3

Just after the site started up, this question was asked:

As we were starting out, the answer was:

I would advise waiting a bit to hammer this one out, wait and see until a few questions have been asked and whether the community is willing and able to properly ask, answer and moderate these.

We currently have 16 questions tagged , all of which have a score >= 0.

So have we reached a more definite consensus? Are we allowing these questions? Are there any guidelines about these questions (e.g. how much detail is needed)?

| |
2

Seeing as the general consensus is that these questions are good, I see no problem in allowing recommendation questions. The hobby of drones and model aircraft has lots of choices. There are drones for certain uses like photography or racing, and there is a wide variety of parts when it comes to building your own rig. Because of this, recommendation questions seem on-topic for this site in particular.

There will, however, need to be enough detail to be able to form a somewhat correct answer. For example, if a question asked "what is the best drone to buy?" there would not be enough detail and everyone could have a completely different answer because of their preferences. There would be no "incorrect" answer to a question like this. Whereas a question like "Drones to fly indoors" would be acceptable because it is asking about drone for a specific use-case (indoor nano drone) so there are still multiple correct answers but it limits the answers down because there are only so many drones that fit into that category.

Ultimately it will be up to the community to decide whether each individual recommendation question is on topic, but I think that in general, recommendation questions should be allowed.

| |
2

I wholeheartedly disagree, recommendations are NEVER tolerable. As a long time SO user these types of questions are rejected wholesale across the platform and provide a very disjointed experience.

Additionally, allowing recommendations provide ample opportunity to "Game the system" and manipulate a potentially (but not yet) valid source of information.

Common exploits, the easy ones:

  • Promote/shut down posts based on affiliations.
  • Use the SE for free "trust" in SEO as well as referrals and other easy system gains.
  • Fine line between promotion wrapped in questions and legit question.
  • Data farming and/or product research at the expense of the users.
  • The list goes on...

I was excited to see this StackExchange leave Area 51 for beta status. My excitement comes from the unregulated and wholesale corrupt nature of model aircraft. HobbyKing, notorious for stealing designed, owns the largest forums an data mines for marketing and trends. GetFPV and others all run a slanted information platforms.

I think that recommendations and "price checks" are too slippery of a slope and the leadership of this SE should be put in question and the SE reset. My experience is quite broad in this field and never have I seen such a toxic culture as model aircraft. Decisions of this ilk are poison and provide a huge disservice to the users and spit in the face of SO culture.

Keep brands and cost out of the discussion and keep it professional.

| |
  • 1
    I agree, it’s sometimes hard to distinguish between promotion and recommendation, – Xnero Jul 22 at 19:37
  • This is definitely a good point, but there are many recommendation questions that wouldn't involve brands or cost. Maybe recommendation questions could be allowed if they didn't pertain to cost or brands but instead focused on more general things like: recommended motor size, recommended ESC ratings, etc. that are all independent of prices and brands. – Jacob B Jul 22 at 20:11
  • We allow technical advice, so talking in general about ESCs or motors would still be allowed. Indeed, talking about a specific make would still be OK in a neutral/factual content (e.g. "{BrandX} has introduced {feature Y}, which claims/offers benefit Z", or "I own a {ModelA}, and it does X {well/badly/sometimes}.") Advise is best given as features to look out for/avoid, perhaps with a couple of examples from different manufacturers as a guide; however, a straight up "You should by this one!" is not great as it doesn't help the OP learn, is liable to link rot and also commercial abuse. – Kralc Jul 24 at 7:29

You must log in to answer this question.

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