, when combined made the question so specific that no one could basically answer it. Sometimes when people feel that a question is not answerable in a decent way, that maybe they should take a stab at it even though they don't have the perfect answer. This sort of "Well I don't really know but have you tried...." answer is much less likely with a more open question. I know it sounds sort of counterintuitive.

3. dictated the *way* they wanted people to respond -- something like "just answer the question, I don't care what you think about Topic X" People ignore these, often, and it just makes the OP seem irritable. You may BE irritable, but treating the people who answer your questions for free as irritants sets the relationship off on the wrong foot.

4. some variant of XYZ SUCKS AMIRITE questioning. I don't think this is what you're after, but questions that have a lot of baggage clearly coming along with them will get people addressing the OPs issue with the topic as well as whatever the topic was to begin with. Good to avoid, use neutral terms whenever possible.

I don't know if any of these apply to your situation, but think long and hard about WHY you think you didn't get answers that you liked the first time before you ask again.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 11:26 AM on July 24, 2007 [20 favorites]

"What should I do about situation Z?
[more inside]
I've asked this question before in this thread, but the answers weren't particularly helpful because what I was looking for was X and what I got was a lot of Y, so without continuing the debate from the previous thread, does anyone have an answer that focuses more on X?"
posted by empath at 11:41 AM on July 24, 2007

Just keep asking until we get it right?
posted by Cranberry at 11:42 AM on July 24, 2007

That's a great list, jessamyn. Perhaps a new section on your user page?

#3 really twists my knickers
posted by mosessis at 11:53 AM on July 24, 2007

I have been putting of posting this very question for months, except my example is more about a question with very concrete answers, that could benefit from the new eyes at AskMe since originally posted.

To be more clear, I once posted an art-project-idea question, and while I got some good ideas, nothing that really inspired me. Now, years later, I'd love to post it again for the new AskMe audience. But I have always had a niggling feeling that would open a can of worms that might be best left unopened.
posted by tristeza at 11:56 AM on July 24, 2007

jessamyn, I've also noticed that questions which trigger anecdotal responses will do so even if they are framed precisely. E.g.

"Why when faced with Situation X will people do Y? I'm looking for psychological studies or evolutionary explanations of this behavior. Also if there is a name for it.."

will almost always get:

"Well, I dont do Y although I had a friend once who..."
posted by vacapinta at 11:56 AM on July 24, 2007

I don't do Y either, but I have been known to do X.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 11:57 AM on July 24, 2007 [1 favorite]

open the box turtle with the tin shears.
posted by quonsar at 12:05 PM on July 24, 2007 [3 favorites]

vacapinta, I think those sorts of responses can occasionally be helpful, either because they give more Google/keyword fodder to the asker or because the asker is too hung up on his or her thesis and needs to be opened up to the possibility that he or she should be searching for a broader phenomenon.
posted by occhiblu at 12:05 PM on July 24, 2007

So, if you post on a Wednesday at 2pm you're likely to get a totally different group of readers / answerers than if you posted on a Thursday at 1am...

Do people really not read every question? I think y'all aren't on the site enough.
posted by smackfu at 12:18 PM on July 24, 2007

Optimism.
posted by signal at 12:31 PM on July 24, 2007

Here's a very recent example of this activity. As you can clearly see, nowhere in the question does the original poster ask for clarification on the standards and practices for showing appreciation to those whom you pay for a service.

As of now, a selection from the ten "answers":

I'm puzzled: do you not pay these people?

It's one thing to have a spontaneous show of appreciation for service above-and-beyond what you expect, it's entirely another to have some sort of ongoing, rotating schedule of this among customers that you are expected to follow, unless the workers aren't being paid.

I don't have a child, so perhaps I'm out of the loop- is this kind of thing common? Who is organizing it? IMO, this seems in the same vein as the increasing ubiquity of "tip jars"- a sleazy move by cheap managers to guilt customers into increasing staff pay instead of doing it yourself.

Gratuitous transcript of the diner scene in fucking Reservoir Dogs

I have to agree that there's something vaguely Orwellian about "and now we shall all assemble for our weekly Appreciation."

Apparently our aggregate reading comprehension is polished to the same level as our emotional perception, that of a twelve year old.

At the very least answer the question in the format it was presented and see how off key that rings around in your head before posting:

Q: What's an appropriate gesture?

A: An appropriate gesture would be to break into your local police department, steal their riot gear and kit out yourself and your significant other in full body armor. Using Google Maps, create a zone you can cordon off in the event of the great preschool siege. When the moment is right kick down the door and throw in a flashbang, storming in with your batons raised ready to pound the skulls of those who would take your patronage and then "appreciate" your milk and cookies on a bi-weekly basis! These communist bastards will surely stand no chance on trial for their grave managerial sleight of hand, attempting to indoctrinate your children into some socialist fucking nightmare!

Yeah that's pretty solid, I'd say GREENLIGHT.
posted by prostyle at 12:44 PM on July 24, 2007 [3 favorites]

Speaking as someone whose response you quoted, prostyle, my reading comprehension is just fine, thankyouverymuch. The clear implication of my answer (and others) is that the OP really has no business participating in that scheme.

Shall I put it in bullet points for you next time, or perhaps a five-paragraph essay?
posted by mkultra at 12:59 PM on July 24, 2007

The clear implication of my answer is that the OP really has no business participating in that scheme.

That's absolutely adorable, I don't recall reading anything that would suggest the original poster is seeking advice on the morality, legality or otherwise functional aspects of this so called "appreciation day" - or for that matter - our thoughts on their willing participation in said events.

Shall I put it in bullet points for you next time, or perhaps a five-paragraph essay?

I will accept no less than six, thank you very much!
posted by prostyle at 1:09 PM on July 24, 2007

mkultra - how does that answer the poster's question?
posted by tristeza at 1:09 PM on July 24, 2007

Not to be defensive, but . . . OK, to be defensive, I did three paragraphs quite sincerely answering the OP's question about how to show appreciation and therefore didn't think it went all that amiss to tack on a brief observation about the oddness of the whole concept.
posted by FelliniBlank at 1:10 PM on July 24, 2007

Gah, that's awful. Answer the damn question or move on, prostyle has a lovely point.
posted by agregoli at 1:13 PM on July 24, 2007

Lovely. Ha.
posted by smackfu at 1:17 PM on July 24, 2007

I'm probably guilty of the hyperspecific question limitations, but it's usually due to me either having already tried that approach and failed, or being unable to change the constraints of the problem.

That having been said, I do have some questions I wouldn't mind re-asking myself.
posted by adipocere at 1:48 PM on July 24, 2007

set up a series of limits that, when combined made the question so specific that no one could basically answer it.

That's an odd-headed view of the world - surely most of the time the limits aren't "set up", but are part of the questioner's problem?
posted by cillit bang at 1:53 PM on July 24, 2007

That's an odd-headed view of the world - surely most of the time the limits aren't "set up", but are part of the questioner's problem?

You're totally right. I've just seen the rare question like "I'm looking for a piece of software that does this" or "I want to buy a widget that has this functionality" and then they list like eight requirements and the answers wind up either being "You can't" or "Maybe you should try losing requirements 2 and 5 and see if this thing will fit the bill"

Sometimes the OP totally knows what they want and wants to know the answer or be told "that's impossible", and sometimes their list is just features they hope they can find and they'll be okay with something not perfect but pretty close. Since a lot of times it's usually hard to tell the difference without asking a lot more questions about their lengthy requirements, sometimes people think they're answering the second sort of question (help me make a choice) when they've got the first type (tell me the answer or say "it's impossible"). The result can be an annoyed question asker and a confused answerer when their answers aren't appreciated.

Since I think a lot of times people aren't even aware that there are two ways their question could be interpreted -- sometimes they are certainly, but often not -- this can exacerbate the confusion that sometimes results.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 2:05 PM on July 24, 2007

I've also noticed that questions which trigger anecdotal responses will do so even if they are framed precisely. E.g.

"Why when faced with Situation X will people do Y? I'm looking for psychological studies or evolutionary explanations of this behavior. Also if there is a name for it.."

will almost always get:

"Well, I dont do Y although I had a friend once who..."

I've noticed that there's a subsection of people who read the first sentence in an AskMe question, formulate a response, and post it as quickly as possible. If one of these people is the first to respond to a question, it sets the tone for other answers and it becomes anecdote-fest.

Unfortunately, these people often are the first to respond, because they spend little time reading the whole question before jumping right in with their dear Aunt Sally story.

The key to avoiding these helpful twits is to lead with your actual question, then follow with details. To wit:

"I am looking for psychological studies or evolutionary explanations of behvaior Y in situation X. Blah blah blah hurf durf."
posted by turaho at 2:52 PM on July 24, 2007

(Or even better: "Help me find psychological studies or evolutionary explanations of this behavior.

[inside]

I'm interested in cases of behavior Y in situation X."

This way you're more likely to get the attention of your target answerers — social science nerds, basically — and also more likely to drive off the wild guessers and anecdote freaks. In general, when people want answers from a particular discipline, it seems to go better if they mention the discipline on the front page and put the real question inside.)
posted by nebulawindphone at 3:48 PM on July 24, 2007

Throwing out your lure a few more times with a little different skirt or jig might get you a more substantial strike, but if there's no big fish in the lake, there's no big fish in the lake.

At this lake my extended family vacations at every year, there's a few "spots" that are (or, increasingly, were) hot for fish. Let's say one of those spots is nicknamed Ask Metafilter. We wade a few hundred feet along shore from our cluster of cabins to Ask Metafilter and there's always all kinds of fish there and one day somebody catches a Largemouth Bass. Its meat is like gold in our stomachs and we want more Largemouth Bass. So, we start fishing like crazy for Largemouth Bass, but nothing. Now, it's a common saying in our family "We caught one there, there's got to be more," so we will try everything to catch more Largemouth Bass at Ask Metafilter. We will try fly-fishing, we will try casting, we will try bobber-fishing. We will try every fly, lure and creature to catch more Largemouth Bass. The thing is, there just aren't any Largemouth Bass or there's just not a lot of em when it comes down to it. But we are convinced that there are MILLIONS of Largemouth Bass and if we just keep trying we'll get them.

At some point, we have to realize that we're not getting any luck with these Largemouth Bass but there's a fuck ton of Bluegill which are pretty tasty. (Incidentally, we don't.)

We may be disappointed in not getting Largemouth Bass, but there's bigger (and smaller, yummy-enuf) fish in the water.

What I mean to say is, go ahead and ask, but seriously consider that you're just not going to get the answer you want.

If you must continue fishing for Largemouth bass, consider the following:

-Maybe the fish you are trying to catch doesn't exist. (I think this might be the case in your Pimp My VR question which definitely didn't go well.)

-The fish you are trying to catch isn't hungry? Maybe it's the time of day.

-Your lure and/or retrieval style is too geared toward a specific fish. The best fish in the lake may not be the fish you think it is... Cast your net wider and you may get an answer from a spot you didn't think you would.

-It's the wrong lake for the fish you want to catch.

-Your lure and/or retrieval style is overly elaborate. If fish have to think too hard about how to best strike your lure, they're not striking and pretty soon the lure will be past the big fish regardless of what smaller fish might reveal about effectively attacking your lure.

-Your lure is not elaborate enough. If fish have to think too hard about what you are floating in front of them, they're not striking...

Hope this answers your question in all the ways you never wanted or expected it to be answered.
posted by pokermonk at 5:53 PM on July 24, 2007 [3 favorites]

“Shall I put it in bullet points for you next time, or perhaps a five-paragraph essay?”

☛ JUST ANSWER THE GODDAMN QUESTION

No, really. It's not that complicated. For example:

Q: This is a question.

✗ This is a philosophical and/or heartfelt challenge to the premise of the question.
✔ This is an answer to the question.

In this example, the “✗” signifies the wrong sort of answer. The blinking “✔” signifies the right sort of answer. If you master this distinction, you'll be allowed to sit at the big kids' table.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 10:41 PM on July 24, 2007 [3 favorites]

What if the fish are in my pants?
posted by dirigibleman at 10:47 PM on July 24, 2007

EB, I'll agree with you in general, but there are enough exceptions ("In what ratio should I mix bleach and ammonia to make the best glass cleaner?") that it's not a universal rule. In fact, if you browse through the archives, you'll find a non-zero number of questions where an "answer" which didn't answer the question as stated, but instead challenged the premise of the question, has been marked "best answer" by the OP.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 5:21 AM on July 25, 2007

A good premise challenge is better than a lot of wrong answers.

It can be done wrong and is certainly done wrong frequently, but when it's done right it can make a bad question valuable.

The real problem is people who aren't thinking about the question, period.
posted by pokermonk at 6:06 AM on July 25, 2007

“EB, I'll agree with you in general, but there are enough exceptions that it's not a universal rule.”

In a previous MeTa thread, jessamyn did a good job of explaining the exceptions when it is acceptable. Basically, it's when it's truly “germaine”, as she put it.

There's a difference between an indisputable factual error that is the basis for a question and a matter of opinion. A whole hell of a lot of these premise-challenging “answers” are matters of opinion, not facts. The example I'm responding to in this thread is a good example. What part of “it is bad for you to participate in these 'shows of appreciation'” isn't obviously a matter of opinion?

A good litmus test is whether someone has an emotional investment in challenging the premise of a question. If they do, they probably shouldn't. Their challenge is probably as much, or more, about them as it is about any real attempt to answer the question.

Pretty much all of the “challenging the premise” answers that are dragged into MeTa are about the answerer crusading for a particular worldview, often implicitly involving morality. They want to promote or oppose religion. Or astrology. Or feminism. Or drug-use. If someone feels like they need to oppose someone's “stupid” or “ignorant” belief or bias as the core of their answer, and it's not a simple matter of universally agreed upon fact, then they're not usefully answering the question. They're crusading. Or just being jerks.

This is one of the two most pernicious question answering activities that infest AskMe. It's trolling the questions for an opportunity to “correct” people who hold beliefs that one find offensive. The other is male answer syndrome (whether displayed by males or females). Both, ultimately, are more about the answerer than they are either the questioner or the question. Both diminish the utility of AskMe and often create argument and confusion.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 8:18 AM on July 25, 2007 [1 favorite]

It's kind of funny that this thread has derailed from answering Signal's question.

But then again, the question you are posing in this post is kind of vague. Perhaps if a link were provided to the specific question we could make suggestions about rewriting it.

I for one think that it would be kind of silly to repost the exact same question twice. Not getting an answer that you consider to be a good answer may say more about the question then you have considered.
posted by jefeweiss at 10:00 AM on July 26, 2007

There was nothing vague about my question: "would it be bad form to ask the same question again?".
Where's the vagueness?
posted by signal at 4:53 PM on July 26, 2007

I feel like it's kind of bad form. Not necessarily Awful Abuse, and done very occasionally it won't fuck anything up, but it's probably not a good idea in general. It'd be a really, really bad thing to see in volume, ferexample.
posted by cortex (staff) at 8:25 PM on July 26, 2007

It may have been easier for me, personally, to try to figure out whether I think reposting would be a good idea, if you had linked to the AskMe questions in question. It's one thing to repost a question asking for specific factual information where you got an incorrect response, and another to repost a question asking for advice, when you just didn't like the advice that you got.
posted by jefeweiss at 12:37 PM on July 30, 2007

If you know that there *are* better answers than the ones that you got, how is it that you don't already know what those better answers are?
posted by PeterMcDermott at 6:32 AM on July 31, 2007

It's clear this AskMe guy is a douche. You should just dump him and move on. You're don't deserve this crap.
posted by French Fry at 11:16 AM on July 31, 2007

There was nothing vague about my question: "would it be bad form to ask the same question again?".
Where's the vagueness?

It is vague because the second half is indistinctly understood and you didn't make explicit what sort of question was originally asked.
posted by jeremias at 8:19 PM on July 31, 2007