koobas.hobune.stream
UAs policy on questions with no coding attempts or any visible attempt to try
Just wondering what the UA community policy is on questions that seem to be asking for the answer to be coded for them.
This kind of urks me when I see it and was just wondering other peoples' thoughts on these situations of users obviously not trying at all, and requesting other users to do their problems for them.
Thanks.
This really bugs me too. It says in the FAQ:
"Also, for some instruction on why asking for code is bad, please see 'What have you tried?' by $$anonymous$$att Gemmell."
I'm guessing there is no policy but there really should be...
I've seen a few questions recently which were just 1-2 lines long and failed to describe what they actually wanted and what they wanted it for. I find them quite amusing because even if someone did actually write out full code for them from scratch they wouldn't be able to understand it enough to modify anything about it so the question is doubly pointless.
I only started with Unity and C# about a month ago and I've gone from spending hours searching for code snippets and examples online to pick apart to spending a solid hour just writing optimised code from scratch without thinking. I'm surprised how quickly I've picked it up. If they don't put any effort in to learning they're never going to so question like that are a total waste of time...
This is just a summary of previous discussions, mostly topics about "Why UA is so bad" from years ago, or "Need beginner area":
o Some users like writing scripts for people who ask, or fixing semi-colons, and so on. They see it as "giving back." Or trying to get Rep points. Or learning by helping others. Either way.
o Some new question-askers don't realize scripts are programs that they can write. Some of those same users get angry and write UnityCorp nasty emails about their "does someone have a script for X" Qs being unfairly rejected.
The real problem is some users keep coming back with basic Qs; more people see that ... and UA is cluttered with junk. The fix to everything is to move it all into the HelpRoom. Your Q wasn't Rejected, bored users can hold people's hands in the HelpRoom if they want, and UA is kept clean.
===
In the FAQ, under "Some Reasons for getting a Post Rejected," asking for a script is mentioned specifically. But that was before there was a HelpRoom area.
I guess I've still tended to reject/close those with the comment "UA is not a script writing service", even if in the help room. I guess it doesn't hurt much to move/leave them in the help room, but I'm not sure they belong even there. Anyone else have thoughts/standards they follow for these?
Yup. EVEN in the help room I dont allow non-attempts. EVEN the help-room needs to follow the basic UA format; its just they are given more elbow room there.
Script requests are always rejected/deleted (and treated as the enemy).
Code requests (not whole scripts) can be acceptable IF the user has demonstrated that they have tried and are willing to learn. A desire to learn program$$anonymous$$g is fundamental.
In the past I've simply nudged them in the right direction and said "Now do the rest yourself" and said users have actually replied saying "Thanks for the awesome help; you really helped me learn this and now I understand it perfectly, rather than having had it done for me".
"Look at Rigidbody -give link- examples are provided in CS and JS" and my favourite: Google-link-Bomb
seems to be adequate for some.
@Brocccoli - Bottom line is - Shite is rejected. If you see something that has slipped through the cracks, tell them yourself "Dont ask for scripts". The more people do it, the more the policy will become renowned.
RE: last para.
But rejecting script requests isn't an official Policy. What do you do if someone calls you on it?
Sure, it's in the old FAQ, but so is debugging help. The best policy guide now is probably the stickied "How to use the Help Room," which pretty much says we don't have any formal Policies yet. I$$anonymous$$HO, something needs to go into the HelpRoom rules before it should be enforced. In practice, for now, most ask-for-script/Tutorial can be rejected on vagueness.
I actually just noticed that it is in the FAQ
Some reasons for getting a post rejected: Your question isn't specific enough: asking for a script
Right -- I mentioned this also. But the same bullet points also ban getting help writing/fixing a script, nullRefExceptions, and Q's without enough context, which are now allowed in the HelpRoom. I'm saying that that part of the FAQ is clearly obsolete, so we can't just cherry-pick reasons.
I don't entirely disagree with you, but from the "How to use the Help Room" blue bar thingy at the top...
...simply need help from other users with general program$$anonymous$$g or guidance in problem solving...
Is pretty broad guidance and can be interpreted to allow "please write me a script" questions. And if people are willing to do that then I guess more power to them. I can be convinced that as long as they're moved to the Help Room they're not really hurting anything and likely will just sit there ignored.
Now if we received clear guidance that they are not allowed even in the help room, I would be more than happy to reject them whenever I see them because I don't personally think they belong here.
