date stringlengths 10 10 | nb_tokens int64 60 629k | text_size int64 234 1.02M | content stringlengths 234 1.02M |
|---|---|---|---|
2016/08/05 | 330 | 1,249 | <issue_start>username_0: I feel that many users of this site also use My Anime List (MAL) to track and organize their anime. Thus, would it not make sense for us to have a MAL tag for questions?<issue_comment>username_1: Like include the tag in every question? That wouldn't make sense. Tags are used to denote that the question is directly related to something. We could as well add [anime](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/anime "show questions tagged 'anime'") tag to most of our questions, and it wouldn't be very useful.
If we had a number of questions that would be on topic and asking about something directly related to MyAnimeList site in a way that would make sense to use a tag for it… actually, I can't even imagine such a scenario.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Tag [myanimelist](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/myanimelist "show questions tagged 'myanimelist'") now exists and was first created in October 2018 on [Is MyAnimeList still good ranking site for anime?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/q/49147/2516).
Note that as [username_1's answer](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3884/2516) has mentioned, **use this tag only for questions about MyAnimeList specifically**.
Upvotes: 2 |
2016/08/20 | 1,078 | 4,240 | <issue_start>username_0: I'd like to draw attention of suggested edit reviewers to a certain user who is currently adding Dragon Ball series tag to a bunch of already DB-tagged questions:
<https://anime.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/31640>
I thought series tags should be used only for questions which directly ask about something that applies to all the works in the series? Or am I wrong and all those edits are correct?<issue_comment>username_1: I've rolled [this one](https://anime.stackexchange.com/revisions/28325/4) and [this one](https://anime.stackexchange.com/revisions/2841/5) back, but [this one](https://anime.stackexchange.com/revisions/3010/3) only serves to annoy me.
Why would I consider rolling these back? Because adding the whole "series" tag is *not helpful* in my mind.
These questions are about specific Dragon Ball series, and not of the series as a whole, so I see ***no*** value in adding the "whole" series tag. My gut tells me that a tag for the whole series has dubious value at best anyway, but I'd like to leave that for another discussion on another day.
My opinion on the matter: keep the overall series tag if it's asking a question about the overall series; otherwise, the more specific series tag is *plenty*.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: A while ago we ran an experiment to see if it would be helpful to adopt a Sci-fi and Fantasy-inspired approach to tagging continuities where every question has a franchise tag and questions that focus mostly on a single series would additionally carry a series tag. That experiment was started in [A certain multivariate experiment: Testing changes to series tags based on story continuity](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2719/a-certain-multivariate-experiment-testing-changes-to-series-tags-based-on-story).
Under the terms of that experiment, we were going to do SF&F-style tagging for Full Metal Alchemist, where every question has the [fma-series](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fma-series "show questions tagged 'fma-series'") tag and questions focusing on a specific continuity would also carry a tag for that continuity (e.g. [fullmetal-alchemist-2003](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fullmetal-alchemist-2003 "show questions tagged 'fullmetal-alchemist-2003'")). We were going to do single tags for the Dragon Ball series, if a question only concerns DBZ, it has the [dragon-ball-z](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dragon-ball-z "show questions tagged 'dragon-ball-z'") tag, and if it concerns the entire franchise (e.g. something like "Why is Goku's hair so spiky?", since Goku's hair appears in every Dragon Ball series), it would have the [dragon-ball-series](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dragon-ball-series "show questions tagged 'dragon-ball-series'") tag only.
It seems like this user was trying to apply the rules we were using for [fma-series](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fma-series "show questions tagged 'fma-series'") to the [dragon-ball-series](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dragon-ball-series "show questions tagged 'dragon-ball-series'") tag. I, at least, was also confused about this point and ignorantly approved a few of these edits, but when they kept on coming I started skipping them so that another member of the community could double check. (Plus, bumping a ton of old posts to the front page for a tag edit isn't cool; a few is fine, but more than three or four is a little excessive.)
As far as I can tell, we never did come to a conclusion about which tag scheme we were going to adopt. The way we were tagging Dragon Ball questions was basically the system we already had, so we should probably collect opinions from people who participated in the Full Metal Alchemist tags under this system about whether they think it would be good to adopt it for other series with several different continuities.
(For the record, at the time I supported the scheme we were using for Full Metal Alchemist. I still think it works really well for cases like Sci-fi and Fantasy where you have huge franchises with multiple independent works, but it is pretty high maintenance.)
Upvotes: 1 |
2016/08/22 | 2,007 | 8,009 | <issue_start>username_0: As an opportunity for members of the community to pose questions to the candidates on the topic of moderation, we will once again be holding a Q&A with the candidates in connection with the moderator elections. Participation is completely voluntary.
>
> **The purpose of this thread was to collect questions for the questionnaire. The questionnaire is now live, and you may find it [here](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3914/2016-moderator-election-qa-questionnaire).**
>
>
>
Here's how it'll work:
* During the nomination phase, (so, until Monday, August 29th at 20:00:00Z UTC, or 4:00 pm EDT on the same day, give or take time to arrive for closure), this question will be open to collect potential questions from the users of the site. Post answers to this question containing any questions you would like to ask the candidates. Please only post *one question per answer*.
* We, the Community Team, will be providing a small selection of generic questions. The first two will be guaranteed to be included, the latter ones are if the community doesn't supply enough questions. This will be done in a single post, unlike the prior instruction.
* This is a perfect opportunity to voice questions that are specific to your community and issues that you are running into at current.
* At the end of the phase, the Community Team will select **up to 8 of the top voted questions submitted by the community** provided in this thread, to use in addition to the aforementioned 2 guaranteed questions. We reserve some editorial control in the selection of the questions and may opt not to select a question that is tangential or irrelevant to moderation or the election. That said, if I have concerns about any questions in this fashion, I will be sure to point this out in comments before the decision making time.
* Once questions have been selected, a new question will be opened to host the actual questionnaire for the candidates, containing 10 questions in total.
* This is not the only option that users have for gathering information on candidates. As a community, you are still free to, for example, hold a live chat session with your candidates to ask further questions, or perhaps clarifications from what is provided in the Q&A.
If you have any questions or feedback about this process, feel free to post as a comment here.<issue_comment>username_1: Here is a set of general questions, gathered as very common questions asked every election. As mentioned in the instructions, the first two questions are guaranteed to show up in the Q&A, while the others are if there aren't enough questions (or, if you like one enough, you may split it off as a separate answer for review within the community's 8).
* How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?
* How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?
---
* In your opinion, what do moderators do?
* A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that?
* In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching 10k or 20k rep?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Edit: This question has been changed to be more specific now that we have [an issue-list meta post](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3903/lets-take-a-look-back-at-our-site-policies-2016-edition).
Last year we [asked the community](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2564/1530) about things they wanted to be clarified or fixed about our policies on Anime & Manga. This helped myself as the newly elected mod highlight some topics for review.
One year on and [a new meta post later](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3903/lets-take-a-look-back-at-our-site-policies-2016-edition) , Is there any particular policy the site currently has that you feel needs to be changed, or reviewed?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Quite a lot of the activity on the site is concentrated around just a few shows: mainly Naruto, Bleach, One Piece, Dragon Ball, and Death Note. While these are all fine shows, they hardly showcase the diversity of anime, and don't leave a lot for people who aren't fans of long-running action/adventure.
What's your take on this situation? Is it fine as it is, or should the community strive for more diversity of topics—more shoujo, more older anime, more artsy/experimental material like *Aku no Hana* and *Goodnight, Punpun*? If you support more diversity, what steps would you take as a moderator to make it happen?
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Some Stack Exchange moderators are activists—they take a strong leading role in the community, bringing up issues, guiding discussions, suggesting policy, and creating initiatives. Others are more passive; they let other members of the community shape policy, enforce it less stringently, and wait in the wings for exceptional situations that require their unique abilities.
The passive approach fits more with Stack Exchange's description of moderators as "glorified janitors" and "human exception handlers" as laid out in [A Theory of Moderation](http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/05/a-theory-of-moderation/) and other posts. However, activist moderators can be good for a site; they can help unite and guide a user base, and can ensure that a valid concern brought up by a significant minority of the community gets a fair hearing and doesn't get automatically ignored in favor of the majority view.
As a moderator, would you be more of an activist, or would you take a more passive approach? Why? How would you recognize a situation that would benefit more from the opposite approach, and how would you deal with it?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Last Year we had problems with Identification Requests with what should be done with them being asked of the candidates in [last year's mod election](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2537/1587).
With the topic now dead, buried, covered in concrete and without a spoon to eat it's way out is there another outstanding [single] subject that you think the community needs to address? why does this subject need to be addressed?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: we have [a number of community events](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2682/1587) from annual events like [Conspiracy Santa](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2684/1587) to one off events like [EU A&M Meet up](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2692/1587).
Are there any other Events you would like to see occur to help bolster community cohesion, attract more users to the site and/or increase activity and participation on the site?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: ***NOTE: should this question get in the top 8 question this should only be selected as a question if the number of candidates is less than 8 ([number of candidates from last year](http://www.opavote.org/results/6186483249577984/0))***
This year we have only had # Candidates nominated to join the mod team while last year there was 8 candidates. can you see any sort of barrier that would prevent other users from applying to become a part of the mod team in the next election?
* if so in what way do you think we as a community can overcome this barrier?
* if not what are your opinions as to why so few nominated to become a mod this time?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: What additional value would you add to the existing moderator team?
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: What's your opinion on Taisho posting images in site's main chatroom?
Taisho's image posting did got criticized in the past for being unnecessary or for not being safe for office. So what you think in favor or against it?
Upvotes: 2 |
2016/08/25 | 1,149 | 4,335 | <issue_start>username_0: [Last year](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2564/lets-take-a-look-back-at-our-site-policies-2015-edition) we asked you what were the pain points of the site for you. Now that a year has passed (almost to the day), We'd like to know what has changed in this list. Are there any new problems? Are old policies out of date? etc.
The intent is to have a concrete list of to-fix items for us as a community to fix. Also it will give [our soon-to-be-elected new moderator](https://anime.stackexchange.com/election?cb=1) some grounding on which to start.
Here is the template, unchanged from last year:
>
> **Policy:** (and what it needs) (e.g., [needs-update](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/needs-update "show questions tagged 'needs-update'"), [deprecated](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/deprecated "show questions tagged 'deprecated'"), [needs-review](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/needs-review "show questions tagged 'needs-review'"), [contradictory](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/contradictory "show questions tagged 'contradictory'"), [needs-clarification](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/needs-clarification "show questions tagged 'needs-clarification'"), etc.)
>
>
> *{{Brief description and link to relevant meta (if applicable). If two or more policies are contradictory to one another, post links to all of them where applicable.}}*
>
>
> **Reason:**
>
>
> *{{What needs to be brought to attention}}*
>
>
> **Remarks:**
>
>
> *{{Optional, any personal remarks or suggestions on said policy}}*
>
>
>
After a period to collect feedback, we will start to work through these - taking note of which are the most important to the site's users. We will open the floor to each topic and try to find a good solution to them all.
The intent of this meta is to collect problems areas our site, particularly with it's policies, so that we can build proper queuing system to address these problems one by one, instead of dividing our attention across multiple issues. This way, we give the users a transparency and clarify behind the state of policy making for the community.<issue_comment>username_1: **Policy**: Tagging multiple continuities in a franchise [needs-clarification](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/needs-clarification "show questions tagged 'needs-clarification'")
Back in January, we started an experiment on tagging multiple continuities, as described in [A certain multivariate experiment: Testing changes to series tags based on story continuity](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2719/7579) as a response to the discussion on [Policy Review: Tagging - separate continuities](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2690/7579).
**Reason**:
As far as I could tell, we never finished the experiment or declared a result. This led a confused user to start tagging Dragon Ball questions with the [dragon-ball-series](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/dragon-ball-series "show questions tagged 'dragon-ball-series'") tag, and at least one confused edit reviewer (me) to approve those edits, as described in [Somebody's adding series tags, possibly incorrectly](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3891/7579).
**Remarks**:
I argued for the more complex tagging policies we tried with Full Metal Alchemist [here](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2700/7579), but I think if we do adopt it we should limit it to certain franchises since it is more work to maintain. I have some ideas on how to decide that we can discuss when this policy comes up for review.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: **Policy**: When is it necessary to use spoiler [needs-clarification](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/needs-clarification "show questions tagged 'needs-clarification'")
**Reason**: Consensus on whether to use and how to use spoilers on the site is not well fleshed out and requires a bit of ironing. Many of the other recreational SEs have a clear policy about spoiler. We should at least try to follow suit and make things clearer for users.
**Remarks**: We've been very inconsistent in our spoiler policy on both the site and chat. This has irked many users and discouraged them from participation.
Upvotes: 2 |
2016/08/29 | 2,695 | 9,846 | <issue_start>username_0: the following question: [DBGT: Does Goku die of old age when he turns SSJ4 in the future?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/35918/dragonball-gt-what-happens-if-re-grown-up-goku-turns-ssj4) got closed for (in my opinion) very wrong reasons. It got closed for being "primarily opinion based". In the comments practically the only reason I got was "GT is not canon", which is obviously a load of bull. An anime is an anime, and within its own canon, it is most definitely canon.
Another comment I got was this:
>
> I think people downvoted your post because you are asking a question which answers can only be based on assumptions. Insist that opinion be backed up with facts and references.
>
>
>
Well, I did. I literally had a header saying "the facts:" with a bullet list underneath it, stating the facts. (now updated to facts and references for clarity)
My question is most definitely based on things that are canon within the show and of which there are many references. My question is entirely based on things that actually happened in the show and there are no assumptions within it. Therefore I would like my question to be reopened. I don't see where the vote was coming from in any way except for bias against GT.
Thank you :)
Edit just to make something clear to whomever agrees with why my question got closed:
[Does Goku become the dragon itself at the end of Dragon Ball GT?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/6441/does-goku-become-the-dragon-itself-at-the-end-of-dragon-ball-gt?rq=1) - a question with 5 upvotes even! It's been favourited, and hey, it explains even less than my question does! This question should be closed for being opinion-based!
[Why do the Black Star Dragon Balls exist?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/4494/why-do-the-black-star-dragon-balls-exist?rq=1) - hey look, another one! 8 upvotes! Again, a question with way less facts and references than mine, yet this one gets respected.
[Why can't Pan go Super Saiyan?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/468/why-cant-pan-go-super-saiyan?rq=1) - oh look, another one!
[How did Goten and Trunks become Super Saiyan so easily?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/422/how-did-goten-and-trunks-become-super-saiyan-so-easily?noredirect=1&lq=1) - look, yet another!
[Are half-blooded Saiyans stronger than pure-blooded Saiyans?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/29205/are-half-blooded-saiyans-stronger-than-pure-blooded-saiyans?noredirect=1&lq=1) - hey guys, what a surprise, another one!
-- I'll just stop here. Obviously I've made my point by finding all these questions that should have been closed even more than mine, in the recommended/related sidebar as top questions, within 1 minute. Anime.stackexchange is absolutely littered with these types of questions (Because otherwise there would be no need to ask them)<issue_comment>username_1: **Your question**: What happens if this Goku, all grown up (again), turns SSJ4?
The only way to answer this is with an opinion. That's why it was closed. That's what the close reason means. Yes, you posted some facts in your question, but AFAICT, there isn't anything in those facts that support any type of conclusion.
To quote the close reason description: "Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but **answers to this question** will tend to be almost entirely **based on opinions**, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise." (emphasis added)
Sure, you can have one answer that says: "We don't know", but any other answer would be an opinion, unless the people who created the anime post something somewhere we can reference, or a DB GT2 gets created, or maybe it will be something in DB Super, but until that happens, you'll get crap answers, hence the close reason.
Your comment of most questions on anime.se are asked because they were never explained in the anime is based on flawed logic. You're disregarding people who didn't really watch the anime that closely, or lacked the cultural knowledge, or simply did not understand what was going on. Then there are works that are adaptations of some other media, and the adaptations are simply abridged versions of the original media.
There are plenty of reasons why people would ask questions about a work even if it was explained in the anime. By your argument, people should never ask any questions about science or math or history, because its all written in the text books.
The questions you've listed are either outright answerable based on watching/reading dragonball or there is enough context to come to a conclusion, with the exception of one having a highly authoritative answer.
[Does Goku become the dragon itself at the end of Dragon Ball GT?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/6441/does-goku-become-the-dragon-itself-at-the-end-of-dragon-ball-gt?rq=1) -> He did not become a dragon. That's a fact, because if he did become a dragon, there would be something in the anime that shows he's a dragon.
[Why do the Black Star Dragon Balls exist?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/4494/why-do-the-black-star-dragon-balls-exist?rq=1) -> The question asks very specific things, and also had misunderstands which were able to be corrected. It is possible to answer the question because we can correct the initial misunderstandings. My memory of GT is a bit fuzzy, but I'm pretty sure it was explained in the anime, too
[Why can't Pan go Super Saiyan?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/468/why-cant-pan-go-super-saiyan?rq=1) -> this is an even better question, since the answer is based off of **what the author** had said.
Last two questions are related. It has been demonstrated time and again that hybrids are more powerful than pure saiyans. There is a strong indication that genetics play a roll, but its not explained exactly why. This predisposition for strength is reinforced with tools (sensu beans, hyperbolic time chamber) and knowledge, goku already became a super saiyan and its something that can be taught.
As I posted originally, if Toriyama decides to shed light on the issue, sure, by all means reopen it, but as it is, I don't see any reason why there would be any reasonable answer to this question based off of what's been showed on the anime.
And finally, this has nothing to do with anything, and is just my personal opinion, but your comments and the wording you've used come off as pretty hostile. Even if people agree with your logic, people will be less inclined to express agreement based on your tone. As the saying goes: you catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar, and I see a lot of vinegar and very little honey. Since you have a decent amount of rep on SO, I think you're aware that most of the responses you've gotten have been pretty polite.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: First of all, I agree that there are a few inconsistencies here and there in regards to whether or not an opinion based question. However, I believe your question is still off topic.
The primary reason for being *opinion-based* is because the answer is based on speculation and is hypothetical. "What if" something happened, can only be answered with guesses - some can be backed up by fact, but ultimately it is something that has not been addressed by the show. More extreme examples are "What if Naruto fought Luffy?" - you could provide information about how much they can both lift, or their skills, but ultimately it is based on the answerer's opinion.
[See this "Gorrilla Vs Shark" post for an explanation as to why these posts are discouraged](http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/08/gorilla-vs-shark/)
Let me explain the reason why those other questions you note remain open:
* Does Goku become the dragon itself at the end of Dragon Ball GT?
>
> This is looking for clarification on the ending of the show. Answers can be opinions alright, but an equally valid answer is that it is up to interpretation.
>
>
>
* Why do the Black Star Dragon Balls exist?
>
> This is asking for the story behind a plot piece. It *can* be answered definitively, even if the answer is 'it was never revealed in the manga nor anime'.
>
>
>
* Why can't Pan go Super Saiyan?
>
> Similarly, this is asking to explain a story element. "It was never revealed why" is valid.
>
>
>
* How did Goten and Trunks become Super Saiyan so easily?
>
> More story explanation
>
>
>
* Are half-blooded Saiyans stronger than pure-blooded Saiyans?
>
> Again, this can be answered with story citations.
>
>
>
Here are some examples that are more similar to your question:
[What if you wrote "eaten by a gigantic sea-snake" in the Death Note?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/13989/what-if-you-wrote-eaten-by-a-gigantic-sea-snake-in-the-death-note)
[What if a pokeball was lost and couldn't be opened?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/29537/what-if-a-pokeball-was-lost-and-couldnt-be-opened)
For this, we have had an old meta post:
[Are question that are slightly hypothetical, but with potentially great answers dissallowed?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2282/are-question-that-are-slightly-hypothetical-but-with-potentially-great-answers)
And the policy is generally:
>
> if the show has a coherent framework of rules from which we can make deductions. That said, shows like this are few and far between
>
>
>
There are no hard rules in the Dragonball. Akira even forgets some of the rules he put in at the beginning - where did all the tails go!?
So, this is our reasoning behind the community's closure - and I realise it seems inconsistent, but the other option is complete off-topic closure and regardless this question would be off-topic.
Please feel free to ask me any other questions :)
Upvotes: 2 |
2016/08/29 | 19,053 | 74,127 | <issue_start>username_0: In connection with the moderator elections, we are holding a Q&A thread for the candidates. Questions collected [from an earlier thread](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3894/2016-moderator-election-qa-question-collection) have been compiled into this one, which shall now serve as the space for the candidates to provide their answers. Not every question was compiled - as noted, we only selected the top 8 questions as submitted by the community, plus 2 pre-set questions from us.
As a candidate, your job is simple - post an answer to this question, citing each of the questions and then post your answer to each question given in that same answer. For your convenience, I will include all of the questions in quote format with a break in between each, suitable for you to insert your answers. Just [copy the whole thing after the first set of three dashes](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/revisions/52a5a42f-2e9e-4b96-a5c8-bb53dc660bd9/view-source). Oh, and please consider putting your name at the top of your post so that readers will know who you are before they finish reading everything you have written.
Once all the answers have been compiled, this will serve as a transcript for voters to view the thoughts of their candidates, and will be appropriately linked in the Election page.
Good luck to all of the candidates!
**Oh, and when you've completed your answer, please provide a link to it after this blurb here. Please leave the list of links in the order of submission.**
---
>
> 1. Quite a lot of the activity on the site is concentrated around just a few shows: mainly Naruto, Bleach, One Piece, Dragon Ball, and Death Note. While these are all fine shows, they hardly showcase the diversity of anime, and don't leave a lot for people who aren't fans of long-running action/adventure. What's your take on this situation? Is it fine as it is, or should the community strive for more diversity of topics—more shoujo, more older anime, more artsy/experimental material like *Aku no Hana* and *Goodnight, Punpun*? If you support more diversity, what steps would you take as a moderator to make it happen?
> 2. Last year we [asked the community](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2564/1530) about things they wanted to be clarified or fixed about our policies on Anime & Manga. This helped myself as the newly elected mod highlight some topics for review. One year on and [a new meta post later](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3903/lets-take-a-look-back-at-our-site-policies-2016-edition), Is there any particular policy the site currently has that you feel needs to be changed, or reviewed?
> 3. Some Stack Exchange moderators are activists—they take a strong leading role in the community, bringing up issues, guiding discussions, suggesting policy, and creating initiatives. Others are more passive; they let other members of the community shape policy, enforce it less stringently, and wait in the wings for exceptional situations that require their unique abilities. The passive approach fits more with Stack Exchange's description of moderators as "glorified janitors" and "human exception handlers" as laid out in [A Theory of Moderation](http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/05/a-theory-of-moderation/) and other posts. However, activist moderators can be good for a site; they can help unite and guide a user base, and can ensure that a valid concern brought up by a significant minority of the community gets a fair hearing and doesn't get automatically ignored in favor of the majority view. As a moderator, would you be more of an activist, or would you take a more passive approach? Why? How would you recognize a situation that would benefit more from the opposite approach, and how would you deal with it?
> 4. This year we have only had 7 Candidates nominated to join the mod team while last year there was 8 candidates. can you see any sort of barrier that would prevent other users from applying to become a part of the mod team in the next election? If so, in what way do you think we as a community can overcome this barrier? If not, what are your opinions as to why so few nominated to become a mod this time?
> 5. Last Year we had problems with Identification Requests with what should be done with them being asked of the candidates in [last year's mod election](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2537/1587). With the topic now dead, buried, covered in concrete and without a spoon to eat it's way out is there another outstanding [single] subject that you think the community needs to address? why does this subject need to be addressed?
> 6. How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?
> 7. How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?
> 8. We have [a number of community events](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2682/1587) from annual events like [Conspiracy Santa](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2684/1587) to one off events like [EU A&M Meet up](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2692/1587). Are there any other Events you would like to see occur to help bolster community cohesion, attract more users to the site and/or increase activity and participation on the site?
> 9. What's your opinion on Taisho posting images in site's main chatroom? Taisho's image posting did got criticized in the past for being unnecessary or for not being safe for office. So what you think in favor or against it?
> 10. What additional value would you add to the existing moderator team?
>
>
>
---
* [<NAME>](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3918/)
* [<NAME>](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3919/)
* [senshin](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3920/)
* [<NAME>](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3922/)
* [Torisuda](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3923/)
* [Ayase Eri](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3924/)<issue_comment>username_1: Amelia / username_1
===================
>
> 1. Quite a lot of the activity on the site is concentrated around just a few shows: mainly Naruto, Bleach, One Piece, Dragon Ball, and Death Note. While these are all fine shows, they hardly showcase the diversity of anime, and don't leave a lot for people who aren't fans of long-running action/adventure. What's your take on this situation? Is it fine as it is, or should the community strive for more diversity of topics—more shoujo, more older anime, more artsy/experimental material like *Aku no Hana* and *Goodnight, Punpun*? If you support more diversity, what steps would you take as a moderator to make it happen?
>
>
>
As a user, the easiest way to go about making it a little more diverse here is probably to just keep with the current season of anime and ask questions on anime.SE.
As a moderator (and as someone interested in community-building), you want to see more diverse questions; if every question on the site is about the same couple of fixed topics, you're going to start to have to close everything as a duplicate and then the site will start to stagnate.
The most popular series here are actually the mainstream anime for the 20-30 age bracket, and so I'd wager that's probably the average age of anime.SE users. People generally know their favourite anime well, and so a lot of content is posted here.
Considering just how much material exists, though, I'm fairly confident things will eventually even out.
>
> 2. Last year we [asked the community](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2564/1530) about things they wanted to be clarified or fixed about our policies on Anime & Manga. This helped myself as the newly elected mod highlight some topics for review. One year on and [a new meta post later](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3903/lets-take-a-look-back-at-our-site-policies-2016-edition), Is there any particular policy the site currently has that you feel needs to be changed, or reviewed?
>
>
>
From frequenting other sites, I'd say the way that tags work here should probably be simplified properly.
People have a laser-like focus on doing an exact single-tag-per-post system, but that's not actually the way the system on stack exchange works. Rather than tagging [fullmetal-alchemist-manga](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fullmetal-alchemist-manga "show questions tagged 'fullmetal-alchemist-manga'") (as an example), doing [fullmetal-alchemist](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fullmetal-alchemist "show questions tagged 'fullmetal-alchemist'") [fma-manga](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fma-manga "show questions tagged 'fma-manga'") (with a synonym for [fma](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fma "show questions tagged 'fma'")) is a better use of the tagging system and makes things easier to find. This can also probably tackle the length limit effectively. This does, however, require heavy mod interaction for cleanup + synonyms + merging tags.
However, prefixed wildcard searches may possibly make this moot, though we'd have to start using abbreviated tags for anime in that case.
>
> 3. Some Stack Exchange moderators are activists—they take a strong leading role in the community, bringing up issues, guiding discussions, suggesting policy, and creating initiatives. Others are more passive; they let other members of the community shape policy, enforce it less stringently, and wait in the wings for exceptional situations that require their unique abilities. The passive approach fits more with Stack Exchange's description of moderators as "glorified janitors" and "human exception handlers" as laid out in [A Theory of Moderation](http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/05/a-theory-of-moderation/) and other posts. However, activist moderators can be good for a site; they can help unite and guide a user base, and can ensure that a valid concern brought up by a significant minority of the community gets a fair hearing and doesn't get automatically ignored in favor of the majority view. As a moderator, would you be more of an activist, or would you take a more passive approach? Why? How would you recognize a situation that would benefit more from the opposite approach, and how would you deal with it?
>
>
>
I definitely default to a passive approach; I only get involved if I know/feel I have to, which is usually a mix of gut feeling, asking the other mods, or asking in the mod-only room.
>
> 4. This year we have only had 7 Candidates nominated to join the mod team while last year there was 8 candidates. can you see any sort of barrier that would prevent other users from applying to become a part of the mod team in the next election? If so, in what way do you think we as a community can overcome this barrier? If not, what are your opinions as to why so few nominated to become a mod this time?
>
>
>
I'd say the people who are the most likely to actually be elected are already active chat users, but probably didn't want to take on the responsibility/commitment of being a mod this year. Quite a few people had to be convinced to put forward a nomination, and I nominated myself half hoping that it would encourage others to put their names forward, and half because I feel that, although I have a fairly low contribution to the site as a user, I do feel like I can contribute way more as a moderator.
>
> 5. Last Year we had problems with Identification Requests with what should be done with them being asked of the candidates in [last year's mod election](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2537/1587). With the topic now dead, buried, covered in concrete and without a spoon to eat its way out is there another outstanding [single] subject that you think the community needs to address? why does this subject need to be addressed?
>
>
>
I don't really think there's anything that needs to be buried six feet under right this second.
>
> 6. How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?
>
>
>
I've seen this exact thing happen on Freelancing, and myself and the other mods there keep a close eye on the user in question. I value their contributions, but on several occasions we've had to pull the user into (private) chat and explain to them that, while they may be a significant chunk of the questions and answers on the site, they still have to abide by the be nice policy and would face potential suspension if they continued.
>
> 7. How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?
>
>
>
I'd ask them in chat what the reasons were; often-times perfectly good questions being closed are actually part of a clean-up from spammy users posting questions/answers to sock-puppet with. In those cases, dissociating the user is often a good way forward. For other reasons, it really does depend, but I don't undo another mod's actions without good reason and/or consensus.
>
> 8. We have [a number of community events](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2682/1587) from annual events like [Conspiracy Santa](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2684/1587) to one off events like [EU A&M Meet up](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2692/1587). Are there any other Events you would like to see occur to help bolster community cohesion, attract more users to the site and/or increase activity and participation on the site?
>
>
>
I desperately want to actually attend a meetup with anime.SE, as during beta a bunch of us were actually planning to meet up for a vacation in akihabara, but I never actually got to go. I'm a fan of regular community meetups for stack exchange communities in general, as the smaller communities feel much closer than S[UFO] and the other large sites, so I'd probably try and get a UK or Ireland meet organised at some point.
>
> 9. What's your opinion on Taisho posting images in site's main chatroom? Taisho's image posting did got criticized in the past for being unnecessary or for not being safe for office. So what you think in favor or against it?
>
>
>
I'm against it; I moderate in my spare time (sometimes at work), and I like to be on chat. I've actually nearly gotten in trouble because Taisho was posting while I was at work. I'm also not sure an imagebot has a place on chat.SE.
>
> 10. What additional value would you add to the existing moderator team?
>
>
>
I'm an experienced mod with a level head who grew up with online anime communities. I'm also a better tomato than Toshinou Kyouko. And that's a fact.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Hereby my point of view on the following items ~*dimitri-mx*~
>
> 1. Quite a lot of the activity on the site is concentrated around just a few shows: mainly Naruto, Bleach, One Piece, Dragon Ball, and Death Note.
> While these are all fine shows, they hardly showcase the diversity of anime, and don't leave a lot for people who aren't fans of long-running action/adventure.
> What's your take on this situation? Is it fine as it is, or should the community strive for more diversity of topics—more shoujo, more older anime, more artsy/experimental material like *Aku no Hana* and *Goodnight, Punpun*? If you support more diversity, what steps would you take as a moderator to make it happen?
>
>
>
As [YAS](your anime sucks) once mentioned "For us to make jokes reasonable, at least half the audience should know the anime. Obscure/old is good, but don't expect everybody to like, let alone know it." - Abunaicon '15/'16
The same count's for Q&A. If less people watch it, less people will know the answer, and less questions will pop up. This is a contrast we clearly see on A&M on an almost daily basis. I do not see this as a bad thing perse,
as this is where most people's questions will originate from. Therefore I think it is fine as is.
However, we as a community can strive to become a bit more difference. There have been several viewing circles before, where anime was watched together. In these viewing circles questions can be brought to light, and people with more experience in asking question, could help users whom might not know how to properly phrase their question. This will reduce the beginner bar, and help us diversify content.
TL:DR It is fine as it is, however, we as a community can create more diversity by participating together.
>
> 2. Last year we [asked the community](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2564/1530) about things they wanted to be clarified or fixed about our policies on Anime & Manga.
> This helped myself as the newly elected mod highlight some topics for review.
> One year on and [a new meta post later](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3903/lets-take-a-look-back-at-our-site-policies-2016-edition),
> Is there any particular policy the site currently has that you feel needs to be changed, or reviewed?
>
>
>
Most of he policies are pretty clear cut and don't really need any mayor improvements in my eyes as of now. Personally I am more interested to see how other people think about the policies and how we should improve them. And would love to think as a community about them.
However we do have some lingering aftermath of the [identification-request](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/identification-request "show questions tagged 'identification-request'"). Such as the [music](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/music "show questions tagged 'music'") ID-requests that we still do. Personally I think that a policy should be established to ensure maintainability, and last ability of the questions, as it wouldn't be the first time that a linked video has gone missing and no time stamp/ episode was given.
>
> 3. Some Stack Exchange moderators are activists—they take a strong leading role in the community, bringing up issues, guiding discussions, suggesting policy, and creating initiatives.
> Others are more passive; they let other members of the community shape policy, enforce it less stringently, and wait in the wings for exceptional situations that require their unique abilities.
> The passive approach fits more with Stack Exchange's description of moderators as "glorified janitors" and "human exception handlers"
> as laid out in [A Theory of Moderation](http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/05/a-theory-of-moderation/) and other posts.
> However, activist moderators can be good for a site; they can help unite and guide a user base, and can ensure that a valid concern brought up by a significant
> minority of the community gets a fair hearing and doesn't get automatically ignored in favor of the majority view. As a moderator, would you be more of an activist, or would you take a more passive approach?
> Why? How would you recognize a situation that would benefit more from the opposite approach, and how would you deal with it?
>
>
>
As a moderator I don't think you can really classify yourself as passive or active, as a balance in both is definitely required. But as a person I would hint towards the passive approach. SE is a community driven, this means that the people in it should have the possibility to voice their opinion, bring up issues and suggest policies them selves.
Here we, the moderators can guide our users to a consensus and help them the the pro's and con's of it. This however will occasionally require use moderators to take a stance, or make a decisions and act upon this.
Some situations however can only be handled upon by moderators, and will therefore require a moderator to take a active stance. This is something I believe reflects fairly well in the way a moderator handles flags and the likes.
>
> 4. This year we have only had 7 Candidates nominated to join the mod team while last year there was 8 candidates.
> can you see any sort of barrier that would prevent other users from applying to become a part of the mod team in the next election?
> If so, in what way do you think we as a community can overcome this barrier? If not, what are your opinions as to why so few nominated to become a mod this time?
>
>
>
I think there is indeed some barrier. The first time I ran for moderator (given that it was joke worthy) I did not have the feeling I would even have a snowball's chance in hell. The other people were way more versed in how the community, site and other SE communities worked. They looked like veterans in my eyes. And why sign up for a losing battle? Or fear that would would not do it correctly anyway.
SE in general has a bit of an elitist feel, and I think that moderators often subconsciously reflect this as well. Not because they want to be, all though they sometimes definitely do (hinting to SO mods). This all together might scare off other people, or make them feel less qualified for the job. Hence leaving it in the hands of somebody else.
On a side note. A downgrade from 8 to 7 participants, considering there are less positions available this time is not so much of a regression. But more of a progression in my eyes.
>
> 5. Last Year we had problems with Identification Requests with what should be done with them being asked of the candidates in [last year's mod election](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2537/1587).
> With the topic now dead, buried, covered in concrete and without a spoon to eat it's way out is there another outstanding [single] subject that you think the community needs to address?
> why does this subject need to be addressed?
>
>
>
I don't believe that there are currently any dilemmas as big as the [identification-request](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/identification-request "show questions tagged 'identification-request'"). But I do believe that some of the after math of it needs some clearing up.
Even after the removal of id requests, we still see a lot of [music](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/music "show questions tagged 'music'") identification requests. Personally I believe some guidelines would be in place here, as it wouldn't be the first time that a YouTube video was provided, which was removed just as fast as the question was posted.
>
> 6. How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?
>
>
>
I would start of by attending the user on it's behavior, and how it is not in line with our [be-nice-policy](https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/240839/259147), either through chat, comments or other viable solutions. If this does not work more drastic measure might have to be taken. But unless it is really clear cut vandalism/profanity, I do consider discussing it along with other moderators, or if necessary even members first.
>
> 7. How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?
>
>
>
I would contact the moderator in question and ask him too explain his motives, either through the chat, or meta posts. Which is not that different from what I did as a regular user either. The freedom to question such things is not only for moderators.
>
> 8. We have [a number of community events](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2682/1587) from annual events like [Conspiracy Santa](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2684/1587)
> to one off events like [EU A&M Meet up](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2692/1587).
> Are there any other Events you would like to see occur to help bolster community cohesion, attract more users to the site and/or increase activity and participation on the site?
>
>
>
Yes, I would love to see more community events, and help out with organizing them. And as much as I would like to see more events such as the EU meet up, I also understand it is hard/expansive considering everybodies daily life's
and the [many places we come from](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2501/1458). non the less, I have plenty of ideas for annual events, both remotely located and physically located which fall within reasonable limits for most of us.
But I guess I could even dedicate a whole meta post too this in itself, which I will actually do some time soon.
>
> 9. What's your opinion on Taisho posting images in site's main chatroom?
> Taisho's image posting did got criticized in the past for being unnecessary or for not being safe for office.
> So what you think in favor or against it?
>
>
>
As a NSFW victim, I think Taisho is a cool guy. As long as my boss ain't near.
His images can be a bit intrusive, but they ain't a nuisance as of yet.
Hence I am in favor of keeping him.
>
> 10. What additional value would you add to the existing moderator team?
>
>
>
All though I have not moderated on SE sites before, I have moderated on several fora before. With a clear grasp on whats going on by lurking around all day I hope to improve our community, and act upon violations swiftly.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Hello, username_3 here.
====================
>
> 1. Quite a lot of the activity on the site is concentrated around just a few shows: mainly Naruto, Bleach, One Piece, Dragon Ball, and Death Note. While these are all fine shows, they hardly showcase the diversity of anime, and don't leave a lot for people who aren't fans of long-running action/adventure. What's your take on this situation? Is it fine as it is, or should the community strive for more diversity of topics—more shoujo, more older anime, more artsy/experimental material like *Aku no Hana* and *Goodnight, Punpun*? If you support more diversity, what steps would you take as a moderator to make it happen?
>
>
>
It is a somewhat unfortunate fact of life that long-running action/adventure shows lend themselves to SE-style questions far more easily than most other types of shows. (This is only unfortunate insofar as it would be unfortunate if *any* small collection of shows were disproportionately "good" at giving rise to questions.)
Something should be done about this. I admit that I don't have a good idea of specific interventions that would be effective here. As a regular user, I make a deliberate effort to ask questions about things that are not frequently asked about, but that only goes so far. I'm going to try out a variant on my old "bounties for tags" idea this coming month, and if that works, huzzah, but I don't have my hopes up.
I don't think that this is a problem that is likely to resolve itself naturally. "ActionAdventureAnime.SE" would probably be a stable equilibrium, and it's one that we might currently be heading towards (I haven't looked at the data; this is just gut-feel for now). I think it will take effort to ensure that we end up at an equilibrium that more closely reflects the overall demographics of "people who have questions about anime".
What, then, would I do specifically as a moderator? I'm not really sure (aside, again, from enjoying the extra gravitas afforded by a diamond when one leads by example). [username_5's recent proposal for "viewing circles"](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2831/) seemed like a great idea to me, and I would definitely be willing to put some time in to get something similar up and running.
>
> 2. Last year we [asked the community](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2564/1530) about things they wanted to be clarified or fixed about our policies on Anime & Manga. This helped myself as the newly elected mod highlight some topics for review. One year on and [a new meta post later](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3903/lets-take-a-look-back-at-our-site-policies-2016-edition), Is there any particular policy the site currently has that you feel needs to be changed, or reviewed?
>
>
>
The series-tags thing that username_5 brought up [here](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3904/) is reasonably important to discuss, and I've already given my thoughts on it over [here](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3907/). Other than that, nothing really pressing comes to mind. For the most part, our policies seem reasonably good and reasonably stable at this point.
>
> 3. Some Stack Exchange moderators are activists—they take a strong leading role in the community, bringing up issues, guiding discussions, suggesting policy, and creating initiatives. Others are more passive; they let other members of the community shape policy, enforce it less stringently, and wait in the wings for exceptional situations that require their unique abilities. The passive approach fits more with Stack Exchange's description of moderators as "glorified janitors" and "human exception handlers" as laid out in [A Theory of Moderation](http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/05/a-theory-of-moderation/) and other posts. However, activist moderators can be good for a site; they can help unite and guide a user base, and can ensure that a valid concern brought up by a significant minority of the community gets a fair hearing and doesn't get automatically ignored in favor of the majority view. As a moderator, would you be more of an activist, or would you take a more passive approach? Why? How would you recognize a situation that would benefit more from the opposite approach, and how would you deal with it?
>
>
>
At our current size, any four moderators are inevitably going to constitute a large fraction of "people who contribute heavily to meta discussions". I think the site is better-off today - though perhaps not in the far future - if all our moderators (including myself, if elected) are reasonably "activist". Krazer's "activism", in particular, has historically led to a number of positive outcomes; I see this as desirable for the well-being of the site.
The "glorified janitors" line has always made perfect sense on SO, where the primary function of a moderator is to janitorialize things that the community cannot or does not. Here, where the moderators are scarcely even *necessary* for janitorial tasks? Not so much.
>
> 4. This year we have only had 7 Candidates nominated to join the mod team while last year there was 8 candidates. can you see any sort of barrier that would prevent other users from applying to become a part of the mod team in the next election? If so, in what way do you think we as a community can overcome this barrier? If not, what are your opinions as to why so few nominated to become a mod this time?
>
>
>
I see no barriers to nominating oneself for modship. 7 is not much smaller a number than 8. In fact, 7 divided by 1 is considerably larger than 8 divided by 3. Arithmetic!
>
> 5. Last Year we had problems with Identification Requests with what should be done with them being asked of the candidates in [last year's mod election](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2537/1587). With the topic now dead, buried, covered in concrete and without a spoon to eat it's way out is there another outstanding [single] subject that you think the community needs to address? why does this subject need to be addressed?
>
>
>
With identification requests gone, there are no immediate existential threats to the site. This is good.
There is still a longer-term threat to the well-being of the site: what if we get *so many* questions on *Naruto* and its ilk that they dominate the front page? At some point, this becomes self-reinforcing - who would want to visit a site full of Naruto questions, other than someone who already likes Naruto? (I'm not saying that this state of affairs is an inevitability; merely that it is a possibility - and one that I think is not even all that likely. Nonetheless, it behooves us to think about the this possibility and mitigate this risk where possible.)
Obviously, we cannot and should not ban Naruto questions, as we did id-reqs. So we need a different approach to ensuring that this doesn't become Naruto.SE - and that approach is to encourage diversity of content. See question #1 in this post.
>
> 6. How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?
>
>
>
Same as [last time](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2542/): we are still in a place where valuable content is worth enough that I think we ought to mop up after argumentative users who write good posts. I maintain that I would probably do no more than tell the user to tone it down, either in comments or in chat.
>
> 7. How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?
>
>
>
Also same as last time: post about it on meta for discussion. Unilateral closures and deletions of reasonable posts are still not a problem we have, so this is hardly a thing that happens anyway.
>
> 8. We have [a number of community events](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2682/1587) from annual events like [Conspiracy Santa](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2684/1587) to one off events like [EU A&M Meet up](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2692/1587). Are there any other Events you would like to see occur to help bolster community cohesion, attract more users to the site and/or increase activity and participation on the site?
>
>
>
I have no interest in coordinating or otherwise being involved in "real-life" events. I don't object to them on principle or anything; they're just not my cup of tea. I prefer to keep my internet life and non-internet life fairly separate.
>
> 9. What's your opinion on Taisho posting images in site's main chatroom? Taisho's image posting did got criticized in the past for being unnecessary or for not being safe for office. So what you think in favor or against it?
>
>
>
I imagine I've been one of the primary complainants here. To be clear - I guess I'm okay with Taisho posting images in the chatroom (though I don't see the point of it - I think it just clutters up the chatlog and makes us look like weirdos). It's just that keeping Taisho around will keep me out of the Maid Cafe most of the time.
>
> 10. What additional value would you add to the existing moderator team?
>
>
>
I will create so many tag synonyms. Please. I want tag synonyms. Let me have this.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: <NAME>
===============
>
> 1. Quite a lot of the activity on the site is concentrated around just a few shows: mainly Naruto, Bleach, One Piece, Dragon Ball, and Death Note. While these are all fine shows, they hardly showcase the diversity of anime, and don't leave a lot for people who aren't fans of long-running action/adventure. What's your take on this situation? Is it fine as it is, or should the community strive for more diversity of topics—more shoujo, more older anime, more artsy/experimental material like *Aku no Hana* and *Goodnight, Punpun*? If you support more diversity, what steps would you take as a moderator to make it happen?
>
>
>
Striving to fit into something to me seems, artificial. Instead, let the questions we have be about the anime we like to watch. Naruto, Bleach, One Piece, Dragon Ball, Death note, are all very popular examples of anime, and thus we see lots of questions being asked about them. With the exception of Death Note, these are all very long running shows which have vast universes, and many questions can arise over the span of their thousands of combined episodes. I don't see it as wrong for there to be more questions in a certain category just because they are more popular.
>
> 2. Last year we [asked the community](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2564/1530) about things they wanted to be clarified or fixed about our policies on Anime & Manga. This helped myself as the newly elected mod highlight some topics for review. One year on and [a new meta post later](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3903/lets-take-a-look-back-at-our-site-policies-2016-edition), Is there any particular policy the site currently has that you feel needs to be changed, or reviewed?
>
>
>
I agree with Krazer about our [spoiler policies](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3908/17758) being inconsistent. For instance: is a spoiler in the title OK? Well, if it's the "best" way to write the title then yes. If it would otherwise make the title ambiguous, then yes. What about spoiler tags? This is pretty much left to poster discretion, or the community to edit in later if someone feels they don't like it.
We should decide where we stand as a community about spoilers. One side of hurting search indexing of posts while keeping the site spoiler-free or the other side of possibly upsetting some of the community. Concreting this would allow us to be very up front to new users about what to expect on our site, and what cautions to take.
>
> 3. Some Stack Exchange moderators are activists—they take a strong leading role in the community, bringing up issues, guiding discussions, suggesting policy, and creating initiatives. Others are more passive; they let other members of the community shape policy, enforce it less stringently, and wait in the wings for exceptional situations that require their unique abilities. The passive approach fits more with Stack Exchange's description of moderators as "glorified janitors" and "human exception handlers" as laid out in [A Theory of Moderation](http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/05/a-theory-of-moderation/) and other posts. However, activist moderators can be good for a site; they can help unite and guide a user base, and can ensure that a valid concern brought up by a significant minority of the community gets a fair hearing and doesn't get automatically ignored in favor of the majority view. As a moderator, would you be more of an activist, or would you take a more passive approach? Why? How would you recognize a situation that would benefit more from the opposite approach, and how would you deal with it?
>
>
>
I much prefer the sense of community responsibility that StackExchange provides over the traditional experience that we find in an internet forum. Everyone here works together, and gives input on what they want out of this site. We all work together to keep the site clean, and to help new users learn to use the site.
I appreciate this fact, and would like to keep it as autonomous as possible. I don't think that a moderator should be necessary at all for change to take place in the community, or for concerns to be addressed within our meta. I believe, that this is even more true because of the smaller size of our StackExchange community.
I favor the moderator position to be viewed as outlined in the theory of moderation blog post, as an elected janitor, handling issues that fall outside the norm.
>
> 4. This year we have only had 7 Candidates nominated to join the mod team while last year there was 8 candidates. can you see any sort of barrier that would prevent other users from applying to become a part of the mod team in the next election? If so, in what way do you think we as a community can overcome this barrier? If not, what are your opinions as to why so few nominated to become a mod this time?
>
>
>
I would have preferred that this election be much bigger, with several more candidates in mind. I know each person has some individual reasons, but I can only share my own reservations. I know that Krazer has invested countless hours into this position and I respect the amount of work that he's put into helping out everyone in our community. The investment in time is valuable, as everyone has their own lives and busy schedules. I'm relieved there is another moderator spot opened to help distribute some of that existing work around a bit.
I haven't talked to Madara or our Tomato very much outside of the Maid Cafe, but I have come to understand that this reservation holds true even for our existing moderation.
To answer your question of why so few candidates have nominated themselves, I don't believe this is unusual at all. If we look at a normal meta thread about changing some policy, or a discussion about our site, we will notice that these topics don't generate huge numbers of participation. It's generally the same group of faces that you'll see in each thread. I would not expect participation in a moderator election to be much different from those results.
I appreciate the efforts of community members such as username_5 who have stepped up in recent times to keep our Meta thriving, and I believe that continuing to bring up topics in our Meta is what will drive future interest in community events, elections, and discussion about our site.
>
> 5. Last Year we had problems with Identification Requests with what should be done with them being asked of the candidates in [last year's mod election](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2537/1587). With the topic now dead, buried, covered in concrete and without a spoon to eat it's way out is there another outstanding [single] subject that you think the community needs to address? why does this subject need to be addressed?
>
>
>
I'm happy that we came together and figured out that identification request questions weren't a good fit for our site. I don't have similar strong feelings about changing another feature on the site at this time.
>
> 6. How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?
>
>
>
Immediately, users come to mind that aren't exactly patient, friendly people. Particularly theres some animosity towards newer, inexperienced users of our site. Both these older members and the new, inexperienced users are valuable to our site. I appreciate the "be nice" policy at Stack Exchange, and I do feel like it's often forgotten. I think that we as a community should call out users when we see them speaking to others in a way that we would find rude in real life. I hope we wouldn't let that happen in the real world. Let's not use the fact that this is an internet powered discussion as a reason for us to be allowed to be mean to others.
Basically, communication is the first step in resolving any problem that we come across. It would only be in regrettable circumstances would a moderator need to take any action past that.
>
> 7. How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?
>
>
>
I would first try to see if I could understand their perspective on my own. If I still felt strongly that their action was incorrect, then I would chat with them about their reasons, and work together to see if there was a mututal agreement that could be reached. If no agreement could be reached after that, then I believe that this issue is not as cut-and-dry as it first might have seemed and is better off handled by the community on a meta post than by a single moderator.
>
> 8. We have [a number of community events](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2682/1587) from annual events like [Conspiracy Santa](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2684/1587) to one off events like [EU A&M Meet up](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2692/1587). Are there any other Events you would like to see occur to help bolster community cohesion, attract more users to the site and/or increase activity and participation on the site?
>
>
>
Personally, what was truly the glue holding me to this community was the organized simulatenous watch parties (using Rabb.it) that Krazer would host. While we haven't had these in a few months, to me they were what an anime community is really all about. We were doing the thing we already know we all love, watching anime.. together. It always generated a few new questions per session and we had a lot of fun together chatting and making jokes during the sessions.
I know these aren't for everyone and the schedules can't work for everybody, but I think that these events are where we're really doing what we love doing and with people that share those interests. Having Anime & Manga as a platform for that is great, because new people can always join at any time and that means you're getting new perspectives with each show you watch.
>
> 9. What's your opinion on Taisho posting images in site's main chatroom? Taisho's image posting did got criticized in the past for being unnecessary or for not being safe for office. So what you think in favor or against it?
>
>
>
I have no problems with Taisho and from what I've seen, the complaints are unfounded. We have a question here on A&M about why anime is considered weird porn by western culture, and I'd say this lines up with the flags that Taisho has received. People on other parts of the network don't necessarily understand our culture, pop into the chat room, and have culture shock.
>
> 10. What additional value would you add to the existing moderator team?
>
>
>
I will continue being an active member of this community whether or not I become a moderator for A&M. The extra responsibilities of moderation would merely be a way for me to assist the existing moderation in keeping the site maintained. I would be happy to contribute to any plans the community has for adjusting the site in any way those priveleges made possible.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: *In Which username_5 Answers the Mod Questions in the Customary Long-Winded Manner*
>
> 1. Quite a lot of the activity on the site is concentrated around just a few shows: mainly Naruto, Bleach, One Piece, Dragon Ball, and Death Note. While these are all fine shows, they hardly showcase the diversity of anime, and don't leave a lot for people who aren't fans of long-running action/adventure. What's your take on this situation? Is it fine as it is, or should the community strive for more diversity of topics—more shoujo, more older anime, more artsy/experimental material like *Aku no Hana* and *Goodnight, Punpun*? If you support more diversity, what steps would you take as a moderator to make it happen?
>
>
>
This was my question. I asked it before I decided to run, and I thought it was important for the candidates to address because I do think we could use more diversity of material. Anime is so much more than just long-running shounen action. There are anime full of beautiful writing and rich symbolism, anime that push the boundaries of animation as a medium, anime that are strange and truly original enough to rival the most underground of underground comix and the most independent of independent movies. There are genres that have no equivalent in the West. There are anime which are all of those things.
Our site, because of Stack Exchange’s content curation policies, is uniquely well suited to introduce people to this wider world of anime. Stack Exchange is designed to attract experts. In the context of anime, this will usually mean people well-versed in art, literature, film, Japanese language, and other culture areas. We do have such experts here, but I’ve noticed that many of them, not being attracted to the popular shows, don’t have enough questions to answer and can’t hope for a response if they ask their own, so they gravitate towards moderation as a way to keep engaged with the site. We need good people moderating the content, but it’s sad that we can’t find more ways for these experts to contribute valuable content. I look at more diversity as the first step to realizing the full potential of our community.
I tried to stimulate more diversity of content with [Proposal: Let's form viewing circles!](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2831/7579). People seemed pretty underwhelmed, and looking back, there were some flaws in that proposal. But from interactions I’ve had with other users, there does seem to be an appetite in the community for more diversity; it’s just a question of finding the right stimuli, the right incentives. I don’t know yet what those are, but I’ve got a hundred ideas and I’d like to try them all.
>
> 2. Last year we [asked the community](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2564/1530) about things they wanted to be clarified or fixed about our policies on Anime & Manga. This helped myself as the newly elected mod highlight some topics for review. One year on and [a new meta post later](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3903/lets-take-a-look-back-at-our-site-policies-2016-edition), Is there any particular policy the site currently has that you feel needs to be changed, or reviewed?
>
>
>
Nothing urgent. There are a few rough edges to sand down. This is an area where I prefer to take more of a passive role and wait for issues to arise naturally; I like to leave a few escape hatches in policies to allow for flexibility.
There are a few things like tagging continuities and spoiler policies that we should talk about, but as my product manager says, "These are problems we want to have"—they mean that, as a community, we've moved past the adolescent identity crisis and come to the college years.
>
> 3. Some Stack Exchange moderators are activists—they take a strong leading role in the community, bringing up issues, guiding discussions, suggesting policy, and creating initiatives. Others are more passive; they let other members of the community shape policy, enforce it less stringently, and wait in the wings for exceptional situations that require their unique abilities. The passive approach fits more with Stack Exchange's description of moderators as "glorified janitors" and "human exception handlers" as laid out in [A Theory of Moderation](http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2009/05/a-theory-of-moderation/) and other posts. However, activist moderators can be good for a site; they can help unite and guide a user base, and can ensure that a valid concern brought up by a significant minority of the community gets a fair hearing and doesn't get automatically ignored in favor of the majority view. As a moderator, would you be more of an activist, or would you take a more passive approach? Why? How would you recognize a situation that would benefit more from the opposite approach, and how would you deal with it?
>
>
>
This was also my question from before I was running, and I asked it because across the SE network, I've seen activist mod teams, I've seen passive mod teams, and I've seen mixed mod teams, and I've seen all of them work and not work.
If elected, I expect to be more on the activist side. Both our pro-tem mod team and our current mod team are more on the activist side, and I feel it's worked well for our community to have them out on the front lines engaging with people. They've been instrumental in organizing events, guiding the community through large and difficult policy decisions, and explaining to new users why Stack Exchange can feel so unfriendly at first. The site is at a place where it doesn't need quite so much activist moderation, but it's not yet at a place where the mods can afford to disappear from view and spend all their time cleaning up messes behind the scenes.
On the other hand, one lesson I've learned in my time on SE is that I don't need to be involved in every decision that gets made and every discussion that goes on. Sometimes, mods should stay out of it and let the community decide. The more dysfunctional activist mod teams I've seen (not going to name any names, but it’s not ours) are the ones that can't do this; they have to offer criticism of one kind or another on every single post. It reminds me of an obnoxious professor I had in college; he would come to every post in our class forum, gleefully nitpick typos, mock our troubles, offer no help at all, and off he went.
As a mod, I would be cognizant of my ability to insta-close and insta-delete, and leave decisions on borderline posts up to the community. If I disagreed with the community decision, I would generally express that through a discussion on chat or Meta, not by unilaterally reversing the decision with mod powers. Mods should avoid the impression that they’re hand-sculpting the site into their own personal police state; being hands-off sometimes is the best way to do that.
>
> 4. This year we have only had 7 Candidates nominated to join the mod team while last year there was 8 candidates. can you see any sort of barrier that would prevent other users from applying to become a part of the mod team in the next election? If so, in what way do you think we as a community can overcome this barrier? If not, what are your opinions as to why so few nominated to become a mod this time?
>
>
>
Our community has a small, very committed core of users who take active parts in moderation and policy. This is a bit intimidating to a potential moderator candidate; when I was considering running, I knew every decision I made as both a candidate and a mod would be reviewed by a group of people who really know their stuff and wouldn't be afraid to call me out. When I realized this was actually an advantage--if I ever made a wrong decision, there would be people to check me and straighten things out--I decided to go for it.
But I'm also not sure why so many people waited until the last minute to slide in their nominations :) I understand it takes time to decide to run, but declaring your nomination so late took away a chance for the community to question you directly and discuss your candidacy.
>
> 5. Last Year we had problems with Identification Requests with what should be done with them being asked of the candidates in [last year's mod election](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2537/1587). With the topic now dead, buried, covered in concrete and without a spoon to eat it's way out is there another outstanding [single] subject that you think the community needs to address? why does this subject need to be addressed?
>
>
>
Not really. Even though Anime and Manga has "graduated" (and where's our new site design, SE? Don't you love us anymore?), we still have some growing pains to work through, but I don't see a single outstanding issue that needs to be addressed, just lots of little things.
If you had asked me several months ago, I would have said "our community's war machine mentality". Things were bleak in the immediate aftermath of the id request ban. For about a month, we had very few questions, almost no answers, downvotes everywhere, and it felt like every single question that came in had close votes against it. But we've moved past that, our Robespierre-like tendencies have been reined in, and the last month has been vibrant and fun, with several promising new users joining us. The only complaint I have left is that most of the activity has been in popular tags.
>
> 6. How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?
>
>
>
Assuming the comments were not abusive or offensive, merely argumentative, I would first try to get in touch with that user and let them know that a lot of people seem to be taking their comments the wrong way. I would assume good intentions and just ask the person to read their comments twice before posting, to be sure it was getting across the intended meaning.
I would also take this opportunity to let them respond and add more context to the situation. When I was in middle school, I knew someone who got in trouble for violence and angry outbursts on a pretty regular basis. None of the adults knew that he was being goaded and verbally harassed until he lost his temper and lashed out. Sometimes authority figures need to listen to someone to find out what's really going on, instead of assuming everything is just as it appears.
If the user was at fault, and the argumentative behavior continued, I would give the user another warning, worded a little more sharply: going from "Hey, I noticed people seem to be taking your comments the wrong way, can you be a little more careful with your wording?" to "Remember our previous talk? It doesn't seem to be improving. You need to try harder to hold back a little."
Depending on how the user responded to the previous outreach, I might give them a third chance, strongly warning that they are close to a suspension. If the user responded badly or escalated the situation, I might go straight for a short suspension at this point. Continued refusal would be met with longer suspensions.
If the comments were abusive or offensive, the first message would be much sharper and things would proceed more quickly. No one has the right to abuse other users, no matter how many good answers they’ve written.
>
> 7. How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?
>
>
>
Starting a mod war is definitely the wrong way to handle the situation. I would start by asking the other mod, in chat or in comments, to explain the reasoning behind the decision they made. If I felt the question was truly borderline and the other mod’s reasons seemed sound, I would probably leave it there, even if I didn’t entirely agree; these decisions are usually not clear-cut, and sometimes you have to trust your colleague’s judgment, even if it’s not exactly what you would have done yourself. Also, if the community feels the question is valuable, they can override a mod’s decision by voting to reopen/undelete; if that didn’t happen, it would indicate that the other mod made the correct decision from the community’s point of view.
On the other hand, if I felt the question was not borderline, that it fell into an undefined area of our policy, or that the other mod made the decision for unsound reasons, I would probably confer with the entire mod team and start a discusson on Meta to allow the community to have input.
>
> 8. We have [a number of community events](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2682/1587) from annual events like [Conspiracy Santa](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2684/1587) to one off events like [EU A&M Meet up](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2692/1587). Are there any other Events you would like to see occur to help bolster community cohesion, attract more users to the site and/or increase activity and participation on the site?
>
>
>
Recently I’ve become a big fan of [Screen Junkies Movie Fights](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLFWHlH4koGZDABLg4i81lswPJPHqLdKj7). It’s a game show where people who love movies answer debate questions like “Pitch the next Wolverine movie”, “Best Quentin Tarantino movie”, “Most traumatizing kids movie”, and even “Which superhero would win the Hunger Games?” The host judges answers based on the quality of the arguments, and there’s a fact-checker to make sure people don’t get away with making things up. It’s a lot of fun to watch, and I think it would be even more fun to play an anime/manga version.
I envision this as a Meta event with accompanying chat events. Some topic ideas I came up with were "Choose a relatively serious anime and pitch a magical girl spinoff starring one of the characters, in the style of Pretty Sammy or Prisma Illya", "What genre should get a Madoka-style deconstruction next and what would the show be like?", and "You've just read the title *Boku no Real Love Napkin* in a forum; what do you imagine is the plot of this show?" I’ve worked out how we could organize it, and I’ll be happy to jump in chat one of these evenings and talk about it if anyone is interested. It would be a great opportunity for us to get creative, have fun, get some of those “X vs Y?” questions out of our systems, and plumb the depths of our anime knowledge, and as a bonus, we could outsource the fact-checking to the main site by asking questions on anything in doubt.
I also think topic challenges like Worldbuilding, Movies and TV, and Writing do could be interesting. I’d envision it as similar to the tag bounty challenges that username_3 was issuing, where we choose a theme, but the question could be in any tag with that theme, not just new tags. We could do it without a bounty like Worldbuilding does, or high-rep users could offer bounties to the top voted posts.
Both of these events would spur more diversity of content by encouraging us all to look outside of our favorite show or favorite genre.
>
> 9. What's your opinion on Taisho posting images in site's main chatroom? Taisho's image posting did got criticized in the past for being unnecessary or for not being safe for office. So what you think in favor or against it?
>
>
>
I don’t have a problem with it. I don’t have time at work to be in chat anyway; I have work to do at work :)
More seriously, Taisho is a beloved part of Maid Cafe, but I can understand where he might be problematic in a work setting. If this is a problem for enough people, we could look into doing a review of the images he posts to make sure they're all reasonably SFW. You can also [hide specific users' posts](http://chat.stackexchange.com/faq#mute); this might be a good short-term option for people who don't want to see Taisho.
Since Taisho is a subject where I don't have strong opinions, any action I took as a moderator would be taken after a round of discussion and input from the community.
>
> 10. What additional value would you add to the existing moderator team?
>
>
>
This is a bit tough to answer for someone like this:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/sxGiFl.gif)
All I can bring to the team is passion for the site and a track record of working for its benefit, sometimes in helpful ways and sometimes in misguided ways. This is the only anime community that I've ever felt moved to participate in over many years of loving anime, and I want to see it become even more amazing.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: <NAME>
---------
>
> 1. Quite a lot of the activity on the site is concentrated around just
> a few shows: mainly Naruto, Bleach, One Piece, Dragon Ball, and
> Death Note. While these are all fine shows, they hardly showcase the
> diversity of anime, and don't leave a lot for people who aren't fans
> of long-running action/adventure. What's your take on this
> situation? Is it fine as it is, or should the community strive for
> more diversity of topics—more shoujo, more older anime, more
> artsy/experimental material like Aku no Hana and Goodnight, Punpun?
> If you support more diversity, what steps would you take as a
> moderator to make it happen?
>
>
>
There is nothing we can do to prevent people from asking questions on Bleach, Naruto, One Piece, Dragon Ball, and Death Note especially since they are famous world wide, compared to shows like Date a Live for example. However I believe that we do need diversity. If most questions are about those said anime/manga, then this site would become so homogenic, and it will be no longer fun and interesting.
We can't ask people outsite our community to give more diverse questions, so it falls on us to do so. Which means that we need to expose ourselves to various different anime/manga, that is read more manga, watch more anime, indulge ourselves in news regarding anime, manga, seiyuu, to make ourselves more knowledgeable. Anyone who get elected as the new moderator needs to promote such way of life by, for example, post random news about seiyuu or a quick summary on a manga or anime he/she found in the chat room to make people interested in it every now and then.
>
> 2. Last year we asked the community about things they wanted to be
> clarified or fixed about our policies on Anime & Manga. This helped
> myself as the newly elected mod highlight some topics for review.
> One year on and a new meta post later, Is there any particular
> policy the site currently has that you feel needs to be changed, or
> reviewed?
>
>
>
No, currently none.
>
> 3. Some Stack Exchange moderators are activists—they take a strong
> leading role in the community, bringing up issues, guiding
> discussions, suggesting policy, and creating initiatives. Others are
> more passive; they let other members of the community shape policy,
> enforce it less stringently, and wait in the wings for exceptional
> situations that require their unique abilities. The passive approach
> fits more with Stack Exchange's description of moderators as
> "glorified janitors" and "human exception handlers" as laid out in A
> Theory of Moderation and other posts. However, activist moderators
> can be good for a site; they can help unite and guide a user base,
> and can ensure that a valid concern brought up by a significant
> minority of the community gets a fair hearing and doesn't get
> automatically ignored in favor of the majority view. As a moderator,
> would you be more of an activist, or would you take a more passive
> approach? Why? How would you recognize a situation that would
> benefit more from the opposite approach, and how would you deal with
> it?
>
>
>
Mostly passive. Of course when there are valid concerns that needs to be addressed then the moderator should bring it up so that we can all decide what to do with it. Moderator can post their own opinion on the matter, but given their status, they should also make it clear that that is an opinion as a user and as a member of the community, not as a moderator.
>
> 4. This year we have only had 7 Candidates nominated to join the mod
> team while last year there was 8 candidates. can you see any sort of
> barrier that would prevent other users from applying to become a
> part of the mod team in the next election? If so, in what way do you
> think we as a community can overcome this barrier? If not, what are
> your opinions as to why so few nominated to become a mod this time?
>
>
>
There is not much of a difference between 7 and 8 to make me think that only a few nominated themselves to be a mod. What is more interesting is that the last 3 candidates signed up on the last day and almost the same time. If there is any barrier at all to this election then it is because we have username_3 nominating himself while at the same time only 1 will get selected as the new moderator. Currently username_3 has the highest candidate score, even higher than the 3 moderators (Madara, Tomato, and Krazer). This might have prevented people from applying because either they feel they stand no chance against username_3 or they feel, "why don't we just vote username_3 since he clearly is the best candidate we have." I think username_1 nominating herself has something to do with why we have the additional 3 candidates singing up late. Indirectly she encouraged people to sign up since she clearly has the lowest candidate score.
>
> 5. Last Year we had problems with Identification Requests with what
> should be done with them being asked of the candidates in last
> year's mod election. With the topic now dead, buried, covered in
> concrete and without a spoon to eat it's way out is there another
> outstanding [single] subject that you think the community needs to
> address? why does this subject need to be addressed?
>
>
>
Diversity issue. Lately we have too many Naruto, Bleach, One Piece questions, especially Naruto. There is nothing we can do to stop people, especially new users from asking questions about those anime, nor should we do anything to stop them since such action would be harmful to the site in that we are cutting ourselves from potential addition of regular users. Talking from personal experience, I get uncomfortable with this, I even ignored a question about Naruto that I should be able to answer out of being bored of answering Naruto related questions. I think something needs to be done to increase the diversity so that users, especially old users won't get bored of this site and making us potentially losing them. This can only be done if we are more familiar to various different anime/manga. Which is why I suggest in my answer for the 1st question that a short summary of a manga or anime be posted every now and then to make people interested and pick them up.
>
> 6. How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of
> valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of
> arguments/flags from comments?
>
>
>
I think such a thing is fine. But since we are not forum, then after 10 or so comments, we need to move it to the chat so that it won't get too long. Later on the conclusion gained from the chat can be posted as a comment or an edit to the answer.
>
> 7. How would you handle a situation where another mod
> closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?
>
>
>
Be open with him, try to talk to him in the chat or post question in meta and explain why I think the question should not be closed. Being open is important here since we are communicating with text only and thus unless we write it there is no way other can know what we are thinking since we can't read their facial expression.
>
> 8. We have a number of community events from annual events like
> Conspiracy Santa to one off events like EU A&M Meet up. Are there
> any other Events you would like to see occur to help bolster
> community cohesion, attract more users to the site and/or increase
> activity and participation on the site?
>
>
>
Conspiracy Santa happens on Northern Hemisphere Winter. We need event for the other seasons to increase our nakama-bond (community cohesion, attract more users to the site and/or increase activity and participation). Since we are Anime and Manga SE, we need activities that is related to those. Thus, my suggestion is...
* **Spring (Spring Gathering)**
In spring people gather to enjoy the sakura (like what <NAME> did with her friends in Yuru Yuri San Hai! Ep. 12). This event should be done on weekend to ensure participation. The gathering will be done on rabb.it and pretty much like Krazer has done (see [this post](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2666/anime-club-event-come-watch-anime-with-us-this-weekend)). Announcement should be made 7 days prior to remind everyone. Users are encouraged to suggest what to watch. I propose doing this yearly on the first Sunday of March. With fixed time and prior announcement it would be easier for people to allocate time to ensure they can join the event.
* **Summer (Summer Ghost Story)**
What is commonly shown as an activity people in anime and manga do during summer is dating, losing virginity, change appearance, courage test and gathering around a candle and tells ghost stories. The first 3 won't help our community, the 4th is hard to do since we are all living in different parts of the planet. So I suggest the last, Ghost Story telling.
A question will be opened every year on August 1st UTC 0:0:0 and participants can post answer until August 14th GMT 23:59:59. Participants can post a ghost story as an answer. All users can give +1 on stories that they think is scary. Winner for the year is the one with the most vote. Since we now have badge for series (such as Naruto badge), maybe we should also give Summer-Kaidan-[INSERT YEAR HERE]-Champion badge to the winner as to encourage participation, especially since it is going to be a unique one-of-a-kind badge.
* **Fall/Autumn**
Sorry, no idea how we can turn Sports and Culture festival into something that can be done regardless of time difference. Will post something later when I get some idea.
EDIT: Okay, I just remembered that other than the festival, they also have election where they choose the King and Queen of the school. So we will do our own election. Categories including Best Male Seiyuu, Best Female Seiyuu, Best Male Character, Best Female Character which will be separated into 4 different questions. Every user can only post 1 candidate for each category along with the reason why they think he/she deserves the title. The candidate must be featured in an anime/manga during the last year. So for the 2016 event, only characters/seiyuu featured from Fall 2015 to Summer 2016 is eligible. For example, for the Best Male Character 2016, Sakamoto is eligible, Kurosaki Ichigo is eligible (since the manga still runs during that time period), <NAME> is not since TWGOK anime and manga didn't run during the time period. If it is hard to keep track on which manga still run during the time period, which not, then we can keep it as anime only.
>
> 9. What's your opinion on Taisho posting images in site's main
> chatroom? Taisho's image posting did got criticized in the past for
> being unnecessary or for not being safe for office. So what you
> think in favor or against it?
>
>
>
The main reason why Taisho was criticized was because the images posted was borderline hentai or too kinky. The images he posted now is a lot better. Taisho, I think is a good addition to our chat room that makes it unique, so we need to preserve the cat. As long as no NSFW pictures posted, it should be fine to keep him.
Of course since we are all living in different countries with different values, then the pictures needs to be regulated strictly, so an image of <NAME> with her cleavage showing is a no no even if she is fully clothed. In other words, the images posted should be neutral enough so that it is acceptable regardless of cultural and value difference. It also needs to be diverse enough. Even if the images is SFW, but if all it posted is pictures of loli or girls, then it is still no good. Adding anime scenery images would be a good addition, I think.
>
> 10. What additional value would you add to the existing moderator team?
>
>
>
What we needed the most, and is the reason why we have this election in the first place, availability.
Upvotes: 2 |
2016/08/29 | 3,023 | 12,074 | <issue_start>username_0: Currently we have an unclear policy with regards to the limits of hypothetical questions, and with their increasing frequency on the site we should revisit this and solidify our rules.
Our policy is [vaguely outlined here](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2282/are-question-that-are-slightly-hypothetical-but-with-potentially-great-answers?noredirect=1&lq=1) in a mixture of suggestions with varying extents of strictness. a short summary is:
* No cross-series hypothetical questions
* "hypothetical questions about a show are fine if the show has a coherent framework of rules from which we can make deductions."
The latter is slightly more strict than what can be seen on other sites such as SciFi & Fantasy - [though their policy is subjective too](https://scifi.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6382/close-reasons-what-if-happened).
Is the current policy sufficient? How do we solve cases of semantics [such as this](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3911/my-question-got-closed-unfairly)? Do we need to adjust our policy to be more lenient / more strict?
Policies are user driven, so don't be afraid to suggest change :)<issue_comment>username_1: Here are some guidelines I think we should adopt when dealing with hypothetical questions. [<NAME>'s post on the Sci-Fi and Fantasy blog](http://scifi.blogoverflow.com/2015/06/gorilla-vs-shark-not-so-fast/) about this subject is a good read and helped inform my beliefs about how we should handle what-if questions.
**Caveat**: These are only guidelines. They aren't a formula that will always tell you whether a question should be closed. Use your judgment; if the guidelines are unclear on a question, but your experience suggests that any possible answer will be totally unsubstantiated, go with that.
No cross-universe What-ifs
--------------------------
These are pretty much always opinion-based; they will almost inevitably involve some amount of pure guesswork or unfounded speculation.
**Caveat**: If there is an official crossover story between two universes, you can ask questions about things that might have happened in that story. For instance, I could ask the question "Does <NAME> think that <NAME> is cute?", because there was in fact an official crossover story between *Oreimo* and *To Aru Kagaku no Railgun*. (The answer is yes, by the way.)
**Caveat**: The burden is always on the question asker to prove that an official crossover exists. If someone shows up asking "Could Naruto beat Luffy? I think they might have crossed over at some point", close the question unless the asker has evidence that they did cross over and might have fought.
What-ifs should be reasonably scoped
------------------------------------
This can be tricky to determine if you're not intimately familiar with the series, but basically, any question that would demand an answer summarizing an entire alternate storyline the series could have taken is too broad. As an extreme example, "How would Lelouch's rebellion have gone if he'd never met CC and gotten his Geass?" That asks answerers to rewrite the entire series starting from the very beginning. Educated guesses supported by evidence from the series should be all right, but there is a point where you don't have enough evidence to do that anymore without leaving the realm of reasonable extrapolation.
[username_2's answer](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3917/7579) has a good set of guidelines to determine if a hypothetical question is reasonable in scope.
What-ifs should obviously relate to the story or the rules of the universe
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I like Izkata's comment on the SF&F post that Toshinou-san linked:
>
> Proposed close wording: "Okay, do you have any reason to think this aside from just pulling it out of your ass?"
>
>
>
Of course, we should be more polite than that. But it's reasonable to close a question for being irrelevant or silly or not asked in good faith. We should be able to close things like "What would happen if Motoko Kusanagi ate chili?", because Major Kusanagi eating chili is totally irrelevant to the story or the rules of the universe. (Unless it was strongly hinted at some point that eating chili might corrupt her boot sector and make her slaughter everyone, or something.)
I'm not in love with Death Note lawyer questions, but they relate to the rules of the universe, so they should be allowed. "Does L like chili?" shouldn't be allowed.
"Whatsit-san vs. Who-sama" questions
------------------------------------
We get a fair number of these anyway, and I think we've been dealing with them pretty well; the really bad ones I've seen have all been closed. But for completeness, here are the guidelines I'd suggest for them, based on [<NAME>'s blog](http://scifi.blogoverflow.com/2015/06/gorilla-vs-shark-not-so-fast/):
* Optimally, the characters should have fought at some point. No "Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon here"; if the only way to answer is "Well, XX fought YY who fought ZZ who fought WW, and AA fought BB who fought CC who also fought WW and defeated him, whereas ZZ lost to WW, so going back up the chain, AA wins", it's primarily opinion-based. If you have good reason to think this is the case, vote to close.
* If they haven't fought, use your judgment, but it's probably not looking good for the question. Lean towards closing, but you might ask the OP whether there was an actual scene that made them curious about this. Give extra scrutiny to cases where the characters, for in-universe reasons, never *would* fight; we might be able to figure out who would win if Sakura without her magic got in a fist fight with Tomoyo, but it would never happen, so the odds are very much against there being any evidence.
* If the characters have never fought, but there are in-universe rules we could use to determine who might win (e.g. "100 Staryus vs. 100 Sandshrew: who wins?"—Staryu, because Ground is weak against Water), the question *might* be okay, depending on how thoroughly it sets up the scenario and how well the scenario conforms to known canon. But any question that would involve vague arguments about "power levels" or requires answerers to construct elaborate scenarios to answer ("Sandshrew would win because they can throw some desiccants at Staryu to dry up all its water it could buy some desiccants at the Pokemart") is opinion-based
"There's not enough information" or "It's a plot hole" should be valid answers, *if* the question conforms to the other guidelines
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The tough thing about "there's not enough information" or "it's a plot hole" is that you never know if there's some interview or special edition one-shot floating around out there that answers the question, but a good-faith effort should be enough. It's not hard to tell when someone actually put some effort in to cover all the bases before writing the answer vs. when someone just plunked in "Nope, it was never explained, not that I remember".
Answers with official evidence like interviews are best, of course.
Global Caveat: Use your Judgment
--------------------------------
We can't cover every possible edge case, and bad questions have a tendency to be really weird. If something looks dodgy to you, go ahead and flag or vote to close. Throw it to the community to judge.
If you vote to close a question and the OP just doesn't seem to understand why, I would encourage you to point them to Meta. Meta should be a place where people can debate individual decisions as well as overarching policy.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In my mind, there's no hard and fast rule to apply to any individual hypothetical question that could be asked about anime or manga, but there are a few heuristics we could apply to determine if they're suitable or not.
Notably, I'm looking for:
* A **specific timeline**,
* Some **specific scenario** in which any characters are involved in, and
* A **clear, unambiguous question**.
This can vary depending on the requirements of the question (since, for whatever reason, the 100 Staryu vs. 100 Sandshrew question has piqued my interest, but in an annoying way), but in general, I would recommend use of the above heuristic to at least *think* about if a question should be closed.
Let's look back at an objective, straight-to-the-point sort of question. [We can use this one for example.](https://anime.stackexchange.com/q/22249/102)
>
> In the new manga mini-series, Sarada figures out the girl in glasses with Sasuke to whom Sarada seems to look like (the glasses, the face). I was wondering if maybe Sakura isn't her biological mother and that Sarada is a child of Sasuke and the other girl in picture.
>
>
>
Even if I'd like to spend a moment to edit this, this sort of question has a few key characteristics about it:
* It mentions a specific timeline, either canonically or via publication (new mini-series for Naruto)
* It describes a specific scenario that the characters (in this case, Sarada, Sakura, Sasuke and Karin ("girl in glasses")) are involved or related in
* It states the question plainly, and leaves no room for ambiguity ("I was wondering if maybe Sakura isn't her biological mother...")
Based on that heuristic, I can reason that this sort of question can be answered, and even better, it could be answered with canonical source material backing up any claims.
Now, let's take a look at [another question](https://anime.stackexchange.com/q/35918/102) which we could use as a benchmark for this heuristic.
* Is there a specific timeline being offered? In my mind, yes; the **start and end of GT**.
* Is there a specific scenario in which the characters are involved in being discussed? Yes; the scenario involves Goku regressing to the age of a child, whereas everyone else maintains their age.
* Is there a clear, unambiguous question being posed? **Not really**, because the question is open-ended in nature. We are led to the end of the series by the question, then asked the hypothetical question here, emphasis mine.
>
> Goku is now walking around the tournament grounds, all grown up again in his base form, still having his tail (proving the wish wasn't reversed, because then his tail would have been gone) just before the end-credits come into play.
>
>
> ... What happens if **this** Goku, all grown up (again), turns SSJ4?
>
>
>
What makes this ambiguous is the fact that we're talking about this *supposed*, *hypothetical* Goku which may or may not take the state being described in the future, which makes this difficult to definitively answer. A lot of theories could be thrown around about it, given the story of Dragon Ball GT, but *theories* aren't *evidence*, which makes me lean stronger towards questions like that being opinion-based.
---
So, what do we do in a scenario like that? By and large the best thing to do *is* to close the question, which gives the OP a chance to edit their question and add disambiguating evidence or circumstantial evidence to demonstrate that their scenario *could* be realistic. To username_1's point on crossovers, if that is a piece that is missing from the question, it should be pointed out. The key here is to **point that out**, though, which I do feel like the previous Meta question which sparked *this* one did a really good job of doing.
Can questions like that be redeemed? Some can; most cannot. Pure, unbound hypotheticals aren't the sort of questions we should be allowing around here since they can get a little fantastical ("What would have happened had Itachi actually killed Sasuke when they were reunited?", "What would have happened had Rukia been executed?", *ad nauseam*). However, if we keep 'em scoped well **and** emphasize **how to get them on-topic, if possible**, then I feel like it would work itself out rather well.
Upvotes: 1 |
2016/10/07 | 628 | 2,520 | <issue_start>username_0: so with this question [What is the song near the end of Episode 24? (Akame ga Kill)](https://anime.stackexchange.com/q/36559/1587) how it describes when the song occurs is kinda vague. we don't know when someone considers an anime episode having reached the end in where they can observe a scene, is it 5 minutes before the ED? 3 minutes? the scene after the ED?
To avoid acting too late what do we do about these Vague Music Requests?<issue_comment>username_1: I suggest the following:
When posting a Music Identification Request you should expect to see the series name indicated by the paired tag with [music](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/music "show questions tagged 'music'") and/or in the question and a description of an identifiable scene that the music occurs. ie
>
> what is the music that plays in Sword Art Online when everyone is gathered in the town of beginning learning that Kayaba has prevented them for logging out
>
>
>
things which can also narrow the scene down are
* an episode number
* a timestamp
* a link to a legal video source (some leeway given to youtube videos)
the first 2 points above can replace a scene description when used together. the last point should always come with a scene description even if the first 2 points are given because if the link dies the timestamp may become invalid, especially if the OP/ED/Transition Scenes/etc are removed (remember that OP and ED's combined are ~3 minutes).
If the request is vague...
==========================
request clarification and have the OP edit the question. if nothing happens (say within 24 hours but how long you wait is up to you) Vote to Close as **Unclear**.
maybe also leave a comment saying that the question can be re-opened if clarification is edited in, this will then put the closed question in the Review Que for reopen votes.
In essence from the description you should know or be able to believe that the described scene can be referenced with a timestamp if one isn't given.
using the link in this question that would be closed as unclear as the scene is described to be *"near the end of the episode"* and at what time would one consider near the end?
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: One other thing to help with the search is to ask OP to add screenshot of the scene when the music starts, like in this question:
[What is the song at 07:37 in episode 60 of Naruto?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/36896/naruto-ost-episode-60)
Upvotes: 2 |
2016/10/16 | 871 | 3,684 | <issue_start>username_0: Sometimes people post "where do I read/watch X" and it isn't phrased as looking for legal shop or streaming site links, so it could have been intended as looking for illegal sites. We seem to have agreed on editing it to be explicitly about legal links only, and then accept that question. In cases where OP is clearly not asking for that, we close it with our custom illegal links reason.
But are we okay with converting possibly bad questions into somewhat less bad ones like that? Do you think they become useful to anyone and worth keeping around? Especially when asking about rather popular or mainstream works.
Some sites have a rule against asking "shopping questions" like "where can I buy " because they're largely useless and it's too easy to find it yourself if you just google "X buy". Do you think we should keep all our questions like that?
Sometimes there are cases I can agree we should keep, like asking where to buy a rare or specific version of a product which was discontinued or isn't sold in OP's region/country. But even so, do you think we should keep searching for people where to buy discs, printed manga books, etc?<issue_comment>username_1: I think questions about "where do I read/watch X" are not acceptable in more than 99% of the cases (that's probably worse than identification requests, and we got rid of that one), because think about it, how many of them aren't asking for illegal or copyrighted materials AND which you won't find on a legal distributor/broadcaster/official site? We already have [this](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/923/8486), [this](https://anime.stackexchange.com/q/8671/8486) and [this](https://anime.stackexchange.com/q/9492/8486), enough info to answer almost everyone's calls, provided your region is not blocked from viewing the contents.
You could potentially ask this question for every tag there is/ever will be and in most cases they wouldn't be of interest to more than a few people. Heck, these kinds of questions don't even enrich our understanding of a series or anime/manga in general. They aren't even fun. Do you believe they have a place here?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I have to state that from an ethics perspective giving recommendations where someone can go to possibly commit piracy is not on the right side of things. There are places where you can pay memberships to have access to manga/anime online, but there is no way of telling if these sites are actually legitimate. Crunchyroll has paid licenses with companies in east asia, as well as Funimation, but the majority of other manga sites are hard to get information on.
I always stick to recommending online stores that carry manga, that way I can make a real recommendation, and support an industry that frankly is still niche and needs the support.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: All of these questioned should be marked as a duplicate of [this question.](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/922/how-can-i-tell-if-a-site-is-legal/923#923) Ideally the title of that questions should be where can I watch shows online legally. Alternatively, we can have a respectable user post a question and answer at the same time which points the user to "Can I Stream It" and the previously mentioned question.
These questions are only specific questions of that existing one. Just closing the question without providing any support will push away potential new users. Marking as a duplicate will push away a few who think this site is for conversations but still pretty much gives them the help they came here for.
My only issue is I don't know where such policies are listed.
Upvotes: 3 |
2016/10/20 | 388 | 1,453 | <issue_start>username_0: So as i was waiting for Windows to Update i was messing around on the main page while i was logged and look what i saw
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/nyM3p.png)
i get the feeling new users see [identification-request](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/identification-request "show questions tagged 'identification-request'") and think we still use it but ignore the error that pop up about us blacklisting it (which they shouldn't).
is there any way we can remove [identification-request](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/identification-request "show questions tagged 'identification-request'") tag from here?<issue_comment>username_1: The tag is there because its on almost 400 questions. You'll need to remove it from those -- there's no specific way of preventing a blacklisted tag from appearing in the home page list, except making it less popular.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I guess someone fixed this - JNat marked [the post on Meta.SE](https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/286105/) as [status-completed], and indeed, [identification-request] is no longer listed as one of the tags on the front page for non-logged-in users.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/nxktH.png)
And it didn't even take 6-8 weeks! Great stuff; my thanks to the folks at SE.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2016/11/03 | 2,856 | 12,222 | <issue_start>username_0: Apparently we still rank pretty high on "identify anime" search engine query, and it's supposedly because we still have around 400 of them, which makes them the 3rd most popular tag, and that means it is displayed on our front page for every non-logged in visitor. And the StackExchange authorities [already told us](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3945/191) they can't hide specific tags from the front page. Also I don't think that's how search engine ranking works anyhow coz there would still be a huge number of questions left with the tag to get us a high position in search results for anime identification. So we still get some ID requests which get closed and deleted pretty often.
It's been almost 6 months since we banned the ID requests. Have they had enough visibility by now? Should we dispose of them for good in hopes of lowering our search ranking for identification?
(note that there's no guarantee it will actually work as well as intended or at all)<issue_comment>username_1: I'm tentatively in favor of it.
I say "tentatively" because it does mean that we'll be losing *some* of the better answers that we actually decided to preserve, but at the same time, I'd rather we finish cleaning up the mess outright.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: When browsing the site before ID questions were outlawed, the questions were full of them and you sometimes had to go back a few pages of active questions to glance at one day’s worth.
Now, with ID questions not allowed the overall question volume is rather low. I have a few ignored tags which means I don’t take much more than five or ten minutes to check a day’s worth of anime.
It *is* possible that most of those ID questions use a tag that I ignore, I don’t know. But my perception tells me that we basically did away with them consequently. The remaining that still make their way through are quickly nuked dealt with with downvotes, flags and close votes. If they are not manually deleted, Roomba deletes them automatically after seven days. (I have no way to check the method of deletion.)
Having the tag standing there is, well, unfortunate. The best solution is to get more questions that use other tags so that it will no longer be among the top five.
I don’t think that there is any action that must be taken.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: Just a quick observation: If the official policy is that ID reqs are banned, wouldn't leaving current ones in place possibly send a mixed message?
Clearing out what is banned should be even across all banned questions. Are questions that are banned for other reasons left in place?
The way I see it, if new users do not see a bunch of ID requests, even with closed tags, on the front page, they may possibly slow down and eventually stop posting new ones.
A quality answer to a banned question, while a quality answer, is still to a banned question. I see it as a having your cake and eating it too situation. Keep the questions with quality answers, and you may be leaving the door open for new ID requests, as people will get the sense that the ban is not an "every ID request" thing.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: Assuming our [feature request](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/286105/do-not-show-blacklisted-tags-under-explore-our-questions-for-non-logged-in-use) is not done, I can see 4 ways to proceed with this. All but one would need to be done by moderators, because ordinary users can't do anything apart from favorite/unfavorite/share to historically locked questions (not even flags).
1. Status Quo. Do nothing and leave [identification-request](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/identification-request "show questions tagged 'identification-request'") on the main page. It will eventually disappear, but this may take many years. It's questionable how big of a problem the presence of [identification-request](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/identification-request "show questions tagged 'identification-request'") really is. We are not getting that many new ID questions, and the ones that do get asked are shut down quickly. No one even noticed this issue for months. So perhaps no action is really required. However the status quo is admittedly annoying even if mostly harmless.
2. Delete all existing [identification-request](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/identification-request "show questions tagged 'identification-request'") questions. I'm not a fan of this because the remaining ones are generally agreed to be fairly high quality, and historical locks were done for a reason. Removing those questions entirely for 99% of visitors isn't a good idea in my opinion. They are high-quality content, even if it's a type of content that we've decided not to continue going forward. This is exactly the situation where we *should* be preserving the questions with historical locks. In addition, it would require moderators to manually delete almost 400 posts, which is a lot of work. Probably someone at the CM or dev level can do it automatically, but I don't think an ordinary mod can.
3. Merge the remaining [identification-request](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/identification-request "show questions tagged 'identification-request'") questions into a different tag. The only one which could plausibly be used here without causing major harm is [retag](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/retag "show questions tagged 'retag'"). I don't like the idea of [retag](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/retag "show questions tagged 'retag'") being a big tag on the site, even if the questions are all historically locked. It would solve this issue of [identification-request](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/identification-request "show questions tagged 'identification-request'") being one of the top tags, but [retag](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/retag "show questions tagged 'retag'") being one of the top tags is not great either. That said, this is also fairly easy for a moderator to do; it would only take a handful of clicks total.
4. Retag the remaining [identification-request](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/identification-request "show questions tagged 'identification-request'") questions individually to have the identified work's tag. The remaining questions are all solved, so there's nothing stopping us from switching the tag to the identified work apart from old policies that made sense when we were taking ID requests but are irrelevant now. Moderators can retag the questions without unlocking them first. Hence this is not a lot more work per question than just deleting them. Probably a handful of the questions will not be able to be retagged easily, but enough should be doable that we'd get [identification-request](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/identification-request "show questions tagged 'identification-request'") off the front page. This has the undesired effect that all of these questions will be bumped to the front page again, but if the retagging is done slowly enough that is not a huge problem. It also will add a lot of small tags (which is probably a good thing) but populate them with now-offtopic questions that aren't very interesting to anyone who cares about the tag (a slightly negative but mostly inconsequential thing).
All of these except #1 need to be done by mods, and #2 and #4 require a significant amount of effort from the mods over questions that we mostly just want to ignore. My personal preference would be a combination of #3 and #4, to first merge all remaining ID requests into [retag](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/retag "show questions tagged 'retag'"), and then individually tag them as the solved series as time and front page space permits.
However because of the amount of work this would require from the moderators, if they don't have the time and energy to do this, I'd rather leave the decision up to them. They're the ones who will potentially have to spend a few hours to do this depending on what is chosen, and ultimately I don't think this is a big enough problem that we should force any particular solution on them. I'd be willing to do it myself over the course of a couple weeks, but I'm certain there is no way for an ordinary user can edit a historically locked question (that's kind of the point) so this is moot.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: I'm going to leave this matter up for the community to decide.
Whether or not the tag shows up in the list of popular tags makes little difference was the users will be informed that they cannot use the tag. Feeble attempts to circumvent the restriction by tagging it with some completely unrelated tag will be met with closure (and deletion) by the collective user community. It that doesn't tell the user we don't want these types of question here, not much else will.
If you stopped to take a look at the types of users that attempt to post identification question you'll observe that very few, if any have the Informed badge. By inference you can assume that they did not take the time to take the tour and get to know the site a bit better before position. Instead they see venue for asking about their long-lost nostalgic memories of what they assume to be anime/manga, ignoring the attempts we've made to deter them.
I am one to argue that this ignorance won't be resolved with the deletion of the remaining id request. These oblivious new users will still come straddling in to our site asking for identifications question, because all they see is a website about questions and answers, they assume it's like the web forums they frequent, and post what they want without much care for our format, nettiquette, or articulation.
Regardless of whether or not these users are registered or not as soon as we admonish them, by closing their question, the likelihood that they return or make an attempt to understand us drops significantly. These users just give up and leave. Few make an attempt to gather the prerequisite 20 rep to ask these off-topic in chat.
So what can we do about these greedy and selfish new users? I leave that up to the community. The bulk of the matter has been more or less addressed by the feature request. What's left is a little clean up or maintenance. These request already are becoming less frequent, so given time you might only see them show up once in a blue moon. I personally would wait to see if it will die out naturally... what about you?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: This is basically a piggy-back suggestion to [Logan’s answer](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3959/13532). I’ll not integrate it into my previous answer which says something entirely different. However, I think Logan has provided a great idea of what else can be done.
Who says we cannot implement Logan’s idea number 3 but create a new tag for the job? The tag I would propose would be [historical-lock](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/historical-lock "show questions tagged 'historical-lock'"). Granted, it still doesn’t look great to see a large number of [historical-lock](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/historical-lock "show questions tagged 'historical-lock'") but it removes both the idea that ID requests are okay and does not interfere with [retag](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/retag "show questions tagged 'retag'").
Naturally, [historical-lock](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/historical-lock "show questions tagged 'historical-lock'") could also be a soft transition from Logan’s third to Logan’s fourth suggestion.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_6: I like Logan's proposition #4 to retag questions individually to have the identified work's tag. The main benefit, I think, is that it removes [identification-request](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/identification-request "show questions tagged 'identification-request'") from badge tracking. It also makes more sense to not keep a tag that can not be used anymore on the site.
Upvotes: 2 |
2016/11/13 | 539 | 2,184 | <issue_start>username_0: so looking at the suggested edit review i came across [this one](https://anime.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/33064). the question is an id request and in this case the OP made the question while unregistered and then created a new account when they went to edit.
now because we don't accept id request aside from a limited sub selection (the anime series must be known) the edit is kinda pointless since in the end the question will be closed and deleted.
from my understanding edits are supposed to improve content but since id requests are for the most part un-salvageable should we accept suggested edits to un-salvageable questions?
NOTE: the linked edit was approved while i was making this but the question still applies<issue_comment>username_1: Usually, the SE guideline is to accept edits if they are not spam or vandalism, attempts to reply, superfluous, decreasing the post’s quality, etc. Basically all the reasons you see in the box to reject edits. Implicitly, if edits *do* improve the quality of a post, do not conflict with the author’s intent, etc., they should be allowed.
However, as you stated, there is absolutely no reason to edit that post. And this is because:
* the question is undesirable and the edit doesn’t (cannot) salvage it
* the edit would bump the question on the front page and give it uncalled visibility
Furthermore, OP should have either registered an account or made sure they kept their cookie around to prevent having to go through the review queue — it *is* supposed to be their own post. Even though the edit would be pointless if they were still associated with the posting account, it at least wouldn’t have wasted anybody’s time in the review queue.
All in all, there is no harm in rejecting that edit. Probably with the custom reject reason; likely something like
>
> Don’t polish turds
>
>
> The post is unsalvageably off-topic, the edit is pointless
>
>
>
or something similar.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: In case of ID requests, I don't think it really matters either way. Just don't forget to cast your close and delete votes, because that's what's important.
Upvotes: 3 |
2017/02/02 | 972 | 3,817 | <issue_start>username_0: It is a bit late into this new year, being that we're already in the second month, but we are now cycling the Community Promotion Ads for 2017!
### What are Community Promotion Ads?
Community Promotion Ads are community-vetted advertisements that will show up on the main site, in the right sidebar. The purpose of this question is the vetting process. Images of the advertisements are provided, and community voting will enable the advertisements to be shown.
### Why do we have Community Promotion Ads?
This is a method for the community to control what gets promoted to visitors on the site. For example, you might promote the following things:
* the site's twitter account
* review blogs and research websites to keep on top of each new season
* events, meetups, and conventions
* anything else your community would genuinely be interested in
The goal is for future visitors to find out about *the stuff your community deems important*. This also serves as a way to promote information and resources that are *relevant to your own community's interests*, both for those already in the community and those yet to join.
### Why do we reset the ads every year?
Some services will maintain usefulness over the years, while other things will wane to allow for new faces to show up. Resetting the ads every year helps accommodate this, and allows old ads that have served their purpose to be cycled out for fresher ads for newer things. This helps keep the material in the ads relevant to not just the subject matter of the community, but to the current status of the community. We reset the ads once a year, every December.
The community promotion ads have no restrictions against reposting an ad from a previous cycle. If a particular service or ad is very valuable to the community and will continue to be so, it is a good idea to repost it. It may be helpful to give it a new face in the process, so as to prevent the imagery of the ad from getting stale after a year of exposure.
### How does it work?
The answers you post to this question *must* conform to the following rules, or they will be ignored.
1. All answers should be in the exact form of:
```
[![Tagline to show on mouseover][1]][2]
[1]: http://image-url
[2]: http://clickthrough-url
```
Please **do not add anything else to the body of the post**. If you want to discuss something, do it in the comments.
2. The question must always be tagged with the magic [community-ads](/questions/tagged/community-ads "show questions tagged 'community-ads'") tag. In addition to enabling the functionality of the advertisements, this tag also pre-fills the answer form with the above required form.
### Image requirements
* The image that you create must be 300 x 250 pixels, or double that if high DPI.
* Must be hosted through our standard image uploader (imgur)
* Must be GIF or PNG
* No animated GIFs
* Absolute limit on file size of 150 KB
* If the background of the image is white or partially white, there must be a 1px border (2px if high DPI) surrounding it.
### Score Threshold
There is a **minimum score threshold** an answer must meet (currently **6**) before it will be shown on the main site.
You can check out the ads that have met the threshold with basic click stats [here](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/ads/display/3999).<issue_comment>username_1: [](https://twitter.com/StackAnime)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: [](https://movies.stackexchange.com/)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: [](http://area51.stackexchange.com/proposals/93238)
Upvotes: 3 |
2017/02/16 | 2,990 | 12,160 | <issue_start>username_0: To start with a bit of history, this site was actually added to the queue for graduation in roughly October/November of 2013 (less than a year after private beta!). At the time there was no procedure for graduating beta sites without creating a custom site design, and the design team was rather understaffed with several other sites ahead of us, so [we had to wait](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1020) for them to do something. A couple years later in 2015, a procedure was created for graduating sites independent of designs, and this happened [fairly quickly here](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2594) after the new policy was put in place. If you read that post, you will see that we still expected to wait a few months for a site design, and that in particular the [reputation thresholds for privileges](https://anime.stackexchange.com/help/privileges) would remain in place until the new design arrived (most other changes happened immediately). I'm not sure exactly what the reason was for coupling only these two aspects of graduation (some information can be found at [Feedback Requested: Design-Independent Graduation](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/260754) and in other MSE posts and meta sites graduating at the same time but there does not seem to be a perfectly clear answer, and even at the time [among the community team](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/260754/feedback-requested-design-independent-graduation?noredirect=1&lq=1#comment850181_260762) not everyone agreed), but at the time no one here was complaining much about it since this was a clear improvement over the previous policy.
It's now been well over a year since that announcement. Collectively, we've been waiting over 3 years for a site design (and the corresponding threshold increases), and I've seen no updates recently to suggest that this is any more likely to happen now than it was 3 years ago when we were first contacted by someone in the design team. Meanwhile multiple sites which did not even exist at that time have had designs made. Every other site which was in the queue with us has long-since been designed. Of the newer sites which have been graduated without a design, [Code Golf](https://codegolf.stackexchange.com/) has had the longest wait, and they haven't even been waiting a full year yet. By far we're the most extreme case in the network, and during that 3 year period numerous other changes have happened on this site. When design-independent graduation was first implemented it was never intended to be a long-term state like it has been here, and in such a long-term case it seems to no longer make sense to tie other changes to the design.
---
To be perfectly honest, I actually don't care very much about the site's design itself (though I certainly can't speak for everyone on this and I think it would not be unreasonable for other users here to be upset about this situation). It would be nice to have a good design, but I understand why it's particularly difficult to come up with something satisfactory for this site. There are at least 3 different groups you have to satisfy with the design. First, questions here are divided, with many questions about popular mainstream series, but still a fairly significant fraction in the long tail of questions on works which few are knowledgeable about. Some users here come only for the big name series like Naruto and Dragon Ball, which obviously tend to attract the most traffic and answers. Others (including me) come almost exclusively for the smaller works, and at least personally I'd argue that this is where we've really improved Q&A coverage versus other sites on the network with overlapping scope such as [Science Fiction & Fantasy](https://scifi.stackexchange.com/) and [Movies & TV](https://movies.stackexchange.com/). Between these two there is some common ground, but not much. There's also the broader SE community who can end up here in a few ways, and as such we need something at least a bit unique and clearly anime/manga-themed. The strategy used on [Arqade](https://gaming.stackexchange.com/) and Movies was to have a classic look, but I don't think that would work at all here. Other major anime/manga themed sites like [MyAnimeList](https://myanimelist.net/) and [Anime News Network](https://www.animenewsnetwork.com/) have fairly bland designs, but fill in the space with a lot of images of specific works and advertisements, but that wouldn't really work either. My [answer here](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/753) is basically about the same issue, and I don't think views on this have changed since then.
So I'm not really sure what a good design would look like. It also doesn't seem like the kind of thing that the design team's experience would be likely to help with, because the problems here are intrinsically related to our site's content and scope, not artistic issues, and I doubt anyone on the design team is specifically an expert on our site's content. The one thing I think almost everyone can agree on is that a bad design, which overly emphasizes only a small subset of the community here, would end up worse than our existing look (just imagine if it's designed primarily based on a genre/work that you actively dislike). The current look isn't anything special, but it's perfectly functional and neutral. I don't think creating a design for this site is an impossible problem, but it isn't one that I know the solution to, and the design team seems to have come to the same conclusion. As such (and as they've had plenty of other work to prioritize ahead of us, especially considering the answer [here](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/283663) which suggests that many more sites may "graduate" to a similar state as ours, allowing the design team to backlog our design effectively indefinitely) it hasn't happened and doesn't seem likely to happen any time soon.
---
However, if graduation without a design is going to be the *de facto* standard on this site for years (possibly even forever for all we know at this point), it does not seem reasonable to me to keep the rep thresholds at the low levels of a beta site. Hence, **I am requesting that the rep levels be increased to the standard graduated site levels here now**, regardless of when (or even *if*) a design is made for the site. Most importantly, editing would be reserved for 2k users and close voting for 3k users, rather than 1k and 500 respectively on the current site.
I argued [almost 3 years ago](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/865/) that we needed more high-rep users to be ready to graduate. In that time, the numbers have changed drastically; now I think we have the opposite problem where we have *too many* users at the low beta-level rep thresholds. That's not to say that I think any users in particular are doing a bad job, but higher rep users could easily handle everything that comes up, and will on average probably have a better understanding of site policies and what constitutes high-quality content here. I'm also worried that the lower rep thresholds discourage extended participation on the site. Certainly this happened for me, so I'm speaking partly from first-hand experience. Roughly when I hit 10k rep, I decided to stop answering questions which I thought others on the site could handle without me. Without higher rep targets to hit, and with few questions that only I knew the answer to (and many newer users who weren't around since day 1 finding it difficult to gain rep), it was rare to find a situation where I cared to answer. Actually many of the highest rep users on the site are not posting that regularly now, so I don't think I'm alone in this (though this is a separate issue which probably deserves its own meta post). In my case you could partly attribute this to other factors but I think in general if the rep thresholds were higher, we'd overall see more Q&A participation from all users.
I guess this change is probably at least somewhat controversial. Having 20k rep myself I'd be mostly unaffected, but many mid-level rep users would probably be somewhat upset to see their long-held privileges removed suddenly, especially without a site design. However personally I'm convinced that, for the long-term health of this site, this needs to happen eventually regardless of whether we ever get a design, and if it's going to happen anyway it might as well happen now.<issue_comment>username_1: Just as an example, for your consideration.
```
anime cooking
pre-grad post-grad pre-grad post-grad
(current) (would be) (would've been) (current)
rep users rep users rep users rep users
4000 36 20000 7 4000 71 20000 13
2000 58 10000 13 2000 144 10000 22
1000 150 2000 58 1000 263 2000 144
350 310 500 210 350 850 500 560
```
Remember that these numbers don't mean all of these users are to this day active on either sites, so the actual number of people meeting these requirements and utilizing these tools is a percentage of that.
* 4,000 (**20,000** at graduation)
*trusted user*
Expanded editing, deletion and undeletion privileges.
* 2,000 (**10,000**)
*access to moderator tools*
Access reports, delete questions, review reviews.
* 1,000 (**2,000**)
*edit questions and answers*
Edits to any question or answer are applied immediately.
* 350 (**500**)
*access review queues*
Access first posts and late answers review queues.
---
My personal opinion is with such low activity as we have here, reducing the number of users who are capable of moderating the site will not lead to any benefit. At best only a few users will try to look for things to improve and earn a bit of rep to gain access to the tools they've had before, and at worst (and this is I think the most likely scenario) we'll see a rise of rep-farming activity which will bring down overall content quality, and this is all for basically no good reason.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I wanted to update everyone on what I've been working on because I've seen many discussions, proposals, and improvised solutions about how the Community Team might allocate various "graduation" features with or without a custom design (e.g. increased reputation threshold, elections, migrations, etc).
There hasn't really been a comprehensive solution regarding how this would work sustainably juggling ~173 sites, much less deciding which sites would be eligible and when/how it would get implemented. So efforts to handle each request one site at a time has been caught up in indecision, confusion, and back logs… which does not work. This request is almost two years old, arg.
I'm taking a different approach.
I've taken it upon myself to write up a comprehensive (i.e. sane ) entire-site life cycle workflow which would *include* breaking apart everything once bundled up under "graduation", and enabling each feature as soon as a site can support it. It's roughly based on the premise I outlined here — [But what happened to Graduation?](https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/257747/98786).
It's hard to say yet how well it will be received in its first draft. Completion and full implementation would likely be at least a few months out, but I suspect this has a much better chance of getting this community what it needs rather than waiting for action on this aging, one-off request.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The reputation thresholds have been raised **since April 30, 2019,** at the same time Anime & Manga Stack Exchange got [its site design](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4245/anime-manga-site-design?cb=1)
>
> It's been a long time coming and I’m excited to share what the design team came up with for our community! \o/ You can see it live in the site now **(along with updated reputation thresholds)**, but here are some screenshots too:
>
>
> (Emphasis mine)
>
>
>
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2017/03/07 | 1,544 | 6,471 | <issue_start>username_0: I see these pop up on occasion thus we don't really have a problem with them unlike some other kinda of questions we ended up blacklisting. these kind of questions the OP posts a (generally badly/un-formatted) question explaining a theory they've come up with and asking if their theory is right or wrong. these theories generally come from a very limited view point of not having seen all the released material and are mostly just vague speculation. a recent example is this question: [Re zero my theory about Subaru, The Witch and Amelia](https://anime.stackexchange.com/q/39303/1587)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/qoRB5.png)
on the one hand i feel as if they are trying to spark a discussion which the Q&A format isn't really for but on the other hand i can see how a question can be answered by a user pointing out all the inaccuracies/flaws (because rarely do i find these questions citing any sources for their theories).
How do we respond to "Is my theory right?" questions? should they be closed as being too broad? (as i said i feel as if they are trying to spark a discussion). or would downvoting for lack of usefulness/lack or backed up research (in the case of wild speculation) be enough<issue_comment>username_1: So far these have proven quite rare, and one can find good and bad examples of fan theory questions. The post which triggered this question is arguably a bad example, but good examples have included [Is Ditto a Failed Mew Clone?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/2555/is-ditto-a-failed-mew-clone) and [Was Lelouch the person driving the cart in the last scene of Code Geass R2?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/116/was-lelouch-the-person-driving-the-cart-in-the-last-scene-of-code-geass-r2), both of which got a good reception and fairly clear answers (though they did also need protection due to multiple low-quality/deleted answers). Hence I'd hesitate to suggest a formal policy is needed for this.
However, the first thing I would try is to rewrite the question as a question about the work rather than a question about a fan theory. In many cases the theory is all just background information which motivates one key question, and that question would be on-topic even if the theory was not included (but not as well motivated). Some editing is probably justified, but there is not any need to remove the motivating fan theory.
If that is not possible, a decision needs to be made. If the theory is notable (e.g. it has been posted or commented on in multiple locations), we should generally air on the side of answering it. Likewise, if the theory is simple and well-motivated, there is a good chance it is interesting and answerable. I should note that (as with many questions on this site) some amount of speculation may still be needed to answer these questions, but it's very much possible to write a *good speculative* answer based on known facts about the work (not merely based on arbitrary guesses), so the lack of existence of a *canonical* answer is not necessarily grounds for closing or deleting the question. Indeed, both canon and fanon are on-topic here; questions about the latter are rare and occasionally problematic, but also sometimes very interesting.
Where we start to run into problems is when people start asking about whatever seemingly random theory they have just thought of. In many cases these can not be succinctly summarized into a single question, meaning they are probably too broad. This is similar to the "check my work"-style questions on other sites, which also tend to be problematic for various reasons. They may also be poorly motivated from in-universe information, making good speculation difficult or impossible, and hence arguably opinion based (though I think we are sometimes a bit too eager to use this even for questions which could have some explanation in-universe). And in some of the worst cases it's not even clear what the actual question is. So depending on the question we have several possible close reasons, but I think "Too Broad" is probably the best one in many cases.
Like I said before though, these questions have been relatively rare in the past, and it's usually easy to tell immediately whether such a question could admit a good answer in this format. So I don't think we need a very formal policy on these types of questions. A good rule of thumb is that if you can't summarize it as a single, specific question (not something generic like "What's wrong with this theory about X?") then there's a good chance it's too broad, but exceptions to that rule are possible if the question is clearly answerable.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: One option for some of these: have the poster convert it from a question that lays out a theory and says "Is this right?" into the question the theory is meant to address and a self-answer containing the theory.
The problem with this particular question (and most of the other bad ones I've seen) is that it's not really a question; it's an answer that carries an implicit question only discernible to those who've seen the series. I haven't seen *Re-Zero*, so I have no idea what the actual question in that post is, but I can tell it would be possible to write a question roughly along these lines:
>
> **What's the deal with Subaru and the witch?**
>
> In blah scene of Episode Foo, bleagh happens between Subaru and the witch. Then later in the scene where bluegh happens in Episode Bar, Subaru hoosegow hollers the witch and she responds sartorially. Why did these things happen this way?
>
>
>
Then in a self answer, lay out your personal theory, with evidence. This turns it from an attempt to start a discussion into a question that can be answered. We can evaluate the question and answer on their own merits, vote on them as normal, and even if the self-answer turns out to be bunk, there's a chance for others to come in and contribute better answers. The OP might not be happy to have their pet theory debunked, but the site as a whole still benefits.
I've used this tactic a couple times on Literature when I had a question that I'd been "thinking super-hard about" and wanted to share with others. It seemed to work pretty well; in both cases my question and answer received some upvotes, and it seemed like people generally thought the site was better for having them.
Upvotes: 2 |
2017/03/21 | 1,890 | 7,342 | <issue_start>username_0: [This question](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/39501/what-if-someone-in-one-piece-eats-a-devil-fruit-that-makes-him-her-an-outstandin) is written posed as a hypothetical that reads as opinion-based. They literally start by asking for the reader to imagine. On the other hand, it just happened that there was a canon answer to it, which seems to be more by chance than anything else. There are close votes for it being too opinion-based which, while being legitimate, would block off access to a good and decently upvoted answer. What should we do with questions like this? Should we have them rewrite the question so it's not hypothetical? Should we close the question for not meeting our standards?<issue_comment>username_1: Well, I'm in sort of a bind on this one.
As I wrote in my answer to the question senshin linked ([this one](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3916/7579)), I have a problem with the way we've handled hypothetical questions in the past. I feel like we've been too quick to stomp on them with the big spiked boots of "primarily opinion based". I feel like we've sometimes been too uptight about standards of evidence, in ways more fitting to a math or science site than to an anime site. I get why we've been that way, but I think we should stop interpreting everything so narrowly and allow a little wiggle room, a little space for judgment to take over, a little scope for creative and fun answers that use lateral thinking. I favor using the "Do you have any reason to think this aside from just pulling it out of your ass?" test: if a post can't pass that bar, close it, but if it's pretty much within the rules of the universe, give it a little latitude.
On the other hand, that question. If you take away the answer and just read the question itself, it doesn't come across as a question asked in good faith. It comes across as the user who asked it going "Tee hee, look at the loophole I came up with, aren't I clever?"
Still, I think it's as much within the *One Piece* universe as questions like [Could a blind person with a death note exchange half their life to see again?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/33621/could-a-blind-person-with-a-death-note-exchange-half-their-life-to-see-again) is within the *Death Note* universe, or [Why was the world of SAO not dominated by good real-life fencers?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/38503/why-was-the-world-of-sao-not-dominated-by-good-real-life-fencers) (which, by the way, I really hated, since for me it was way too close to the border of the "ass pull" rule, but I did not vote to close it) is within the *Sword Art Online* universe. That is, **in principle**, there could be an answer to be found, either within canon, with some creative reapplication of principles found in canon, or in the last resort by going out of universe, and if we can't find such an answer, it's because we don't have enough information, which, as I argued on the other question, should be an acceptable answer for cases like this. (The Death Note question I linked is actually answered exactly in this way: there's not enough information, and the accepted answer says so.) But for this question, we don't even need to go that far, because we *do* have kaine's answer from within canon which strongly suggests that no such Devil Fruit can exist.
So, even though I think it's kind of an obnoxious question, and I'm not convinced the questioner meant it in good faith, I think we should ignore that and reopen it. Maybe some edits to the wording could make it less come off less "Look at me I'm so clever" and make it seem more on-topic.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Let's start with defining some boundaries around questions that are hypothetical and go from there instead. Then, we can see if the questions we want to answer which fit this mold are decent.
First, the question **has to be based on canonical facts already known**. This means things like a character or environment's known abilities and limitations. This excludes hypotheticals which ask open-ended questions based on *no* knowledge of canon.
Next, the question **has to describe a scenario which could reasonably occur in canon**. Given the constraints of the above, this allows for a narrower scope in questions. For argument's sake, this eliminates questions like, "What if Naruto could use the Sharingan?", since it is established in canon that he does not have access to the Sharingan, while also allowing a question like, "Could Boruto use the Byakugan?", given his direct parental lineage (and also his sister's ability to use it).
Third, any answers to the question **must be supportable with source references from the original work, or an authority of the work, as necessary**. This means the venerable [Is Ditto a Failed Mew Clone](https://anime.stackexchange.com/q/2555/102) question could also be further bolstered with actual evidence from the creators of its intent, and any other hypotheticals that exist going forward may carry this forward.
---
Now, let's apply these concepts to [the question at hand](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/39501/what-if-someone-in-one-piece-eats-a-devil-fruit-that-makes-him-her-an-outstandin).
* **Is the question based on canonical facts already known?**
+ The Devil Fruit curse [does prohibit a consumer from being able to swim in water](http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/Devil_Fruit#Side_Effects_of_Devil_Fruits) (or at least makes them powerless/weak when coming into direct contact with it). This at least weakens the belief that a Devil Fruit could bestow one with the ability to swim in water, given that Devil Fruit's *direct* antithesis is water. This *doesn't* cover other angles, such as through solid objects, or through land; however, the question isn't clearly specifying which of these is intended to be answered. At best, I can interpret this particular question to be asking about "water-based swimming".
* **Does the question describe a scenario which could reasonably occur in canon?**
+ No. Given the limitations of Devil Fruit, it doesn't quite line up with expected reality. This assertion discounts all loopholes in Devil Fruit's behavior - of note the ability to don a suit and avoid *direct* contact with the water - and [the existence of artificial fruits](http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/Artificial_Devil_Fruit). The rationale in canon doesn't add up; no one would benefit from having a Devil Fruit that bestows upon them a superb ability to swim, when swimming in water would in all reality kill them.
* **Can an answer to this question be supported with references from the original work or an authority of the work?**
+ An answer has been demonstrated on the question, with the obvious proviso that the user be on land. However, that doesn't mean that the question actually *meant* that; swimming is an activity that goes with water, and that would be the angle that one who doesn't watch the show would presume.
With that said...I'm thinking that there is a reasonable way to answer this question, ***after*** the OP **clarifies what they mean**. If they meant swimming on land, then that's clearly demonstrated and proven. If they meant swimming in water, then assumptions and additional provisos must be made for the consumer.
Upvotes: 1 |
2017/03/30 | 2,898 | 10,606 | <issue_start>username_0: So we have this question "[What is Kikuhiko's sexual orientation?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/q/39623/1587)". when it was posted it used [retag](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/retag "show questions tagged 'retag'") because the series tag didn't exist. after confirming that the series was *[Descending Stories: Showa Genroku Rakugo Shinju](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descending_Stories:_Showa_Genroku_Rakugo_Shinju)* i tagged it as [descending-stories](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/descending-stories "show questions tagged 'descending-stories'") following the list [here](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/522/1587)
>
> In general, my preference would be for the following system. In descending order of preference, we should *generally*:
>
>
> 1. Use English name. If there is an **official** English name which fits in 25 characters, we should go with that. Subtitles can be omitted in general.
> 2. Use English abbreviation. If the English title exists, but it does not fit in 25 characters, and there is an official abbreviation of the English title which does fit, then use that.
> 3. Use romanized Japanese title. Hepburn romanization is the standard method most of us use. Since macrons are not available without going to unicode characters (which is a bad idea) be sure to do these in the traditional style, e.g. ō should be replaced with ou. In Japanese word boundaries are sometimes ambiguous, but usually it's fairly clear where they should be.
> 4. Use Japanese abbreviated title. This is going to be common for shows with long titles, like *Ore no Imōto ga Konna ni Kawaii Wake ga Nai* gets tagged as [oreimo](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/oreimo "show questions tagged 'oreimo'"). There are usually official abbreviations for series with very long titles, at least for those series that are fairly successful.
> 5. If none of the above seem to fit, come up with something that works temporarily, e.g. the first N words of the title. Make a meta post asking for suggestions for a better tag name.
>
>
>
aside from going with the first item in the list my other reason for [descending-stories](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/descending-stories "show questions tagged 'descending-stories'") was that [shouwa-genroku-rakugo-shinjuu](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/shouwa-genroku-rakugo-shinjuu "show questions tagged 'shouwa-genroku-rakugo-shinjuu'") and [showa-genroku-rakugo-shinju](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/showa-genroku-rakugo-shinju "show questions tagged 'showa-genroku-rakugo-shinju'") are both too long for the 25 character limit on tags. also like how *Ar Tonelico: Melody of Elemia's* japanese release name is *Ar tonelico: The Girl Who Keeps Singing at the End of the World* (アルトネリコ世界の終わりで詩い続ける少女 *Aru toneriko Sekai no Owari de Utai Tsuzukeru Shōjo*) can be shortened to just *Ar Tonelico* by dropping it's subtitle i figured that *Showa Genroku Rakugo Shinju* was a subtitle and could just be dropped
however [Aki Tanaka](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/39623/what-is-kikuhikos-sexual-orientation?noredirect=1#comment53765_39623) may have found a better name
>
> @Memor-X if else, the alternative Japanese tag should be [rakugo-shinju](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rakugo-shinju) ([from the URL of its official site](http://rakugo-shinju-anime.jp/))
>
>
>
[rakugo-shinju](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rakugo-shinju "show questions tagged 'rakugo-shinju'") seems valid to me aswell. so i would like to ask which tag should be used for the question? [descending-stories](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/descending-stories "show questions tagged 'descending-stories'") or [rakugo-shinju](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rakugo-shinju "show questions tagged 'rakugo-shinju'")? and whatever isn't used can we use as a synonym?<issue_comment>username_1: Well, I'm in sort of a bind on this one.
As I wrote in my answer to the question senshin linked ([this one](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3916/7579)), I have a problem with the way we've handled hypothetical questions in the past. I feel like we've been too quick to stomp on them with the big spiked boots of "primarily opinion based". I feel like we've sometimes been too uptight about standards of evidence, in ways more fitting to a math or science site than to an anime site. I get why we've been that way, but I think we should stop interpreting everything so narrowly and allow a little wiggle room, a little space for judgment to take over, a little scope for creative and fun answers that use lateral thinking. I favor using the "Do you have any reason to think this aside from just pulling it out of your ass?" test: if a post can't pass that bar, close it, but if it's pretty much within the rules of the universe, give it a little latitude.
On the other hand, that question. If you take away the answer and just read the question itself, it doesn't come across as a question asked in good faith. It comes across as the user who asked it going "Tee hee, look at the loophole I came up with, aren't I clever?"
Still, I think it's as much within the *One Piece* universe as questions like [Could a blind person with a death note exchange half their life to see again?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/33621/could-a-blind-person-with-a-death-note-exchange-half-their-life-to-see-again) is within the *Death Note* universe, or [Why was the world of SAO not dominated by good real-life fencers?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/38503/why-was-the-world-of-sao-not-dominated-by-good-real-life-fencers) (which, by the way, I really hated, since for me it was way too close to the border of the "ass pull" rule, but I did not vote to close it) is within the *Sword Art Online* universe. That is, **in principle**, there could be an answer to be found, either within canon, with some creative reapplication of principles found in canon, or in the last resort by going out of universe, and if we can't find such an answer, it's because we don't have enough information, which, as I argued on the other question, should be an acceptable answer for cases like this. (The Death Note question I linked is actually answered exactly in this way: there's not enough information, and the accepted answer says so.) But for this question, we don't even need to go that far, because we *do* have kaine's answer from within canon which strongly suggests that no such Devil Fruit can exist.
So, even though I think it's kind of an obnoxious question, and I'm not convinced the questioner meant it in good faith, I think we should ignore that and reopen it. Maybe some edits to the wording could make it less come off less "Look at me I'm so clever" and make it seem more on-topic.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Let's start with defining some boundaries around questions that are hypothetical and go from there instead. Then, we can see if the questions we want to answer which fit this mold are decent.
First, the question **has to be based on canonical facts already known**. This means things like a character or environment's known abilities and limitations. This excludes hypotheticals which ask open-ended questions based on *no* knowledge of canon.
Next, the question **has to describe a scenario which could reasonably occur in canon**. Given the constraints of the above, this allows for a narrower scope in questions. For argument's sake, this eliminates questions like, "What if Naruto could use the Sharingan?", since it is established in canon that he does not have access to the Sharingan, while also allowing a question like, "Could Boruto use the Byakugan?", given his direct parental lineage (and also his sister's ability to use it).
Third, any answers to the question **must be supportable with source references from the original work, or an authority of the work, as necessary**. This means the venerable [Is Ditto a Failed Mew Clone](https://anime.stackexchange.com/q/2555/102) question could also be further bolstered with actual evidence from the creators of its intent, and any other hypotheticals that exist going forward may carry this forward.
---
Now, let's apply these concepts to [the question at hand](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/39501/what-if-someone-in-one-piece-eats-a-devil-fruit-that-makes-him-her-an-outstandin).
* **Is the question based on canonical facts already known?**
+ The Devil Fruit curse [does prohibit a consumer from being able to swim in water](http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/Devil_Fruit#Side_Effects_of_Devil_Fruits) (or at least makes them powerless/weak when coming into direct contact with it). This at least weakens the belief that a Devil Fruit could bestow one with the ability to swim in water, given that Devil Fruit's *direct* antithesis is water. This *doesn't* cover other angles, such as through solid objects, or through land; however, the question isn't clearly specifying which of these is intended to be answered. At best, I can interpret this particular question to be asking about "water-based swimming".
* **Does the question describe a scenario which could reasonably occur in canon?**
+ No. Given the limitations of Devil Fruit, it doesn't quite line up with expected reality. This assertion discounts all loopholes in Devil Fruit's behavior - of note the ability to don a suit and avoid *direct* contact with the water - and [the existence of artificial fruits](http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/Artificial_Devil_Fruit). The rationale in canon doesn't add up; no one would benefit from having a Devil Fruit that bestows upon them a superb ability to swim, when swimming in water would in all reality kill them.
* **Can an answer to this question be supported with references from the original work or an authority of the work?**
+ An answer has been demonstrated on the question, with the obvious proviso that the user be on land. However, that doesn't mean that the question actually *meant* that; swimming is an activity that goes with water, and that would be the angle that one who doesn't watch the show would presume.
With that said...I'm thinking that there is a reasonable way to answer this question, ***after*** the OP **clarifies what they mean**. If they meant swimming on land, then that's clearly demonstrated and proven. If they meant swimming in water, then assumptions and additional provisos must be made for the consumer.
Upvotes: 1 |
2017/04/04 | 1,158 | 4,918 | <issue_start>username_0: I've noticed that, at least in the past few weeks if not longer, we've had a fairly large number of music ID requests, especially compared to the number of non-music ID request questions. I'm having a hard time dealing with exact numbers because I'm on mobile, but of the most recent half dozen or so I've looked at, the person is new not only to Anime SE but also to SE in general, asks no other questions, and has a question that basically boils down to "at x time or in x scene in y show, what music is playing".
While this doesn't have the normal ID request problem of being answerable through reverse image search (though not all ID request questions did either), it seems to be having some of the other issues that we had with those questions, which in the end were determined to be off-topic. So I guess what I'm asking is, **should we keep these questions on-topic, and if so what are they contributing to our site?**<issue_comment>username_1: I agree that music identification questions are frequently uninteresting, of limited use to future readers, and have some superficial commonalities with [identification-request] questions, such as the "hit-and-run" nature of the users asking these questions. However, these are what I might call "pragmatic" issues. If the only problems with [identification-request] questions were "pragmatic" ones, I'm not sure we would've ended up banning them.
Indeed, the chief problem with [identification-request] questions (as I see it) is that they were "philosophically" unsound, if you will. In particular:
* While a community of anime & manga experts are probably the people best-suited to answer identification requests about anime & manga, the kind of expertise involved in doing so is somewhat orthogonal to the kind of expertise needed to answer all of our other questions. In practice, it turned out that, with the exception of a small number of exceptionally well-read users, these questions were answered primarily by means of adept googling. Search engine wizardry is not really the "core mission" of our site, so to speak.
* They frequently had more than one "correct" answer, in the sense that there were multiple different things that fit the description provided in the question. While the ability to have multiple answers is a feature of Stack Exchange, in this particular case, it moves the question into the realm of an out-of-universe list question, which we strongly proscribe for other reasons.
* They sometimes were not about anime & manga at all, and we had no a priori way of detecting this.
Music identification questions anchored in a particular show or franchise suffer from none of these "philosophical" problems, and so I see no problem keeping them around. Every Stack Exchange site has its long tail of mundane "workhorse" questions; music identification questions are shaping up to be ours, and I don't think there's anything wrong with that.
>
> [W]hat are they contributing to our site?
>
>
>
This kind of information is usually not easily found elsewhere on the internet (which is, I think, part of why we're starting to get so many of these as our site grows). As such, I think one way to look at it is that the users asking these questions are helping *us* to contribute to the broader internet anime community by turning us into a repository for this kind of information.
(Personally, I also happen to enjoy answering these questions for shows whose music I like. I assume there are some other users that do too. So in that sense, these questions contribute by virtue of providing more content to keep users like me interested.)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I find myself largely *agreeing* with what username_1 is saying, but I do have...a bit of an issue with both music identification as a whole which was exposed thusly:
>
> Every Stack Exchange site has its long tail of mundane "workhorse" questions; music identification questions are shaping up to be ours, and I don't think there's anything wrong with that.
>
>
>
It doesn't feel like these sorts of questions do a lot to grow the site, realistically speaking. "Workhorse" or not, they don't really inspire me to answer them at all. This mentality would have a direct negative impact on the site, as it means that I wouldn't engage with the questions being posed. Suppose then if the *entire* front page were questions about music; I couldn't engage with the site in any way I wanted to.
However, because they at least satisfy my requirements of:
* being reasonably scoped,
* being specifically about a single piece of work, and
* are often asked in context to a single episode or some single work on the OST,
...I'll begrudgingly let them stay on topic. I do expect this to shift in the future though, since I don't doubt that there are a number of folks who don't really want to answer this type of question.
Upvotes: 1 |
2017/04/20 | 814 | 2,835 | <issue_start>username_0: This may seem as a pointless question to many, but I'm new here and just wanted to know a bit more about the Stack Exchange websites. While visiting various other Stack Exchange websites, I noticed that the top of the home page over there looks far more attractive than the one on this website :
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/sYFav.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/JdKDv.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/HcmRb.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ZEU1Z.jpg)
But when you look at this website:
==================================
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/bRYOT.jpg)
There is an obvious difference. Why is this site not made as attractive as the other sites. I'm guessing its probably because of the lack of popularity, but come on. We're pretty popular (We as in this community). Also, Who decides this stuff ? I was curious about that. And if this question is irrelevant to this website or cannot be answered, just let me know and I'll delete it myself.<issue_comment>username_1: All Stack Exchange sites start out [in "beta"](https://meta.stackexchange.com/help/whats-beta) and look the way ours does. After a site achieves sufficient activity, it ["graduates"](https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/257614/). It used to be that graduation was always accompanied by snazzy designs like the ones you've posted, but [that changed about two years ago](https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/263905/) so that getting a snazzy design comes some time after graduation.
Our site has graduated (so, for example, you don't see "beta" in our site header like you would on, say, [Alcohol.SE](https://alcohol.stackexchange.com/)), but does not yet have a design. Creating a new design for a Stack Exchange site is a labor-intensive process, and Stack Overflow (the company) has only limited resources. We are somewhere in the queue for getting a design - it'll happen eventually.
We are a reasonably popular site compared to Stack Exchange as a whole, but if you go to <http://stackexchange.com/sites> and sort by whatever metric you'd like, you'll see that there are sites that are more active than us that also don't have a design (you can tell because their icons are generic blue speech bubbles).
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: *Adding an answer here because the current one is outdated and the answer is kinda obvious:*
This Stack's design went live in [July 2019](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4272/42482), after [having graduated in 2015](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2594/42482).
Upvotes: 2 |
2017/04/26 | 492 | 1,824 | <issue_start>username_0: Today I saw [this suggested edit in the queue](https://anime.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/36254) adding the [boruto](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/boruto "show questions tagged 'boruto'") tag.
I get the association because of the new *Boruto: Naruto Next Generation* anime but i thought [naruto-gaiden](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/naruto-gaiden "show questions tagged 'naruto-gaiden'") was for the stuff after the Naruto manga.
So should we have the [boruto](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/boruto "show questions tagged 'boruto'") tag? if so do we make [naruto-gaiden](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/naruto-gaiden "show questions tagged 'naruto-gaiden'") a synonym of it?<issue_comment>username_1: Yep. In fact, it's already created. The link below sends you to the Boruto tag section:
<https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/boruto?sort=newest>
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: To answer the first question: yes, we do want a tag for it which is separate from Naruto. The chief reason is that these are different series; if you want prior examples, then one can look at the Dragonball collection of tags.
If we want to start thinking about the universe of Naruto, then we can talk about that bridge when we need to; I'm sure that there's already a convention for tagging questions in the same universe that we can adopt.
I would also argue *against* a synonym for [naruto-gaiden](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/naruto-gaiden "show questions tagged 'naruto-gaiden'"). That's a mini-series unto itself, and while there may be significant overlap, I would imagine that questions related to the gaiden may not specifically be about the new series.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2017/05/31 | 3,185 | 12,430 | <issue_start>username_0: We've (Stack Exchange Inc.) recently received a DMCA takedown notice for several posts from this community. As a result of that, I'm taking down around 15 posts at this very moment (got a script running), but many more might need to be removed over the coming week. This means some reputation is probably gonna be lost, and also that some good content is gonna vanish. The DMCA process tells us we must notify the author of the content, which means the author of the questions will get a comment notifying them of the occurrence — however, whoever answered any of the deleted questions is just gonna be left wondering why they lost rep, and why the post was even deleted in the first place. So here I am, preemptively notifying the community as a whole as a courtesy.
**So what can I do if my question was deleted due to this?**
If you own one of the posts that were removed, you will have a comment left on it by me notifying you of why the post was deleted. You can then, if you believe you are the wrongful subject of a copyright takedown notice, [file a DMCA counter-notice](http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/responding-dmca-takedown-notice-targeting-your-content) through [the proper channels](https://stackexchange.com/legal/terms-of-service#designatedagent) — and hopefully we'll be able to restore the content!
You can find the DMCA notice [here, at Lumen database](https://www.lumendatabase.org/notices/14438003) (or [here](https://lumendatabase.org/notices/14712591), since Lumen lost the original one for some reason, and are trying to make this new one point to the older link).
Given that most of the posts are over 60 days old, they won't show up in your profiles at all — so feel free to reach out to the Community Team using [/contact](https://anime.stackexchange.com/contact) if you require any assistance.
---
**Disclaimer:** none of this is official legal guidance; it's just provided as a courtesy :)
---
---
Update: concerns & questions
============================
BIG thanks to everyone who responded here - as you can probably tell, this isn't something we've had a lot of experience dealing with, so identifying areas for improvement is extremely helpful.
**We're not done working on this.** As you noticed, only 17 of the 190+ links have been removed as of this time, and we're hoping this whole thing will have a happy outcome. Hopefully, we'll be able to resolve this in a way that's acceptable to both the folks sending this take-down notice and the authors who've donated their time and knowledge here; as with most legal things, this isn't likely to be fast, but we'll do our best to keep you updated.
Here are the open questions you've asked that we're gonna try & figure out answers to. Again, no guarantees on when (or even if) we'll actually be able to do that - but, we're gonna try:
* [Who is responsible for DMCA takedown counterclaims on authorless / disassociated / CW posts?](https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/296630/208518)
* Given that a lot of our content is collaborative, it’s not obvious who can legally challenge DMCA notices, so:
+ Who "owns" the content, and can file counter-notices?
+ A question author only?
+ Or is an answerer or editor entitled to that too?
* Can the posts on which no action was taken (yet) be edited to try to minimize this (by editing out links or properly attributing images)?
* Can the post owner edit their *deleted* post *before* filing the counter-claim to aid its validity?
* Given the shared ownership of the content (asker, answerers, editors) who are we (SE) required to notify?
* Are users who file a counter-notice required to give out details like their real name, or can they use their online pseudonym?
+ And how much of the information provided in the counter-notice will be made public vs how much of it will just be used internally to assess validity of the counter-notice?
Again, thank you all for your patience and insights.<issue_comment>username_1: Is StackExchange going to offer any assistance with this?
I don't appreciate SE rolling over to Aniplex, etc and just deleting my content rather than standing up for its users and its content - which are both **the very being of Stack Exchange**. How are our users, who are individuals supposed to individually contest against giant conglomerates who have entire legal teams?
Why is StackExchange running scripts for automatic copyright flag and removal, when it should be up to the copyright holders to point out why each post is infringing?
(Redacted due to an incorrect assumption of the script's purpose)
This is setting an ugly precedent, personally I believe the majority of the posts that I have seen should fall under fair use - will Movies & TV, Literature, etc also be burden to over-reaching 3rd party companies?
Why not offer a nicer alternative and edit out any infringing material?
Also, many of our users are non-US residents, like myself - It says in the link provided that filing a counter-notice for people like me is actually something that I probably don't want to do. How can I fight this then?
Please can StackExchange offer more than a token post and offer some real support?
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: A couple important problems here regarding the effectiveness of this post in notifying authors of their counterclaim options (**TL;DR:** A meta post alone might not be enough). I pulled info about all the reported posts:
* [Info script and list of posts](https://github.com/JC3/SEUserScripts/tree/master/misc/dmca)
* [A messy SEDE query](http://data.stackexchange.com/anime/query/678784/dmca-related-reports?AccessDays=30)
In general, here is the breakdown of Anime meta access activity ([see also](https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/293155/230261)):
```
Total Users: 16043 [a]
Accessed Last 30 Days: 1537 [b]
Also on meta last 30 days: 97 (0.60% of [a], 6.31% of [b])
On meta, ever: 1858
Never accessed meta, ever: 14185
```
It's pretty low, but, more importantly, here are those stats for the authors of those posts (original authors of questions and answers, plus original authors and all editors for tag wikis):
```
Total Authors: 148 [a]
Accessed Last 30 Days: 52 (35.1% of [a])
Also on meta last 30 days: 20 (13.5% of [a])
On meta, ever: 79 (54.5% of [a])
Never accessed meta, ever: 69 (46.6% of [a])
```
So this raises a few concerns:
* **Issue #1:** Given that about 65% of the involved authors have not accessed the main site in the past month, it seems unlikely to expect them to contest. What should be done about this?
+ Suggestion: Notify all authors via email about their options.
* **Issue #2:** Given that only about 14% of the involved authors have accessed meta in the past month, it seems unlikely to expect them to read this post. That is, this post may not be an effective way to spread this information (also consider low % of total users that visit meta). Additionally, any given user has no direct way of knowing that their post is part of the claim without cross checking the rather large list against all their own posts, by ID. What should be done about this?
+ Suggestion: Post an automated comment on each of these posts (***not* just ones that have been deleted**) linking to this meta post (not applicable to tag wikis) and stating the issue.
This should maximize communication effectiveness, by providing both an inbox notification for active authors, as well as an email notification for inactive ones (that's the best effort that can be made, I think).
Note: The claim lists /questions/id links. It is unclear if they're referring to just the question, or the entire collection of questions with answers. Of course removing a question implies removing the answer but from the context of the claim it's unclear what is being claimed so it's probably best to assume that *everything* visible on each post (questions *and* answers) are subject. In that case it may also make sense to do the email and comment notifications **on each answer** on each of those posts as well. If the claim includes the answers it seems you'd be obligated to notify the authors of the answers, too, as they *are* content authors.
A similar concern may be valid for tags (do they mean the tag entry, or do they mean all posts containing that tag?).
Also, there's another bit of vagueness:
* **Issue #3:** There are two posts whose authors no longer have accounts. Both are well-received and are definitely, imho, contestable. Who can contest these?
+ [How much time has passed in-universe in Detective Conan?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/77)
+ [What's the tune that Noel is humming in Sora no Method?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/14812)
+ Suggestion: Unknown. Does SE owns this content now? Should SE file the counterclaims for these two posts? The copyright counterclaims section of [the TOS](https://stackexchange.com/legal) does not cover this scenario.
Given the [unfortunate fact that](http://chat.meta.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/6069498#6069498):
>
> JNat: The content provider (SE) *cannot* contest the validity of the claim, and are required to take action unless the request is not properly formatted.
>
>
>
I believe it becomes philosophically and morally important to make sure a *best effort* is made to contact authors and a meta post alone unfortunately doesn't seem to have adequate visibility.
---
List of Posts By Author
=======================
Along those lines, to make it easier to see if your posts are in this list (this is a list of all posts in the claim, it doesn't necessarily mean the posts were removed), here is:
* A list of [all questions and tag wikis by author / editor](https://github.com/JC3/SEUserScripts/blob/master/misc/dmca/contributors_questions_tags.md), and
* A list of [all answers by author/editor](https://github.com/JC3/SEUserScripts/blob/master/misc/dmca/contributors_answers.md).
Look at both lists, find your user name, and your posts will be listed there. I'll certainly be filling out my counterclaim forms for my posts if they end up removed. If your username contains non-Latin characters, check the end of the lists, too.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I'm really not happy about this. Stack Exchange's hands are tied, and we're being forced to play along with the lawyers on this one.
I did look at the content that my name came up under, and I can't see why anyone would bother filing a claim on just *words*.
I digress; I didn't really come here to vent. But two things struck me as annoying throughout this process.
1. Stack Exchange isn't in a position to counter the validity of these claims. Does that imply that any non-infringing work is effectively stuck in the process until someone actually realizes they made a mistake? More pressingly, do any other sites in the network have some kind of established precedent for dealing with scenarios like this? It may comfort some of us to know how another network site handled it, and how successful they were at ameliorating the DMCA.
2. The process requires specific, pointed information (emphasis mine):
>
>
> * **your physical or electronic signature;**
> * **your name, address, and phone number;**
> * identification of the material and its location before it was removed; a statement under penalty of perjury that the material was
> removed by mistake or misidentification;
> * your consent to the jurisdiction of a federal court in the district where you live (if you are in the U.S.), or your consent to the
> jurisdiction of a federal court in the district where your service
> provider is located (if you are not in the U.S.); and
> * your consent to accept service of process from the party who submitted the takedown notice.
>
I use a pseudonym online for a reason, and I don't think it's particularly fair to demand (for this process) that I remove that. This does raise the question, "is the pseudonym (and a burner phone number) okay to provide for the process", but I do feel like that would only further impact things.
It's just very discouraging, really. We do our best to keep the site free of pirated resources, and it doesn't seem like the industry really cares about our efforts. Definitely not making me feel very good about the whole thing.
Upvotes: 4 |
2017/06/13 | 2,569 | 8,442 | <issue_start>username_0: Ok so if you're not aware on [Literature.SE's Meta](https://literature.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/735/can-we-increase-the-maximum-tag-length/761#761) there was a question posted about the age old problem regarding the 25 character limit to tags
>
> Is there any way we can increase the maximum tag length to something bigger than 25 characters?
>
>
> Right now, our site tags questions by book titles. Unfortunately, many book titles are longer than twenty-five characters. This has lead to some awkward abbreviations, such as [zen-and-art-of-mc-maint](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/zen-and-art-of-mc-maint "show questions tagged 'zen-and-art-of-mc-maint'")
>
>
> Is there any way to increase the maximum tag length?
>
>
>
as you can see it got [status-completed](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/status-completed "show questions tagged 'status-completed'") and [this reply from Shog9 ♦](https://literature.meta.stackexchange.com/a/761/283)
>
> This can be increased, but only up to a maximum of 35 characters. This means [zen-and-the-art-of-motorcycle-maintenance](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/zen-and-the-art-of-motorcycle-maintenance "show questions tagged 'zen-and-the-art-of-motorcycle-maintenance'") is right out.
>
>
> I increased the allowed length to 32, thus allowing [zen-and-art-of-motorcycle-maint](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/zen-and-art-of-motorcycle-maint "show questions tagged 'zen-and-art-of-motorcycle-maint'"), which should be a little bit easier to recognize. This sort of compromise is likely to be common... Thus, whenever possible, try to work the name of a publication into the title or first paragraph of a question.
>
>
>
however this change [**isn't network wide**](https://literature.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/735/can-we-increase-the-maximum-tag-length/761#comment2744_761)
>
> It's not network-wide, @Cahir; let's try it here for a little bit & make sure nothing breaks unexpectedly. The only other place this has been changed from the default is the Russian-language Stack Overflow, and there are a lot of other differences there too - so this is the first time it's been changed on an otherwise-standard English-language site. Also, 32 is a nice round number.
>
>
>
almost 2 years ago [senshin pointed out Anime and Manga's problem with the 25 character limit](https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/259377/250962) and since Lit's character limit on tags have been increase [Arqade](https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12497/increase-tag-length-limit-to-32-or-35/12499#12499), [Movies and TV](https://movies.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2822/can-we-increase-the-tag-length-limit) and [SciFi](https://scifi.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/11018/can-we-please-increase-our-tag-length) has posted up their own requests to have their Tag Character Limited increased.
So i ask the question, Should we get the increase in the tag length limit aswell?<issue_comment>username_1: Absolutely.
===========
The fact that most of the top users of the site know that the limit is 25 characters is evidence enough that it comes up a great deal. For comparison, the fact that the body character limit is 30000 characters is mostly just an odd piece of trivia, but something that very few users have ever encountered. The point of character limits like this is supposed to be to eliminate extreme cases where it's very unlikely there's a legitimate reason, not to have to develop a toolbox of techniques for circumventing them, which is what we've been forced to do time after time.
35 characters will still not be enough for everything. We can't fit, for example, [ore-no-nounai-sentakushi-ga-gakuen-love-comedy-wo-zenryoku-de-jama-shiteiru](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ore-no-nounai-sentakushi-ga-gakuen-love-comedy-wo-zenryoku-de-jama-shiteiru "show questions tagged 'ore-no-nounai-sentakushi-ga-gakuen-love-comedy-wo-zenryoku-de-jama-shiteiru'") unless we have a full 75 characters, and there are still far longer titles than that even (see [here](https://worldwithouthorizons.com/opinion/2017/04/28/light-novel-titles-have-gotten-too-long-heres-the-top-5-longest-titles-and-this-joke-title-too/) for several longer ones, the longest of which would be over 180 characters by my count). Even [ghost-in-the-shell-stand-alone-complex](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ghost-in-the-shell-stand-alone-complex "show questions tagged 'ghost-in-the-shell-stand-alone-complex'") is too long at 38.
But 35 characters would allow [the-irregular-at-magic-high-school](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-irregular-at-magic-high-school "show questions tagged 'the-irregular-at-magic-high-school'") (34), [fullmetal-alchemist-brotherhood](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/fullmetal-alchemist-brotherhood "show questions tagged 'fullmetal-alchemist-brotherhood'") (31), [the-girl-who-leapt-through-time](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/the-girl-who-leapt-through-time "show questions tagged 'the-girl-who-leapt-through-time'") (31), [chuunibyou-demo-koi-ga-shitai](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/chuunibyou-demo-koi-ga-shitai "show questions tagged 'chuunibyou-demo-koi-ga-shitai'") (29) or [love-chunibyo-and-other-delusions](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/love-chunibyo-and-other-delusions "show questions tagged 'love-chunibyo-and-other-delusions'") (33), [ouran-highschool-host-club](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ouran-highschool-host-club "show questions tagged 'ouran-highschool-host-club'") (26), [legend-of-the-galactic-heroes](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/legend-of-the-galactic-heroes "show questions tagged 'legend-of-the-galactic-heroes'") (29), [blood-blockade-battlefront](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/blood-blockade-battlefront "show questions tagged 'blood-blockade-battlefront'") (26), [my-teen-romantic-comedy-snafu](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/my-teen-romantic-comedy-snafu "show questions tagged 'my-teen-romantic-comedy-snafu'") (29), [soredemo-sekai-wa-utsukushii](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/soredemo-sekai-wa-utsukushii "show questions tagged 'soredemo-sekai-wa-utsukushii'") (28), [shouwa-genroku-rakugo-shinjuu](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/shouwa-genroku-rakugo-shinjuu "show questions tagged 'shouwa-genroku-rakugo-shinjuu'") (29), and I stopped listing them not because it was remotely difficult to find more but because I got bored of doing so many character counts. The [list on the Arqade meta post](https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12497/increase-tag-length-limit-to-32-or-35/12499#12499) had a very large number of examples, but factoring in the relative site sizes I'm sure this is just as big a problem here. Most works with titles longer than that have some generally accepted abbreviation, but quite a few in the 26-35 range can not be abbreviated canonically.
One might also worry that these long tags would be harmful for SEO purposes, because the tag comes first in the page title seen by Google and is thus given large weight, displacing other content. But I don't know if that is actually true. It seems more likely to me that an abbreviated title would have a bigger effect than pushing the question text 10 characters later. That said, I'm far from an SEO expert. But it's just as, if not more, important that tags can be discovered by users here as that Google can identify them, and for that this is a clear improvement.
As such I strongly support increasing the character count for tags on this site. Of course, longer tag names have to be used responsibly; if a better tag name exists you shouldn't use a long one just for the sake of using the feature. But it seems very unlikely this would actually become an issue in practice, in contrast to short tag names, which have been a problem since day one on this site.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: [status-completed](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/status-completed "show questions tagged 'status-completed'")
The maximum tag length was [increased to 35 characters](https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/299490/162011) for the entire Stack Exchange network on August 8, 2017.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2017/07/03 | 1,726 | 6,808 | <issue_start>username_0: Anime & Manga is scheduled for an election [next week, July 10th](https://anime.stackexchange.com/election/3). In connection with that, we will be holding a Q&A with the candidates. This will be an opportunity for members of the community to pose questions to the candidates on the topic of moderation. Participation is completely voluntary.
>
> **The purpose of this thread was to collect questions for the questionnaire. The questionnaire is now live, and you may find it [here](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4077/2017-moderator-election-qa-questionnaire).**
>
>
>
Here's how it'll work:
* Until the nomination phase, (so, until Monday, July 10th at 20:00:00Z UTC, or 4:00 pm EDT on the same day, give or take time to arrive for closure), this question will be open to collect potential questions from the users of the site. Post answers to this question containing any questions you would like to ask the candidates. Please only post *one question per answer*.
* We, the Community Team, will be providing a small selection of generic questions. The first two will be guaranteed to be included, the latter ones are if the community doesn't supply enough questions. This will be done in a single post, unlike the prior instruction.
* If your question contains a link, please use the syntax of `[text](link)`, as that will make it easier for transcribing for the finished questionnaire.
* This is a perfect opportunity to voice questions that are specific to your community and issues that you are running into at current.
* At the start of the nomination phase, the Community Team will select **up to 8 of the top voted questions submitted by the community** provided in this thread, to use in addition to the aforementioned 2 guaranteed questions. We reserve some editorial control in the selection of the questions and may opt not to select a question that is tangential or irrelevant to moderation or the election. That said, if I have concerns about any questions in this fashion, I will be sure to point this out in comments before the decision making time.
* Once questions have been selected, a new question will be opened to host the actual questionnaire for the candidates, typically containing 10 questions in total.
* This is not the only option that users have for gathering information on candidates. As a community, you are still free to, for example, hold a live chat session with your candidates to ask further questions, or perhaps clarifications from what is provided in the Q&A.
If you have any questions or feedback about this process, feel free to post as a comment here.<issue_comment>username_1: Here is a set of general questions, gathered as very common questions asked every election. As mentioned in the instructions, the first two questions are guaranteed to show up in the Q&A, while the others are if there aren't enough questions (or, if you like one enough, you may split it off as a separate answer for review within the community's 8).
* How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?
* How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?
---
* In your opinion, what do moderators do?
* A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that?
* In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching 10k or 20k rep?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: My question to the wannabe-moderators is the following :
>
> What are, in your opinion, the current issues our StackExchange is facing and how do you plan to address them if you were elected as a moderator?
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: How much do you know about the following series: *Naruto*, *One Piece*, *Fairy Tail*, *Bleach*, *Dragon Ball*?
---
The reason I ask is that these five franchises have the following characteristics:
* They together make up about 25% of our total questions to-date and [35% of our total question views](http://data.stackexchange.com/anime/query/690993/), so being able to moderate them is important.
* Questions on these topics appear to be poorly-written more often than questions on other topics, which makes moderating them more important. (This is gut-feel; I don't have numbers. It might just be that I *notice* poorly-written questions on these topics disproportionately often.)
* The sum total of my knowledge of these franchises is that I've played one of the *Naruto* fighting games, and hence I often have difficulty distinguishing between "a pile of utter garbage" and "a poorly-written but reasonable question". Our other moderators aren't as useless as me in this respect, but it never hurts to have more hands who know about these things.
Knowing about these series is by no means a requirement, of course. But if candidates A and B are identical except that A has an encyclopedic knowledge of *Naruto* while B has an encyclopedic knowledge of (say) *Doraemon*, I would vote for A.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: One thing I have noticed is that most of our Mod Team do not appear in the main Chat Room, to the point that most can't being be @ pinged.
While Chat is optional it does provide a platform to contact Mods and discuss policies/decisions as opposed to using custom flags or posting on Meta and it does make a Mod more approachable.
As a Mod would you become more active/participate in Chat? if not how would you open yourself up to being contacted outside of flagging and Meta Posts?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I like @username_4's [question from the 2016 election](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3902/1530):
>
> we have [a number of community events](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2682/1587) from annual events like [Conspiracy Santa](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2684/1587) to one off events like [EU A&M Meet up](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2692/1587).
>
>
> Are there any other Events you would like to see occur to help bolster community cohesion, attract more users to the site and/or increase activity and participation on the site?
>
>
>
With an additional modification from myself:
>
> apart from the idea of *events*, are there any other ways you would encourage the community to grow and collaborate?
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: What example can you point to, either here or on another site in the network, that is most indicative of your moderation style? How would you adapt it to fit for this site?
Upvotes: 2 |
2017/07/08 | 3,441 | 11,860 | <issue_start>username_0: While browsing for unanswered questions, I stumbled upon [Are there any dubbed episodes of naruto shippuden After episode 388? Or its like they have stopped dubbing episodes?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/40969/are-there-any-dubbed-episodes-of-naruto-shippuden-after-episode-388-or-its-like). Since I browse unanswered questions and new questions back-to-back, I suddenly remembered that there's a recent question asking the same, which was [How many of Naruto Shippuden episodes are dubbed?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/41108/how-many-of-naruto-shippuden-episodes-are-dubbed) and already answered.
This suddenly made me realize, that someone would ask the same question whenever they feel like there's no progress (as can be seen for [*Naruto* dubs](https://anime.stackexchange.com/search?tab=newest&q=naruto%20dub%20is%3aq)):
* [Why did the English dub of Naruto stop?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/3252/why-did-the-english-dub-of-naruto-stop)
* [When will the Naruto: Shippuden English dubbed version resume production?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/26470/when-will-the-naruto-shippuden-english-dubbed-version-resume-production)
* [How many Naruto Shippuden dubbed episodes are there?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/29473/how-many-naruto-shippuden-dubbed-episodes-are-there)
* [Naruto shippuden episodes](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/39870/naruto-shippuden-episodes)
* [Are there any dubbed episodes of naruto shippuden After episode 388? Or its like they have stopped dubbing episodes?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/40969/are-there-any-dubbed-episodes-of-naruto-shippuden-after-episode-388-or-its-like)
* [How many of Naruto Shippuden episodes are dubbed?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/41108/how-many-of-naruto-shippuden-episodes-are-dubbed)
Searching for more general questions on [dub](https://anime.stackexchange.com/search?tab=newest&q=dub%20is%3aq) returned:
* [Has there been an English dub release of Ghost in the Shell - Arise 3?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/22955/has-there-been-an-english-dub-release-of-ghost-in-the-shell-arise-3) (closed as "unnanounced future event")
* [What is the status of the Valvrave the Liberator English Dubs?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/27823/what-is-the-status-of-the-valvrave-the-liberator-english-dubs)
* [How can I find out when new English Dubbed One Piece episodes will be released?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/27154/how-can-i-find-out-when-new-english-dubbed-one-piece-episodes-will-be-released)
* [When will Fairy Tail (2014) be dubbed?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/22012/when-will-fairy-tail-2014-be-dubbed)
Some matters to be discussed:
* Are we okay with this kind of questions?
* Are they facing a dilemma of ["already announced but no research" or "unannounced future event"](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/27/what-do-we-do-with-questions-about-future-events-releases/43#43)?
* Specifically for *Naruto*, should we create a canonical post for this?<issue_comment>username_1: These questions annoy me, along with their spiritual cousin, the "When is *Hunter x Hunter* coming back?" / "When is *Attack on Titan* Season 2 airing" / "Is *Mamotte Shugogetten* getting a sequel?" question, but I don't know if they're a big enough problem to be worth banning.
Three major things annoy me about these questions:
* They have expiration dates. If *Mamotte Shugogetten* resumes its dubbing schedule on October 17th, 20XX, then the question becomes useless noise for anyone reading after October 17th, 20XX. (Unless they're doing research to fill out a "Dubbing history of *Mamotte Shugogetten*" section on Wikipedia, I guess.)
* They recur. If dubbing for *Mamotte Shugogetten* goes on hiatus again, someone is going to show up asking the exact same question: When is the dub for *Mamotte Shugogetten* going to start again? (Insert some series that people care about instead of *Mamotte Shugogetten*.) This new question is sort of a duplicate, but also sort of not, because we're talking about a new hiatus and a new resumption date for the same show.
* The only way to know if the question is answerable is to answer it. This is something that annoys me about the way we handle all newsy-type questions. I usually don't bother to review any of this sort of question because I have to do research equivalent to an answer to even know if the question should be closed or not, and it's easy to miss an announcement since some companies, especially US dubbing companies, make their release announcements weirdly hard to find.
Still, policy is policy, and even though these annoy me, I don't think they need to be stamped out yet. For now, I think we should treat them the same as other types of future event questions: close them unless there's an announcement or source that makes them answerable, and close ones that are asked during the same period as duplicates.
As for the recurrence problem, even though it irritates me to have multiple versions of the same question scattered all over the site, it seems like it would get very confusing to try and close them all as duplicates of each other. As I understand it, we should vote to close a question as a duplicate of another if it is completely answered by the answers to the other question. But if someone asks "When will *<NAME>* resume dubbing?" in 2017, and then it resumes, and then it pauses again and someone asks "When will *<NAME>* resume dubbing?" in 2018, then the answers to the 2017 question do not actually answer the 2018 question, so it seems wrong to close the 2018 question as a duplicate. Of course, someone could come along and provide a new answer with the new date on the 2017 question, but then we have answers giving a date for the previous hiatus mixed with answers giving a date for the current hiatus, which makes the whole post confusing to read, especially since the default is to order the answers by votes.
So for now, I recommend the status quo.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> TL;DR: I would support the following course of action:
>
>
> * Close *all* of these types of questions as future events.
> * In the case of dub schedules:
> + Close them as a duplicate which ***generally*** talks about dub release schedules and where one can find them, but make it painfully
> clear that **unless the specific publisher has said so, everything is
> to be taken as unofficial information**.
>
>
>
---
I kind of wanted to think about this a bit more as it both pertained to us as a community, and the network at large. Specifically, I wanted to know if there was any "prior art" to address this issue, and as luck would have it, Movies & TV has had an issue with this in the past. As far back as their [first draft](https://movies.meta.stackexchange.com/q/40), they explicitly forbid questions which pertained to release dates, or rumors thereof.
I'm not saying that the verbatim Movies' model would work best for us, but let's take a look at the questions we're presented with to see if they'd be something we'd even *want* to answer. Remember, we're setting these precedents for us; not because we want to stop users from coming, but because we want users to keep coming back.
Anyway...
* [Why did the English dub of Naruto stop?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/3252/why-did-the-english-dub-of-naruto-stop)
* [When will the Naruto: Shippuden English dubbed version resume production?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/26470/when-will-the-naruto-shippuden-english-dubbed-version-resume-production)
+ The only reasonable answer(s) to these questions are, "money, time, and interest". All of this would have to be verified by someone in the industry, specifically closely working with the Naruto dub, which while isn't *entirely* outside the realm of possibility, isn't something that we here and now can answer.
* [How many Naruto Shippuden dubbed episodes are there?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/29473/how-many-naruto-shippuden-dubbed-episodes-are-there)
* [Naruto shippuden episodes](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/39870/naruto-shippuden-episodes)
* [Are there any dubbed episodes of naruto shippuden After episode 388? Or its like they have stopped dubbing episodes?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/40969/are-there-any-dubbed-episodes-of-naruto-shippuden-after-episode-388-or-its-like)
* [How many of Naruto Shippuden episodes are dubbed?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/41108/how-many-of-naruto-shippuden-episodes-are-dubbed)
+ All of these questions *can* be independently verified by us, specifically by referencing official sources and Wikipedia. Yes, this means that one who asks this isn't really doing much research into this...it also makes the question more answerable as there's actually an answer that *doesn't* involve someone in the production cycle. I would rather not have to answer *each* question that gets asked about this though, so I'd encourage **a canonical duplicate** for that.
* [Has there been an English dub release of Ghost in the Shell - Arise 3?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/22955/has-there-been-an-english-dub-release-of-ghost-in-the-shell-arise-3) (closed as "unnanounced future event")
* [What is the status of the Valvrave the Liberator English Dubs?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/27823/what-is-the-status-of-the-valvrave-the-liberator-english-dubs)
* [How can I find out when new English Dubbed One Piece episodes will be released?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/27154/how-can-i-find-out-when-new-english-dubbed-one-piece-episodes-will-be-released)
* [When will Fairy Tail (2014) be dubbed?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/22012/when-will-fairy-tail-2014-be-dubbed)
+ All of these should be treated as "future events" and closed as such. We don't know when these dubs will be released, if ever, and there's no satisfaction to be had when they're on our site, looking for a solution.
---
So, effectively, we're left with only one category of question that we could answer readily: the count of available dubs for a specific series. Now, the question is: do we really ***want*** to answer those questions? I've [certainly done so](https://anime.stackexchange.com/a/39871/102) on one that's listed, but if I'm honest, it's not a particularly insightful bit of information. Anyone can look at Wikipedia and conjecture a timeline similar to what I did, but that doesn't make it *accurate*.
That makes it dangerous; if someone were to use information sourced from this site, then ~~not only do they look silly for sourcing an unverified source~~not only is it a bad look for us as a community by providing incomplete information, but it also means that we haven't really done what we set out to accomplish in providing an insightful and valuable answer to someone who really wants to know this.
It seems like [username_1's answer](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4075/102) alludes to much of what I'm saying as well, but I'm going to take a different stance here. In my mind, we don't want to regurgitate readily-accessible information about series, and we don't want to have to maintain that sort of information when the official sources do a much better job of it than we do.
That said, I would support the following course of action:
* Close *all* of these types of questions as future events.
* In the case of dub schedules:
+ Close them as a duplicate which ***generally*** talks about dub release schedules and where one can find them, but make it painfully clear that **unless the specific publisher has said so, everything is to be taken as unofficial information**.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2017/07/10 | 5,205 | 19,285 | <issue_start>username_0: In connection with the moderator elections, we are holding a Q&A thread for the candidates. Questions collected [from an earlier thread](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4067/2017-moderator-election-qa-question-collection) have been compiled into this one, which shall now serve as the space for the candidates to provide their answers.
Due to the submission count, we have selected all provided questions as well as our back up questions for a total of 10 questions.
As a candidate, your job is simple - post an answer to this question, citing each of the questions and then post your answer to each question given in that same answer. For your convenience, I will include all of the questions in quote format with a break in between each, suitable for you to insert your answers. Just [copy the whole thing after the first set of three dashes](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/revisions/b71172bc-35f8-45e0-af6d-92b94e14811f/view-source).Please consider putting your name at the top of your post so that readers will know who you are before they finish reading everything you have written, and also including a link to your answer on your nomination post.
Once all the answers have been compiled, this will serve as a transcript for voters to view the thoughts of their candidates, and will be appropriately linked in the Election page.
Good luck to all of the candidates!
**Oh, and when you've completed your answer, please provide a link to it after this blurb here, before that set of three dashes. Please leave the list of links in the order of submission.**
To save scrolling here are links to the submissions from each candidate (in order of submission):
[**Makoto's answers**](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4079/102)
[**<NAME>'s answers**](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4080/1458)
---
>
> 1. How much do you know about the following series: *Naruto*, *One Piece*, *Fairy Tail*, *Bleach*, *Dragon Ball*?
> 2. What are, in your opinion, the current issues our StackExchange is facing and how do you plan to address them if you were elected as a moderator?
> 3. One thing I have noticed is that most of our Mod Team do not appear in the main Chat Room, to the point that most can't being be @ pinged. While Chat is optional it does provide a platform to contact Mods and discuss policies/decisions as opposed to using custom flags or posting on Meta and it does make a Mod more approachable. As a Mod would you become more active/participate in Chat? if not how would you open yourself up to being contacted outside of flagging and Meta Posts?
> 4. We have [a number of community events](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2682/1587) from annual events like [Conspiracy Santa](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2684/1587) to one off events like [EU A&M Meet up](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2692/1587). Are there any other Events you would like to see occur to help bolster community cohesion, attract more users to the site and/or increase activity and participation on the site? Apart from the idea of *events*, are there any other ways you would encourage the community to grow and collaborate?
> 5. How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?
> 6. How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?
> 7. What example can you point to, either here or on another site in the network, that is most indicative of your moderation style? How would you adapt it to fit for this site?
> 8. In your opinion, what do moderators do?
> 9. A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that?
> 10. In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching 10k or 20k rep?
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: >
> 1. How much do you know about the following series: *Naruto*, *One Piece*, *Fairy Tail*, *Bleach*, *Dragon Ball*?
>
>
>
Of the franchises listed:
* I've watched nearly the entirety of Naruto and half of *Shippuden*, but have read the entire manga.
* I've not pleasently experienced One Piece; the only versions I saw were the 4Kids dub way back when.
* I've not watched or read Fairy Tail, but I am keen to look into it.
* I'm *very* well versed in Bleach. Of the "big three", this was the one I faithfully stuck with to completion.
* My knowledge of Dragon Ball ends at around Z, but I know bits and pieces of the other series.
I would counter, however, that regardless of my knowledge levels of these series, it's still prudent for me to do the research on them *anyway* and look into what they're all about. I don't personally feel that having an *encyclopedic* level of knowledge on these series is vital, but knowing what to look for in a high quality question *is*.
In that vein, there are heuristics I use to determine a good question even if I don't have experience with the series:
* Can it realistically occur in the canon? ([Example.](https://anime.stackexchange.com/q/40710/102))
* Does the question cite specific episodes or major plot points? ([Example.](https://anime.stackexchange.com/q/17009/102))
* Is the question something that can be answered as a fan (myself), or by someone with *some* insight into the industry? ([Example.](https://anime.stackexchange.com/q/38846/102))
As this is a heuristic it is subject to flaws, but by and large I feel that I have a good eye for good questions.
>
> 2. What are, in your opinion, the current issues our StackExchange is facing and how do you plan to address them if you were elected as a moderator?
>
>
>
We have a bit of an issue with diversity of questions. As alluded to in an earlier question, we've got a serious focus on the major franchises (Naruto, One Piece, Bleach, Fairy Tail, etc.), but not as much focus on the smaller or newer ones. There are two issues at play here: reach and personal watching habits.
The former is well out of our control; we can't dictate (very well, anyway) which series become the next Big Thing in Japan, so we would have to divert our attention to the latter. This means that events like group watching sessions or chat discussions around new series would be beneficial, as it'd get a guy like myself (who's very stuck in his "not interested in cute girls doing cute things series but OMG *New Game* does programming and I do too! Wow!!"-ways) interested in other series.
That's a lot harder since I personally haven't been to any of those events held by us here - scheduling conflicts, mostly - and I don't know what measure of success they have. But having more of these events more often and geared towards a wider diversity of genres would be beneficial. Who knows; *maybe* doing that I'll actually watch *Yuri on Ice* or *Free*. *Maybe.*
>
> 3. One thing I have noticed is that most of our Mod Team do not appear in the main Chat Room, to the point that most can't being be @ pinged. While Chat is optional it does provide a platform to contact Mods and discuss policies/decisions as opposed to using custom flags or posting on Meta and it does make a Mod more approachable. As a Mod would you become more active/participate in Chat? if not how would you open yourself up to being contacted outside of flagging and Meta Posts?
>
>
>
The way my schedule and routine are structured prevent me from going to chat, but I am prepared to make adjustments which would mean I do go into chat. I don't mind being reached for when needed, but I'd like to set up a system that works for me too. Might fiddle with some notifications APIs to make it more convenient.
>
> 4. We have [a number of community events](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2682/1587) from annual events like [Conspiracy Santa](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2684/1587) to one off events like [EU A&M Meet up](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2692/1587). Are there any other Events you would like to see occur to help bolster community cohesion, attract more users to the site and/or increase activity and participation on the site? Apart from the idea of *events*, are there any other ways you would encourage the community to grow and collaborate?
>
>
>
This is a lot tougher as we really look to find where we fit in the vast and broad community of Anime and Manga discussion places. We've got our share of growing pains with what is and isn't acceptable on our site - notably the identification question issue among others - but that may stem from a deeper identity crisis. We're quite happy and content with being what we are, which is a repository of knowledge for Anime and Manga, but to others, that seems to conflate to "forum", and we're simply not that. An emphasis on growth would require clear and readily visible expectations to others as to what we're looking for.
I quite liked senshin's [past efforts](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2305/april-2015-bounties-for-tags-sports-anime-2005-present) to facilitate activity and encourage new content here, but ultimately that also meant that we'd have to *want* to contribute to that. I would love an opportunity to bring something like that back, but instead of tying it to a theme or anything like that, I'd rather want to see some deeply insightful questions from other anime that are harder to answer. I don't have the rep to facilitate something like that for very long, but I'd still like to see it.
>
> 5. How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?
>
>
>
Pull 'em aside and have a chat. I'd want to see what's really going on behind those flags and figure out if it's a deeper issue than two users having a disagreement of some sort.
>
> 6. How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?
>
>
>
Moderators should act as a quorum, and we should respect the decisions of fellow moderators. That said, I'd take them aside and ask them why they felt why they took the action they did. Then I'd present my side and give reasons why I feel their actions weren't right. I'm looking for consensus in the decision made, and possibly I would also learn a bit more into how they feel moderation is and should be done around here.
>
> 7. What example can you point to, either here or on another site in the network, that is most indicative of your moderation style? How would you adapt it to fit for this site?
>
>
>
Of the posts on A&M:
* [I'm pretty happy with this one](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3893/102); it communicated my express opinion on what value a series tag holds here, since "the universe" is much broader in scope than "this instance", and "the universe" may not even have an equivalent "instance". (I did notice that it was re-added afterwards, so I went back and corrected that.)
* [This one is pretty good too.](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2810/102) I feel that a new tag for that subject would've been too broad and I communicated that clearly and respectfully.
Of the posts elsewhere:
I'm quite (in)famous on Stack Overflow nowadays - feel encouraged to [look at my answers for more details](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/users/1079354/makoto?tab=answers), but of the posts here, I feel like these capture an applicable style for A&M best:
* [What we do with non-native English speakers' posts](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/a/291179/1079354); if it can be edited into shape, we should edit it into shape.
* [Understanding the scope of an answer](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/a/302624/1079354), and how "Not an Answer"-answers can be identified.
* [Encouraging users to provide answers even if they're not innately familiar with the subject matter.](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/a/351688/1079354) I feel like *this* is the thing we should be promoting a *lot* here, since not everyone really knows every anime.
* [Editing advice](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/a/339127/1079354); domain knowledge is not required to know that "I" should be capitalized.
* [Encouraging the long-form answer](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/a/351433/1079354); we're small (and I allude to as much in another answer in that post), and we don't draw lots of attention to long-form answers, but that doesn't mean we should *stop* doing them.
>
> 8. In your opinion, what do moderators do?
>
>
>
As a high-rep user on another site, I've come to see moderators as folks that can handle the things that I can't handle. That is, they handle the more intangible issues of the community, such as voting rings, users needing a timeout (potentially), and various parts of the community that no other user is privy to, such as warnings and suspensions, and even deleting comments. Effectively, they clean up the mess that others can't *quite* clean up. As we've still got beta-level privileges, my reputation here is near equivalent to that of a high-rep moderator-user on a fully-graduated site, so this means that there are a decent number of users here who still contribute to cleaning things up. Moderators are there to help when the community can't *quite* accomplish it on their own, which I feel is a good role.
>
> 9. A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that?
>
>
>
In the best cases, it reflects well on the community for having placed their confidence in my history. In the worst case, it highlights that I, too, am human, and make human mistakes.
>
> 10. In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching 10k or 20k rep?
>
>
>
This is hard to quantify on a smaller site, but the main issue(s) we would potentially have around here is content that can't be removed in a timely enough fashion, such as content which goes against the ToS of the site. Also, moderators are the only kind of user who can remove comments, and removing offensive comments timely is something only a moderator can help with.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Dimitri-MX
----------
>
> 1. How much do you know about the following series: *Naruto*, *One Piece*, *Fairy Tail*, *Bleach*, *Dragon Ball*?
>
>
>
Fairly knowledgeable. In case of Naruto and Bleach I have read the whole manga series, and have it physically available at home for review.
As for Fairy Tail, One Piece and Dragonball I follow the releases as they come. So consider me up to date.
>
> 2. What are, in your opinion, the current issues our StackExchange is facing and how do you plan to address them if you were elected as a moderator?
>
>
>
There seems to be little variety in questions, and I think the very first question answered reflects that quite clearly.
This has been a thing for as long as I have been an active member, and I think this mainly caused by the type of people the community attracts. Which often just 'want to know/need help' with finding an serie/song
Figuring out a way to attract more dedicated fans would be my approach on fixing this particular issue.
>
> 3. One thing I have noticed is that most of our Mod Team do not appear in the main Chat Room, to the point that most can't being be @ pinged. While Chat is optional it does provide a platform to contact Mods and discuss policies/decisions as opposed to using custom flags or posting on Meta and it does make a Mod more approachable. As a Mod would you become more active/participate in Chat? if not how would you open yourself up to being contacted outside of flagging and Meta Posts?
>
>
>
Personally, I am also not an active chat user on A&M. However, when becoming a Mod I will attempt to be so more.
Besides that I actually am available on a lot of other chat services such as skype and discord, As I prefer to work with desktop clients for chatting.
These clients also offer mobile support, which makes me available nearly 24/7 on these mediums, and always up for a chat.
>
> 4. We have [a number of community events](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2682/1587) from annual events like [Conspiracy Santa](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2684/1587) to one off events like [EU A&M Meet up](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2692/1587). Are there any other Events you would like to see occur to help bolster community cohesion, attract more users to the site and/or increase activity and participation on the site? Apart from the idea of *events*, are there any other ways you would encourage the community to grow and collaborate?
>
>
>
I have been part of some of these events and would extend a helping hand if community members decide to create new events. However, I wouldn't currently have any suggestions for said events.
>
> 5. How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?
>
>
>
Would be dependant on the type of flags, however assuming that it's just to chatty/ extended discussions
would redirect the users to chat, to continue their discussion there instead as comments are not for extended discussions, and point this fact out to them.
>
> 6. How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?
>
>
>
Discuss it with the the said mod. See if you can reach some sort of mutual consensus, or if it escalates beyond that, included other moderators or some cases the community it self as well.
>
> 7. What example can you point to, either here or on another site in the network, that is most indicative of your moderation style? How would you adapt it to fit for this site?
>
>
>
I guess I would point out <https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2660/1458> , moderation can be hard, especially considering borderline materials.
So by helping define limits, both as a moderator assisted by the members of the community we can keep a nice and safe place.
And if people need clarifications, help, or an explanation. <https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2655/1458> Ill give it to them
>
> 8. In your opinion, what do moderators do?
>
>
>
They mediate, maintain, answer and respond to the community, there where the user driven moderation is insufficient.
>
> 9. A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that?
>
>
>
Not that different. People will see that they can reach out to me if they need help or have questions. Besides that, I am still a community member.
>
> 10. In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching 10k or 20k rep?
>
>
>
Yes, I think it make it easier for people to reach out to me if they need anything.
Upvotes: 3 |
2017/07/23 | 2,475 | 10,113 | <issue_start>username_0: The way we approach "Where can I watch?" questions has bothered me for a while. Usually, we easily get five people to vote to close every one of these questions as "requesting illegal or copyrighted materials", but not one person who bothers to edit the word "legally" into the title, even though that's typically all that's needed to make the question on-topic.
I would even argue that in most cases the question doesn't need to explicitly ask for a legal source, as long as it doesn't explicitly ask for an illegal source. But when I've made such edits, I usually make it look like "Where Can I Legally Watch Legal Copies of Legal Legally, Legally Only, Must be Legal (legally only)?" since some people seem deeply disturbed by the absence of that word.
[Where can I legally watch the legal dubbed version of "Kimi no na wa" ("<NAME>") (legally only)?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/q/41469/7579) is the most recent example, that spurred me to say something. In its original form, that question did not explicitly ask for a free or illegal source. It did ask for a download, which we might infer means illegal, but all someone had to do was edit that out and maybe change the title to specify "legally". Instead, we had five people vote to close, and now it's sat closed for five days, and no one could be bothered to take the thirty seconds to edit.
I don't love "where can I watch" questions, but they're one of the few question categories on this site that helps a lot of people solve a practical problem they're facing. And in 99% of cases, all you really need to do is edit them so they're asking for legal sources. I'm not even sure what kind of post would fall in that remaining 1%; maybe if the OP keeps on rolling back edits, that would be a case for closing the question and re-asking it. Answers that provide illegal sources should of course be nuked immediately, but that doesn't make the question itself off-topic.
I get it: here on A&M we've got lots of posts that are impossible to salvage through editing, either because the OP's writing skills are so poor that you can't make heads or tails of what they're saying, or because they didn't include any detail, so fixing the answer would basically be equivalent to writing your own answer, but with all the gains going some rando who couldn't be bothered to put in any effort. I get that that's what we mostly review around here. But everyone, please try to be more aware when a tiny edit can completely fix a question, and don't immediately reach for the close vote button.<issue_comment>username_1: Additional questions from me.
Assuming OP wants a list of legal sources, will this turn into a "shopping advice" type of question which is generally disliked on other SE sites? Will it eventually lead to basically every popular title having a "where can I legally watch it today" and a lot of the links becoming obsolete over the years as licenses end and the item is removed from streaming sites, and discs are removed from shop listings?
Assuming OP wants an illegal source and we turn the question into asking about legal sources, and then OP becomes disinterested (and comments about it, and maybe tries to delete their question), what use is it to anyone on the site? Are you okay with putting effort into answering a question the OP didn't ask?
I also don't like that we don't try as we should to salvage potentially useful questions *generally*, but in this case I have to ask myself and other editors: do we want to put effort into something that isn't hard to find answers to by googling "watch|stream [anime title]"?
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: I think username_1's point here is a strong one:
>
> ...[I]n this case I have to ask myself and other editors: do we want to put effort into something that isn't hard to find answers to by googling "watch|stream [anime title]"?
>
>
>
...so the TL;DR of my answer here will be:
Are these the kinds of questions we *really* want to answer?
============================================================
I make as much reference to this struggle [in an earlier post](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4076/102) asking about release dates for dubs. But I suppose that we should take a step back here.
Let me be clear, in terms of procedure that is what should've happened - we should edit out the references to any requests for illegal sources - and it's regrettable I didn't take the time to do that, but I have a rationale for it which has been weighing on my mind for a bit.
The anime fanbase is pretty well pigeonholed. We've got a lot of forums and discussion boards dedicated to anime of all kinds and subjects, and quite frankly, asking where to find these sources is a question that comes up *very* common. Enter A&M if someone were to ask the *same* question here and expect an equivalent reception to it, and then get slapped with, "oh no, we don't do that here", then chances are they're not going to get what they want from us, and they just up and leave.
To tie that back to this question, it was asked and phrased the way it was because the user either didn't know or didn't care of any legal sources, and there's little that our words can do to sway them of either notion. Further, any information we *could* provide would regurgitate a well-timed and thought out Google search.
It seems I made that mistake again in answering this question; it's something that can be found on the Internet, but it isn't particularly insightful or interesting. An idle moment while taking a breather at work allowed me to look things up and get an answer in while referencing legal sources, but...again, that's still a Google search that we should encourage others to be doing.
I personally don't feel like we should be answering these questions.
Providing a resource to users looking for specific shows through legal channels and avenues - and more importantly, **a resource we *don't* have to maintain** - would be the more ideal approach.
We actually [have a list of legal sites](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/922/102) available; it suffers from an acute lack of visibility. If we were to make this kind of resource more prominent, we'd likely get more users looking things up for themselves in that regard.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: Personally I don't think we should want these kind of questions, not even if they state *legal*. Mainly due to the broad variety of the term *legal* in different countries.
We have a list of *generally accepted legal source* [How can I tell if a site is Legal?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/922/how-can-i-tell-if-a-site-is-legal). Which is a very good source to refer to, if somebody wants to **stream** anime or manga online.
We also have a fairly nice list of resources if you want to download for offline usage [Apps for offline manga reading](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/25959/apps-for-offline-manga-reading/25961#25961)
Now we get to the dubious part
------------------------------
**Switzerland, Spain**: Downloading copyrighted content for personal use is perfectly legal. You cannot distribute the content or use it to make profit though.
**Canada, Mexico and Netherlands**: Known to tolerate downloading copyrighted contents for personal use.
**So this would mean the sites that *distribute* said content are still illegal right, case closed?**
Frankly no, or at least not always.
In Spain, file sharing and torrenting of copyrighted content for private use has been repeatedly declared legal by the courts multiple times.
There have also been cases where *distribution for private use* was allowed, if the original distributor at the very least owned a copy.
Take note that private use covers both online and offline usage of said resource.
**Great, so any source can be legal. So lets only support franchised (paid for) alternatives. This way we support the creator, and we know it's legal for sure for everybody**
Leaving the fact most people that ask these questions won't be to happy with that, that sounds like a solid plan!
This does however come with one more flaw, fan dubs/subs. Which are glorious legal gray zones, as they most often can fall under either
A: Fair use
`Fair use is a doctrine in United States copyright law that allows limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders, such as for commentary, criticism, news reporting, research, teaching or scholarship.`, however, similar laws exist in other countries as well.
Or B: educational purposes
`Activities that are integral, immediate, and proximate to the education of students, or in the case of libraries, integral, immediate, and proximate to the provision of library services to library patrons, qualify as "educational purposes."`
Both of which may or may not be always legal.
So, to actually answer your question. No, I would rather close a question than just add the word 'legal' to it. As it carries closely to no meaning or difference, as opposed to without it.
Yes I would accept a re-open at this point in time if the OP himself takes the effort to add *legal* to the question at this point in time, like i did here. [Where can I legally watch the dubbed version of "Kimi no na wa" ("Your Name")?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/q/41469/7579)
And to be frank, I think all such questions should be closed as off topic. We can't properly tell legal sources apart for each individual user. However, when we close it, we can link them our resources of *generally accepted legal sources* to at least push them in the right way.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_1: I'd like to propose to not add the word "legally" into these questions anymore to "make them ask about where to get it legally". Let's just assume we're only interested in legal sources because that's how things actually are. There's no need to assume everybody is a filthy pirate if the word "legally" isn't present. We just delete illegal requests fast anyways.
So, no more "legally".
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2017/07/24 | 2,838 | 11,567 | <issue_start>username_0: On the topic of this question: [Can we stop immediately closing "Where can I watch" questions as "Requesting illegal copyrighted materials"?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4082/can-we-stop-immediately-closing-where-can-i-watch-questions-as-requesting-ill)
---
StackExchange used to have a close reason that sounded like so:
>
> This question can be easily answered by a simple search query
>
>
>
Which most "where can I watch/read this anime/manga" are potential candidates for. I think we could allow such questions for titles with obscure series which don't have English translations (subs and/or dubs) and in other languages which are actually not so easy to google up.
We also have our [big list of legal resources](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/922/102) which can be browsed for a lot of the popular titles. But it's pretty obscure coz it's on meta and there aren't a lot of links to it (not enough if people still keep asking, I suppose?)
So, in case of questions which can easily be googled, should we close them as
duplicated of our big legal list of anime streaming and manga reading sites?
(for that we'd need to migrate that list post from meta to our main site, which can be done, but requires some moderator help, so let's talk about this first)<issue_comment>username_1: I'm *certain* at some point I had recommended that we migrate that resources over to the main site...I can't seem to find the post, but no bother.
My stance on this issue is fairly simple: we shouldn't allow these kinds of questions.
It's easier for us to maintain the one list of legal resources, and keep that fairly locked down (i.e. protected and watch it like a hawk) to mitigate the damage of others coming in and adding their own illicit sources than it is for us to look for a single specific series.
Note that this has the *unfortunate* side-effect of locking out series which have gone long out of print, or are otherwise not available through legal channels. Even with that in mind, I don't want us to be in the business of maintaining a resource dedicated to those series if I can help it.
This will *also* have a knock-on effect on how many people come to the site, since they're not going to get an answer that will satisfy them, but I have *other* ideas on how to solve that...
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: It used to be called *General Reference*. The guidance for it can be found in [Are Some Questions Too Simple](https://stackoverflow.blog/2011/02/22/are-some-questions-too-simple/), which was written by <NAME> in 2012, but it proved to be problematic and was replaced with custom close reasons in 2013 as a result of [The War of the Closes](https://stackoverflow.blog/2013/06/25/the-war-of-the-closes/) due to abuse.
A question could only truly be considered general reference if it could be found within the first few results of a reasonable internet search, and even then finding the answer on a search engine was merely the start of the General Reference closure test, and when taken in its entirety it also needed to be considered if there was any redeeming value in providing more information than the existing answer provided. If redeeming value could be found, then answering the question was supposed to be the preferred option over closure.
By directing people to our big list of resources, you only tell them where they can start looking for a show. It does not tell you which services actually have it, and what you are proposing looks as if people should have to sort through a dozen of links, and perform *dozens of searches* on each service until they discover if the show is licensed or not. That is a few dozen times more effort than the General Reference standard was ever meant to require of our questioners. That is not to mean a given question, such as where to watch Dragonball Z legally would not be General Reference, as the first result in an internet search, [should lead you directly to Funimation's website where it can be watched](https://www.funimation.com/shows/dragon-ball-z/), but it is to suggest that it would have needed to be decided on a case by case basis depending upon the availability of the show, and other factors such as where the viewer is trying to watch it, since legal sources vary from region to region.
It is also for this reason that it is not a good candidate for *duplicate closure*, which is more or less an extension of General Reference, except for existing answers on Stack Exchange. In [The Wikipedia of Long Tail Programming Questions](https://stackoverflow.blog/2011/01/05/the-wikipedia-of-long-tail-programming-questions/), Stack Exchange co-founder and Chief Execuitive Officer [<NAME>](https://stackoverflow.blog/authors/spolsky/) has this to say about duplicates:
> If you’re going to close a user’s question as a duplicate, it has to be a real duplicate. For example, if a user asks, “What does the IP address 172.16.31.10/24 mean?” it’s OK to close that as a duplicate of a more general question like “What do IP addresses of the form a.b.c.d/e mean?” But it’s not OK to close it as a duplicate of a twenty-seven page guide to netmasks. That’s the moral equivalent of saying “[RTFM](http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=RTFM).” Stack Overflow is not meant to be a library of reference manuals. It’s supposed to contain the same information as a library of reference manuals, in the form of millions of questions and answers. Combined with Google, that gives us the magical power of a library of reference manuals you never have to read! It’s like, you got to the library, and there’s a wizard there at the door, and you ask your question, and, instead of being told to read a book, you just got (are you sitting down?) the actual answer!
This article is referenced in the network wide meta question [How Should Duplicates Be Handled](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10841/how-should-duplicate-questions-be-handled/10844#10844), and the guidance there is to only close real duplicates as duplicates, which I interpret to mean that the actual answer should be found there, not merely a lead to the answer. This makes a great deal of sense given that [the main reason we have duplicate closure](https://anime.stackexchange.com/help/duplicates) simply is not served like that:
>
> The fundamental goal of closing duplicate questions is to help people find the right answer by getting all of those answers in one place.
>
>
>
If you really think about it, it makes a great deal of sense, because with enough of a research effort, the answer to just about any question can already be found on the internet with *enough* of a research effort, but knowing what information is necessary to find the answer is of some value, as is putting in the effort to actually complete the steps necessary to complete the answer. Putting us out of a job like that is [one of the main fears people expressed when Gen. Ref. was proposed](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/86043/introduce-a-general-reference-close-reason). Knowing how to find information is a skill in and of itself.
There are another problem with the *close as a duplicate* suggestion as well. One such problem is that if we do not expressly close these questions as being directly off-topic, it implies that this is the sort of question we want to answer, but if we were to implement this particular sort of plan it would mean we do not want to answer these questions. The discrepancy may lead more people to ask us than we might see otherwise, and as a result, our archive of questions would be cluttered with off-topic information. I think it would be better to commit to answering these questions, or not answering these questions instead of trying to reach a potentially confusing compromise that might not satisfy anybody.
Additionally, what happens when our list of resources contains no legal source for the show whatsoever? What we have effectively done, by closing the question as a duplicate of the existing list, is send the questioner on a wild goose chase! This is contrary to the purpose of duplicate closure, which is to direct people to pre-existing answers, and frustrating enough to them as to merit being against the notion all on its own, even if the other points weren't factors.
I would like to nevertheless make one more final point, and that is that strictly speaking, Meta is not really supposed to be as an alternative form of Q. & A. for otherwise off-topic questions. Meta is supposed to be for discussing website policy, and how Stack Exchange Software works. *Strictly speaking*, everything else, including resource request topics, are off-topic questions. Please reference this [administrative note on this Meta-Latin S.E.](https://latin.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/103/should-we-make-a-canonical-resources-question/142#142) by the network's Director of Community Development [<NAME>o](https://stackoverflow.blog/authors/rcartaino/), and the following closure flag, which refers to [this help center page](https://english.stackexchange.com/help/whats-meta):
I think the problems that trying to harbor off-topic questions on meta would pose are similar to [the sorts of abuse Community Wiki questions posed](https://stackoverflow.blog/2011/08/19/the-future-of-community-wiki/), when they were still possible to ask, [prior to the feature's removal in late 2010](https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/11741/371286).
Now I opine that the existing topic is fine, since a rationale regarding why a list of *legal* resources is policy related could be devised: We should not be supplying links to illegal resources. That opens up the S.E. network to nasty [contributory infringement claims](https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/contributory_infringement), and while D.M.C.A. safe harbor protects them I have observed we had D.M.C.A. takedown problems in the past in the Maid Cafe. However, to close a question as a duplicate, you stated that we would have to migrate those other questions over to meta, where they certainly do not belong, and interfere with efforts of people trying to find relevant answers to relevant subjects. I think topics asked on meta should be on-topic for meta, and that we should only accept categories of questions on the main website if anywhere.
In conclusion, I do not think we should close these questions as duplicates, and what we should really be doing is asking ourselves if these topics are problematic, or relevant enough to our goals to merit answering here. I shall formally reserve my opinion on that matter for another topic, since I have already gone on long enough, feel as if I have exhausted what can be stated about what is being asked about here, and do not want to burden the voters with yet another point to consider while deciding to vote for, or against, this answer.
Also, here is an afterthought: None of this is meant to necessarily suggest that we should not direct people to the existing list of resources, but I think duplicates are the wrong tool for the job. I think [comments](https://anime.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment) are more apt for this purpose, since they may be used for "minor but transient information", such as "providing a link to a related question".
Upvotes: 2 |
2017/07/25 | 493 | 1,689 | <issue_start>username_0: Anime & Manga's [3rd moderator election](https://anime.stackexchange.com/election/3) has come to a close, the votes have been tallied, and the new moderator is:
[](https://anime.stackexchange.com/users/1458)
They'll be joining [the existing crew](https://anime.stackexchange.com/users?tab=moderators) shortly — please thank them for volunteering, and share your assistance and advice with them as they learn the ropes!
Also... Please join me in honoring [<NAME>](https://anime.stackexchange.com/users/27/madara-uchiha) and [<NAME>](https://anime.stackexchange.com/users/1530/toshinou-kyouko) as they lay down their weapons and don the garb of ordinary members after 4 and 2 years of service as moderators here.
For details on how the voting played out, you can download the election results [here](https://anime.stackexchange.com/election/3), or [view a summary report online](https://www.opavote.com/results/6044267751407616/0).<issue_comment>username_1: Congratulations Dimitri mx - I believe you'll make a fantastic moderator.
Thanks to <NAME> and <NAME> for sticking in there as mods. Your services are appreciated, and while it's unfortunate that you are stepping down, I believe that there are good reasons for such. Thanks again for your efforts here.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Congratulations Dimitri, I know you'll do a fine job.
Thanks for giving the chance to be a mod at this amazing community. It's been tough making the decision but I know I'm leaving the site in better hands.
Take care, and I'll be right next door ;)
Upvotes: 3 |
2017/08/13 | 3,498 | 14,875 | <issue_start>username_0: This is a [second time I'm asking this question](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3949/should-we-delete-the-remaining-id-questions-to-possibly-reduce-the-number-of-sti). Previously I asked it 9 months ago, but with how much time passed and the public opinion has had enough time to change, I thought I'd give it another go.
If you're active on the main site, you might have noticed that we've taken the task of deleting every incoming ID request and that it's like a 1/3 of all questions that we get.
See [Logan's answer for a list of possible actions](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3959/191). But to summarize, the main 2 options are:
* It's not that big a deal, let's not do anything about it;
* Delete all remaining locked IDs and hope Google ranks us way down on "identify anime" search results;
There are no guarantees that search engines will actually hide our site from those seeking to identify anime. But if it's that big a deal, we could try.
Are you annoyed enough by the still never-ending ID requests which we regularly delete? Is it not such a big deal? Let's discuss.<issue_comment>username_1: Nowadays it's more of a trickle than a flood, and the occurrence of it isn't as high as it was long ago. [I'm going to admit to only seeing the trickle](http://data.stackexchange.com/anime/query/709967/identification-esque-questions-which-are-still-alive) as SEDE [doesn't expose post history events to deleted questions](https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/286495/175248).
The larger issue is one I alluded to in my nomination answers: we're *weird* in an ecosystem of forums and discussion boards which very much allow those sorts of things. We can say that they're not allowed until we're blue in the face; they'll still keep coming through, little by little. How we've handled these things thus far has been satisfactory; nuking them on sight seems to have gotten the message across such that it's not *as* bad as it once *appeared* to be.
With that, I'd say let's finish the job. I did say at one point that I was tentatively in favor of it, but in all frankness, we don't want to maintain those kinds of answers nor do we want to entertain them either. We can nip questions about why they're still around and okay but the newer ones aren't okay in the bud with this, at least. Doubt it'll stop the questions from coming in, but it's worth a shot.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: As per what [username_1](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4094/1587) had already said we don't see so many ID Requests anymore.
However i would be against wiping out the remainder of the questions. the reason is because when we chose to get rid of most of them as apart of [Phase 3 of the phase out](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3839/1587) some people did loose reputation on the questions/answers that got deleted because of the questions and answers not meeting the requirements
>
> Please delete all "identification-requests" without a question score of 4 or higher AND at least an answer with a score of 3 or higher.
>
>
>
now while the "complaints" in the chat room i had saw about rep loss because of this may have been just joking about i would think some users may have taking it about more personally (after all, some people can really get hot and bothered when they loose rep [INSERT COMPLAINT SO.META QUESTION ON DOWNVOTING]).
if we delete these people could be loosing more rep than what they may have lost the first time. this can also add insult to injury after a bunch of questions/answers were removed by [a DMCA Request](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4050/1587). also it would be kinda unfair for those who put in the effort to post well received questions/answers only to loose the rep from them now just because a bunch of zero effort users ignored, and continue to ignore all the sign posts we stuck up. also no one can claim to have an [unobtainable tag badge](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2496/1587)
In regards to the concern about Google Ranking Anime and Manga higher up in "identify anime" or "what anime is this" i don't get Anime and Manga.SE on the first page. i would think that anyone who is putting in the time to check out more than the first Google Results Page will learn that id requests are off-topic here before posting.
if users are landing on one of the locked questions they should see the in use [identification-request](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/identification-request "show questions tagged 'identification-request'") tag, assume we allow them and try to use it only to get the message that it's black listed with the links back to Meta, if they still post their id request after this then they would have posted it anyway regardless of what we do (save some regex that 100% correctly ids an id request about to be posted and throws a fist out of the screen hitting the user and yells *"READ THE RULES!"*)
it is also my opinion that just like *"what anime?"* comments, because we are Anime and Manga related we will always get people who see random images or remember plots from when they were young and what to know the source. what stops us getting pointless *"what anime?"* comments is series tags and the rep requirement for comments.
>
> If you're active on the main site, you might have noticed that we've taken the task of deleting every incoming ID request and that it's like a 1/3 of all questions that we get.
>
>
>
while i can't say i am as active as some (ie. wasn't on at all for most of yesterday) the trickle of id requests i see isn't all that much, maybe 1 every few days? if these are a third of our new questions then this might speak to a bigger problem of us not getting enough questions to reduce this 1/3 to be like 1/5.
---
DISCLAIMER: i too would loose rep if all remaining id requests were deleted however i stand to only loose [22 rep](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/22689/is-this-a-shonen-jump-anime) which is chump change to me so i wouldn't be torn up loosing it
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: This question is predicated on a false premise, namely that we are still getting identification requests because we have strong SEO *specifically* for questions asking for anime/manga *identification*. That is a misunderstanding of how SEO works on SE sites.
By far the most crucial aspect of SEO is the presence of tags. Popular tags give keywords which are present on the questions they are tagged. Tagged questions link to the tag pages, which link back to all the questions with the tag. Google looks at the internal structure of the site and determines what the big topics are. For us, until early 2016, identification requests was one of the big topics.
None of that is happening with identification requests, which is ultimately the reason why we removed [identification-request](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/identification-request "show questions tagged 'identification-request'") in the first place. The tag barely even exists at this point, and there is no risk of it growing (in fact, as time passes it will shrink relative to the site as a whole). Google also updates regularly enough that we can't reasonably blame any form of caching. Individual posts in random tags will not have any big effect on SEO just from their titles. Indeed, I tried a few representative searches for things like "What is this anime?" or "Anime identification" and I never saw this site on the first page of results, except this single question once near the bottom of the first page of one search: [Where is this picture from? How do I use Reverse Image Search to find the source of an anime/manga image?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/21618). If you want to propose doing something specific with that question, such as locking or deleting it, I think that deserves a separate meta post, as it isn't *really* an identification question at all.
So if we aren't optimized *specifically* for identification questions, why do they keep showing up? The answer is simpler than you think. It's because that's still a common type question people on the internet as a whole want to ask about anime/manga. We're no longer targeting identification questions specifically, but we are still targeting people who want to ask questions about anime/manga generally. And a lot of those questions *are* identification questions. Like it or not, that fact should be obvious to anyone who was on the site when they were allowed. Even if we remove every reference to identification questions from the site, the rate of incoming identification questions might drop 10%, but it would not drop to 0. Even in the early days of the site, when we had barely any external traffic, identification questions occasionally showed up, and not because of any SEO-related phenomena (the tag then, as now, was not one of the top ones); they will continue to appear occasionally as long as this site exists and regardless of anything we try to do to preempt them.
---
So what can we do? We could try to kill all SEO for anime/manga questions in general. Which would basically amount to deleting the site, as far as search engines are concerned. Obviously we aren't ever going to seriously consider this, but it's the only way to completely eliminate incoming identification questions.
We could remove [identification-request](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/identification-request "show questions tagged 'identification-request'") from the 27 remaining questions that use it. However I suspect at this point the tag (which is not even in the top 50 tags on the tag page) is doing more good than harm, by announcing that identification questions are no longer permitted and giving an error message when users try to use this. I suspect this is why, concurrent to the overall drop-off in identification questions, we have seen them become low quality spammy questions: the askers who wanted to ask serious high quality identification questions and put work into asking well tend to see this and withhold their questions, leaving only the ones who are not willing to put much effort in. Almost anything we do to reach them and preempt them from asking is likely to be in vain for that reason.
We could change the titles of the remaining identification questions to be less obviously identification-related. Like I said above, I suspect this would only affect things at the 10% level or so, not completely eliminating the remaining trickle of identification questions. I'd be open to suggestions in this direction, but personally I don't understand the details of SEO enough to know what kinds of changes would affect the situation, and it seems equally possible to make the situation better or worse with a move like this, so I don't think it makes much sense.
---
Or we can keep doing what we're doing. It's not a big deal at all that occasionally someone asks a question that we don't take and we have to click a few buttons to close it and remove it. The questions are removed quickly and there's no lingering effect, so basically no harm done to the site. Unless you spend a lot of time in the chat room or review queues, you'd never even see 90% of them. It's by far the easiest moderation we ever have to do on the site. If annoyance over needing to moderate identification questions is the main motivation here, the only way way we ever could have avoided that was to *not* ban the questions (or even restrict them); deciding to ban identification requests was *exactly* a decision to moderate the new ones that show up. The community decided that the effect the questions were having was worth the extra sustained moderation effort to remove them, and so we just have to keep removing them.
Of course, we also should not forget the negative effects of removing hundreds of well-written, answered questions from the site as well. Some of the information in the identification requests we've closed is not available in any form anywhere else. Some of it is linked to from this site or externally and some have thousands or even tens of thousands of views. Most of the questions that remain are well written and solidly answered (contrasted to the reason we banned the type of question, because a lot of them were poorly written and fundamentally unanswerable). The fact that we no longer accept more questions of this type does not mean that we should destroy good content that they contributed when it was allowed, nor is it a license to ignore that content.
Additionally, removing such posts would delete most of the tags that were newly created based on the resolution of the previous request, harming the overall accessibility of the site (and wasting many hours of senshin's time). Based on [this query](https://data.stackexchange.com/anime/query/668009) that's over 200 tags, which is quite a large number, over 10% of all the tags on the site if I counted correctly. In my mind, accessibility is one of our greatest issues, especially as SE has provided next-to no technical support to make it easy for new users on sites like ours to ask questions that may not yet have appropriate tags despite acknowledging this problem years ago. Deleting all those tags again just because we still have a (completely expected and predictable) incoming trickle of identification questions seems like a huge overreaction.
When identification were allowed, many people were working very hard to improve those questions and answer them, and the ones that are still around (and historically locked) represent the best of that effort. Now that they're disallowed, I think having to click 4 or 5 times, taking 10-20 seconds apiece, to close vote such a question a couple times a week (reading the question is barely even required, and the close notice is clear enough that commenting isn't necessary) doesn't even register as a real problem, and certainly not one that we ought to be removing hundreds of old posts over.
---
In any case, if the real worry is that a sizable fraction of the incoming questions are identification questions, I think it is ultimately more productive to ask what we can do to improve the existing allowed questions and attract more questions (including asking more ourselves). The overall quality of the site as a reference has nothing to do with what fraction of incoming questions get deleted immediately; it has to do with the quality and quantity of good questions and answers that stick around. We should think more about what we can do to increase those numbers (especially since the raw question/day numbers have dropped dramatically due to the removal of identification requests as well as some very popular series ending) and less about the occasional bad questions that take 10 seconds to deal with.
Upvotes: 3 |
2017/08/19 | 999 | 4,349 | <issue_start>username_0: There's been a lot of mentions that we're losing new question numbers and that we should do something to improve the situation on the site. How do you think we should do that?
Points of interest:
* Increase the number of new questions;
* Improve the quality of questions and answers through editing;
* Attract more active users who would be interested in doing all 3;
Post your propositions, or perhaps explain why none of this is really necessary :p<issue_comment>username_1: In my opinion, we shouldn't artificially inflate the "questions asked per day" stat by asking questions which nobody has asked before due to how simple/obvious the answer is. That would seriously bring down the site's quality and turn it into [something bad for very unintelligent people]. If a question needs to be asked, it will be asked naturally by others.
It's true that some of the more active series have ended for which people could have had questions, so I don't think it's unusual to see fewer questions these days. IMO it's just how it is and the site works perfectly fine in this regard.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I had intended to write something up a week after the mod election, but then life happened. That's how life goes, but...
For those of us actively following the seasons, we could author questions that ask about plot holes with the series. Many of these can't just be figured out by watching the show (namely, a few of them in Alice and Zoroku), so I feel like questions like this would be beneficial.
However...I find myself largely agreeing with username_1's point. Artificially inflating the questions asked count isn't going to accomplish anything. However, if we ask meaningful and impactful questions about current series (or even a few classics), then it wouldn't be artificial.
I want to stress, in an Anime/Manga ecosystem where most sites allow discussion, opinion, and conjecture on the front pages, we come across as very weird in that we only want verifiable facts or educated guesses at all, and there's no room for chit-chat. We're ***not*** going to attract the vast majority of casual participants here **just** by existing; we may have to look at what it took for other sites to sustain a following, like Movies and TV.
I still get the impression that we're looking for what suits our style best. We're a Q&A site that wants good questions and great answers. It'd be valuable to add more great answers (analogous to <NAME>anaka's proposal), but I think to get the ball rolling, we need to ask good questions, too.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I think we should improve the quality of existing questions with citations and encourage proper sourcing. We should also feature good questions as a role model of what a good answer is.
We should start focusing on the quality of answers and less on the quantity. No one is interested in a Q&A site where most of the information is quoted or copied from tertiary sources. Many of the top answered questions are well researched and/or referenced question with primary or secondary sources. Edits to grammar and spelling can also help improve the readability and eloquence of answers as well, encouraging more upvotes.
Let's work building and encouraging these types of question. It's understandable that this is a recreational stack site and users aren't as serious about participation. Our user base can be lazy at times, but can produce some impressive content when motivated. Lets start encouraging that.
I think we should start taking our answers serious. If we can demonstrate that we can provide quality answers, we can leverage the high page rank traffic we get from being a SE site to spread the word about us.
What we can start doing is getting together and finding gems of answers and award bounties. This will spotlight good answer that might not have gotten much attention and award rep to the user. Perhaps do this on a weekly to monthly basis, coordinated on meta. The answers could come from community suggestions and moderation staff picks (or both). It should be alright to award previously bountied questions as well since things can get buried as time passes.
I believe its best to focus on what we already have and do well and use that as a beacon to light the way for future content and users.
Upvotes: 2 |
2017/10/20 | 1,816 | 7,771 | <issue_start>username_0: Right now the text of it is this:
>
> Identification questions are off-topic, because they tend to attract low-quality and low-effort posts. The community has decided to no longer support these questions. Please refer to [this meta post](http://meta.anime.stackexchange.com/questions/2805/what-wed-like-to-do-about-those-gosh-darn-identification-requests-questions) for additional details.
>
>
>
The meta post it links to explains why IDs are not allowed, but doesn't immediately offer help. It should.
Let's change the "why" to "how can I still get my answer".
This meta post was proposed in chat: [Where else can I go for identification help?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2488/where-else-can-i-go-for-identification-help)
If you have other meta posts in mind for this, or if you think we should create a new very minimalistic meta post for people who we know don't like to read much, you're welcome to post below.<issue_comment>username_1: The main worry that I have is that (to use programmer terminology) this creates an extra "dependency" on a meta post. That forces us to keep the meta post useful, complete, and up to date, which is not an easy task. Right now the [suggested meta post](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2488/where-else-can-i-go-for-identification-help) hasn't been updated in 2 years. When it was written, we *still allowed identification requests*. The answers focused on what was wrong at the time with a single user's particular questions (which were notably low-effort and came in large numbers) and what would need to be changed to have them be allowed here. The situation has changed drastically since then, and 90% of the content in the answers there will not help a user here who is looking to ask identification questions. The one useful piece of content is 2 links to other sites which are claimed to accept identification questions, but little direction is presented for how to acceptably ask there. So it already fails on the "useful" mark.
We could alleviate that by writing a new meta post that would actually be useful (or editing the old one but a new one seems more appropriate). Specifically, we could list in answers various other sites that allow identification questions and their policies on them. A complete list would have much more than 2 sites. I don't know all sites which allow identification questions but I can think of at least 5 which are relatively big.
Overall this would be a fair bit of effort, but we wouldn't be done yet. In all likelihood the situation here will not change substantially for *years*. There is no suggestion to unban identification requests that I can see, and [as I've argued before](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4096/24) it seems likely that the incoming ones aren't going to slow down much no matter what we do because they're coming from people who aren't bothering to read directions (which are very clear and easy to find). Hence, the meta post will be relevant for years, and so we also have to keep the meta post up to date. If those sites change policies, we have to stay up to date on that and edit the post. Given what I've seen in the past here, it's very likely that we won't keep it completely up to date for years (which isn't intended as criticism; this is just not the type of content SE does well with). At that point, we're doing a disservice to anyone who reads the post, because they can get better, more up-to-date information from Google easily.
As I argued in the comments above, the users who come here asking ID requests have already demonstrated that they aren't likely to read directions, so spending a lot of effort on trying to write more directions for them is probably not worth the effort. For the few who do honestly ask for help finding other places (in comments, meta, or chat), we can make suggestions. However, I think making a canonical source for those and linking to it in the UI will just end up creating a lot more work for us that will ultimately not even make much difference. Actually if they have enough information for the question to be answerable, we can usually just direct them to chat and it's likely someone can answer, and if not we can at least provide better guidance on where else to ask than a mostly static meta post.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: If we don't support a subset of questions, we should not be encouraging users to do so elsewhere. While there may be communities more suited for much discussions. We shouldn't out right make it someone else's problem.
There will always be low effort users that don't bother with the tour or even getting to know our site before asking or answering. Ignorance by new users is am unavoidable given no matter how prepared a community is. They will get mad, they will make excuses, they may even try to argue themselves to be the exception. The close reason we have right now is us drawing the line. We've dealt with and tried to reason with these questions, but it was a losing one no matter how hard we tried.
Identifying tip of the tongue questions require a fair amount of deductive reasoning and prior knowledge, a specialized skill that may not come naturally to many. In the past identifications requests have been polarized to many users, and eventually became tedious to some. The reason why identification questions are still allowed in chat is in order to form a rapport with these users can affect your willingness to interact and work together. It's a how smaller teams that work closely have better productivity than remote teams. Informal communication plays a large part in getting past social barriers. The better you know these users the more willing you may be to help them, most of the time at least.
This community is still relatively in size (for a variety of reasons) and really has no real goal in mind except to help fans enjoy the all aspects of anime and manga, plus its subculture. That being said we can't possibly cover everything, we are limited to what our community can manage.
I'm all for helping those that make an effort to contribute. But there's a line between helping and efforts akin to spoon feeding. We can only work with what tools and resources we already have. At the moment these I don't think this seem to be a noteworthy issue to be addressed. There backlogs of anime that need trimming for some people, much more worthwhile investment of time and effort, coupled with a spot of tea.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: **Update**: I added the link to [What identification requests are acceptable here? Otherwise, where else can I possibly get helped with it?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4189) on [What we'd like to do about those gosh darn "identification requests" questions](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2805) (the meta post on the current close banner).
---
This is (a bit?) late, but there's a more recent meta post providing alternatives to ID request: [What identification requests are acceptable here? Otherwise, where else can I possibly get helped with it?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4189) (disclosure: I wrote it).
The post should have covered most kinds of off-topic ID requests. Otherwise, anyone is free to improve it.
Anyway, I have manually posted "canned" comments on some posts that look like on-topic on other SE sites, or otherwise on outside of SE, and I observed some users (although minimal) reposted their question on the correct site and getting answered correctly.
So, I'd propose that meta post be *at least* included somewhere (either on the close-reason banner or on the currently linked meta post) to allow a kind of self-service for them.
Upvotes: 2 |
2017/11/23 | 4,300 | 17,803 | <issue_start>username_0: Some people on SciFi.SE seem willing to accept identification request [and is asking on their meta if the community wants](https://scifi.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11552/23127).
As for now, we don't have the option to properly migrate them. Should we migrate science fiction and fantasy related identification requests to SciFi.SE?<issue_comment>username_1: I think a lot of our users here want nothing to do with ID requests anymore, and we wouldn't mind if they (SciFi users) filtered through them and took what they like. (comment if you disagree)
Migration requires 5 votes (if I'm not mistaken), but I don't think anyone here wants to think about whether it's a worthy question to migrate. Because there is a "don't migrate crap" policy and SciFi has their own set of rules for ID request quality, this is kind of a headache.
If the SciFi users really want this to happen, they'll have to follow all of our newly posted questions. In chat, [Sakamoto](https://chat.stackexchange.com/users/-179/sakamoto?tab=recent) does this for our room, and they could also subscribe to the same feed in their chat room to monitor new questions. Then SciFi users would have to come and vote to migrate if they deem it useful.
So this is a way to enable this without requiring any extra action from our users or moderators.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: **Yes, absolutely we should take them up on their offer.** Having to close and delete ID questions is a hassle, but that doesn't mean that we can't still take a few extra seconds to point those users to somewhere they might find help.
As has been pointed out, waiting for a five user quorum (for a formal migration) is probably the wrong way to go with this. Since these questions are *definitely going to be deleted* (and hence there will be little controversy over them being migrated instead of deleted), it's far simpler to have the moderators use their powers to move them over as soon as they're seen **by raising a custom moderator flag on them.**
>
> **"*Hey moderator, this would be a good fit for SFF and should be migrated*"**
>
>
>
---
What can we flag to migrate?
----------------------------
Anything that meets the following three simple-to-understand conditions;
* **Contains science fiction or fantasy content**
* **Not Hentai / Animated pornography**
* **Appears to contain a uniquely identifiable question** (so "*Help. I'm trying to remember a story about a giant robot*" would be a no but "*Help. What is this story about a giant robot called an Eva*" would be a yes)
If there are any problems, the migration will simply get rejected but as long as you've followed the three rules above, the chances of that happening are next to zero.
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: If SF&F wants these questions (god knows why they would), I am happy to kick any new ones we get that are sufficiently science-fictional or fantastical over to them.
I do not support opening a formal migration path (i.e. making SF&F a migration target available to non-moderator close-voters) at this time. For the time being, it would be better for migration candidates to be identified in the following ways:
* users see potential migration candidates and cast custom flags indicating they should be migrated to SF&F
* I and other moderators directly migrate candidates to SF&F if we catch them before they are deleted
* I (and possibly other moderators) look through our closed/deleted questions every so often (maybe a couple times a week) for candidates that got wiped out before we had a chance to look at them, and evaluate them for undeletion + migration as appropriate
If this works, we can then work on opening a formal migration path and encouraging non-moderator close-voters to directly migrate without need for moderator intervention.
---
I do have some concerns about this. Chief among them is SF&F's requirement that the identification request "Appears to contain a uniquely identifiable question". This is a nebulous and ill-defined requirement. We have had various debates about similar requirements on *this* site (back before we'd banned id-reqs altogether), and my stance has always been that one simply cannot know (in the vast majority of cases) whether the text of an id-req uniquely identifies a single work. I will make a good-faith attempt to guess whether a question uniquely identifies a single work (or whether such information could be coaxed out of the asker with nominal effort), but it is entirely possible that my sense will not align with SF&F's voters' senses and we will get a lot of rejected migrations as a result.
Also, to be blunt, our id-reqs have historically been substantially lower-quality than SF&F's and you're probably not going to like them once they start appearing on your site. Doubly so, given that the id-reqs we get *these days* are exclusively from people who have no presence on this site and have not read any of the site rules, and hence are probably not inclined towards putting substantial effort into their questions.
---
But anyway, tl;dr: my take is that users should cast custom flags for migration, and we'll look at them. (Not starting immediately, though; we should wait a bit for our two metas to settle into a consensus. We moderators are also discussing this matter amongst ourselves [as, at least initially, it would be us upon whom the burden of this migration stuff would fall].)
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: I do not think we we should. I see no benefit at all in a migration path. It just puts more effort on the moderation staff to handle all the things, as regardless of infrequently as these questions occur. As many have mentioned in the comments, it puts lot of unnecessary burden on the moderation staff.
If people are adamant about this happening, I'd suggest for certain conditions for migration. If SFF.SE wants our identification-type questions that fit their criteria, they will need to establish a set of clearly definable criteria and actively request questions for migration on a case by case basis. It is not the responsibility if the moderation staff to actively monitor and migrate these questions.
If users from the other communities would like our off-topic questions, they should make an attempt to participate in our community for them. If we wanted something similar from their community, I would ask for the same amount of participation from our users.
The moderators have dealt with these questions for almost 3 years and a quite weary of them. We're familiar with how a vast majority of the question are not very comprehensible or sometimes even relevant to anime.
We allow questions on the topic of hentai, as long as it does not involve explicit material or details (yes, it gets tricky to draw the line, but we manage), as it violates the content policy. Without a set criteria it's hard to say what works and what doesn't. Different communities do things differently after all. How some users define "fantasy" is questionably subjective in my opinion. Talking animals doing human like thing can be considered "fantasy-like", while something setting like *Charlotte's Web* might not. Ambiguity and subjectivity will just more difficult for everyone in the long run.
The Stack Exchange community works the way it does thanks to it's community and users. If there is a set criteria to match questions appropriate for migration, I don't see the problem with it, if community pitches in to help.
Additionally, there is no merit in the migration of historically locked questions. The whole reason they are locked and not completely deleted is to reminded users of the deprecated nature of these question.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: Just gonna leave a couple of thoughts here.
First, it doesn't seem reasonable to me for this community and its mods to have to take the burden of quality controlling these questions for another community, since they've been considered off-topic here. If SF&F found a way to make it work for them, awesome — but it shouldn't be expected for this community to go around and make sure questions check all the boxes in SF&F's quality guidelines for these types of questions.
It would also be unreasonable, however, to just migrate everything wholesale there, since most of the id-req stuff that gets posted here is low-quality (one of the reasons we ended up doing away with 'em).
Both of those reasons seem like pretty good reasons not to enable the migration path, to me.
Now, that being said, I do know that there's some overlap between users of both communities... so if anyone who is really active at SF&F and familiar with their guidelines sees something here they definitely think is a good fit there, great! **Leave a comment** suggesting the asker re-post their question on SF&F (and delete the one they posted here).
[As username_1 mentions](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4134/49), you can always follow our bot in the main chat room, and drop some guidance when something interesting that'd be a good fit on SF&F is found.
This way, the question isn't orphaned: if the asker cares enough to join a new site and re-ask it, they probably also care enough to stick around and respond to clarifications, add necessary details, *accept a correct answer if one arises...*
And if they're *already* gone, no additional work is needed - we can just neatly leave it in our curb until the garbage man comes by... that is, [the community deletes it](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2824/49).
[username_2 mentions](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4133/should-we-migrate-scifi-related-identification-request-to-scifi-se?cb=1#comment8368_4134) we delete these new questions too quickly for anyone to react, though. Well... that's great, to be honest! Because it means we clean up our front page real quick :) But, to the point of this discussion: the close reason can always be *slightly* edited, so it gently points these users to SF&F — I don't *think* it'd make everyone who asks these questions here go there, but some of the most attentive ones might... and hopefully that's the subset of people who ask better quality id-reqs? IT could, however, have the exact same result as dumping all of these questions on SF&F, so I'm not so sure it'd be a great idea.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: No
--
The proposal is reasonable on paper but **unrealistic** in terms of grounds for execution.
The benefits are too small for Anime.SE - which already banned this type of questions after having dealt with them for long enough to identify it as **problematic** - to be worth the effort.
The questions in concern are **not dire** for migration - If a question is closed but meets the standards for Sci-Fi, the question askers can already be manually redirected as-is.
Handling identification requests to decide if they're worth migrating shouldn't be the problem of that of our moderators and/or reviewers. However, the linked discussion thread on Sci-Fi.Meta.SE includes the following points:
>
> Anime's own users and mods will do some quality control for us, ensuring that inappropriate questions (such as those that don't contain any SFF content) won't get migrated over.
>
>
>
>
> We've had a TON of migration discussions on SO, and they inevitably break down because the target site gets a lot of rejected migrations. Invariably, what will happen is it will promote the lowest common denominator. "Oh, a story ID question. Off to SFF you go!", only to have us now do more work to close the ones not in the rules.
>
>
>
>
> if ID questions are getting closed over there that would be upvoted and answered over here, then there's no reason not to deprive those questions' OPs of getting their answers.
>
>
>
These quotes outline the two main problems behind the migration option:
1. It is an **idealistic implementation** with the hopes that our users can identify questions that are worth Sci-Fi.SE's users' time. However the last major thing we have been able to decide is that **they aren't worth our own time** (even after trying to improve and fix them), so our users are not likely to re-learn **a new set of quality guidelines** for identification questions that we've already tried before and has in no way worked out, not barely.
2. This generates **unnecessary work** as a side effect. Where as currently "identification questions are off-topic, because they tend to attract low-quality and low-effort posts", the proposal has not addressed the problems (why do you want floods of low-quality and/or low-effort posts?) (edit: have not appeared to discuss in regards to remedying the problems to be worth the effort) and wants our questions that are fantasy-related. This leads to every new identification request having to be scanned for fantasy, it's not a trivial amount of work for a pool of questions that Sci-Fi users have no promise to fix into shape.
---
Conclusion: Implementing the migration path appears to be a liability, and as there is no compromise to be made, it doesn't seem like a good solution. However, as with all solutions, they should be implemented to solve a problem. While a migration path is not a good solution, there may exist others when the problem is identified.
Identification questions has made up a large percentage of our regular "income" before they were banned, so there is definitely a "market" there but there needs to be more realistic ways to get questions over to Sci-Fi (while taking into account that we want all of them out of here without worrying about fine grains).
I can't imagine that Sci-Fi isn't already getting its fair share of animated fantasy works and the existing field there is healthy. Implementing this migration path without solid promise for their users to be doing the work to fix them into shape would only pollute this small haven and waste both of our communities' time.
---
Addendum: Recently, some users (should this even be plural? I didn't notice if they were the same persons) have been manually redirecting question askers for the possibility of reposting their question there. [You can judge the results for yourself.](https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/story-identification+anime?sort=newest)
---
Post script: I didn't realize what a migration path meant, I assumed the discussion was surrounding opening a new close vote option for all reviewers. While I think that good questions that could find a home on Sci-Fi.SE safely may be worth migrating to on a case to case basis, it shouldn't be Anime.SE's job to identify them.
Post-post script: I was right in assuming what a migration path meant, ignore this block. As things are now, manual migration by moderators is already possible.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_7: Y'know, I'm late to the conversation and I'm late to how this has panned out, but from my perspective we've been doing this for at least most of December.
My take on this:
I *hate* it.
============
I hate the idea of giving another community the detritus that we genuinely didn't want. It makes me think that we're giving them hand-me-downs that have been utterly ruined in ways both imaginable and unimaginable.
I hate the idea of catering to a demographic of user who is only here for an *instant*, who only want to engage based on this one premise, and will not add positively to any community. I get that I'm painting a group of people with a broad brush, but [there is some data to back me up on this.](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1193/do-identification-request-questions-attract-users-that-dont-contribute-to-the-s)
I hate even thinking that these questions are suitable for Stack Exchange's Q&A style ***period***, given that they're really...not. This gets to the heart of asking what the purpose really *is* for SciFi.SE.
I hate the idea of migrating what essentially is grunt work; even if the other side of the fence is willing to accept it, it feels like a non-trivial amount of effort for a trivial gain.
---
I feel like identification questions have no real value anywhere that they go. I genuinely fear that SciFi may run into the same fork in the road that we did three or so years ago with them. Learn from our lesson; **don't accept any more.** It's not going to make your community any better. It's not going to make *ours* any better for sending them over since it won't change the fact that we get them at all. For those who think that this'll lead to users shifting their attention to SciFi instead...given how often they contribute to the site *after* they ask an identification question, I have *strong* doubts.
---
To go a bit more into providing some data, (at the time of writing) I have access to the stats for migrated questions.
In the last 90 days (from 2 January 2018):
* 10 questions have been migrated to SciFi.SE
Of those 10 questions:
* All of them score above zero
+ 2 score above 10
* ***None*** of the OPs have registered accounts on the site after migration (a problem for a site trying to become full-fledged, may be less of a problem for already full-fledged sites)
* 6 have at least one answer
+ 2 have more than one answer
To put that into perspective with Area 51's applicable metrics, which are:
* An average of 2.5 answers per question
* 90% of questions answered
The migrated questions have:
* An average of **0.9 answers per question**
* **60% of questions answered**
I entirely recognize that this is early days and that these are a small sample set. However, I'm not convinced that just accepting these questions from us is going to be the best approach here, nor do I feel like it's going to improve either community in the long run.
Upvotes: 2 |
2018/01/29 | 928 | 3,717 | <issue_start>username_0: It's almost February in 2018, which isn't supposed to be the proper time to cycle these, but for this year it'll be once again, so we'll be refreshing the **Community Promotion Ads** for this year now!
### What are Community Promotion Ads?
Community Promotion Ads are community-vetted advertisements that will show up on the main site, in the right sidebar. The purpose of this question is the vetting process. Images of the advertisements are provided, and community voting will enable the advertisements to be shown.
### Why do we have Community Promotion Ads?
This is a method for the community to control what gets promoted to visitors on the site. For example, you might promote the following things:
* the site's twitter account
* review blogs and research websites to keep on top of each new season
* events, meetups, and conventions
* anything else your community would genuinely be interested in
The goal is for future visitors to find out about *the stuff your community deems important*. This also serves as a way to promote information and resources that are *relevant to your own community's interests*, both for those already in the community and those yet to join.
### Why do we reset the ads every year?
Some services will maintain usefulness over the years, while other things will wane to allow for new faces to show up. Resetting the ads every year helps accommodate this, and allows old ads that have served their purpose to be cycled out for fresher ads for newer things. This helps keep the material in the ads relevant to not just the subject matter of the community, but to the current status of the community. We reset the ads once a year, every December.
The community promotion ads have no restrictions against reposting an ad from a previous cycle. If a particular service or ad is very valuable to the community and will continue to be so, it is a good idea to repost it. It may be helpful to give it a new face in the process, so as to prevent the imagery of the ad from getting stale after a year of exposure.
### How does it work?
The answers you post to this question *must* conform to the following rules, or they will be ignored.
1. All answers should be in the exact form of:
```
[![Tagline to show on mouseover][1]][2]
[1]: http://image-url
[2]: http://clickthrough-url
```
Please **do not add anything else to the body of the post**. If you want to discuss something, do it in the comments.
2. The question must always be tagged with the magic [community-ads](/questions/tagged/community-ads "show questions tagged 'community-ads'") tag. In addition to enabling the functionality of the advertisements, this tag also pre-fills the answer form with the above required form.
### Image requirements
* The image that you create must be 300 x 250 pixels, or double that if high DPI.
* Must be hosted through our standard image uploader (imgur)
* Must be GIF or PNG
* No animated GIFs
* Absolute limit on file size of 150 KB
* If the background of the image is white or partially white, there must be a 1px border (2px if high DPI) surrounding it.
### Score Threshold
There is a **minimum score threshold** an answer must meet (currently **6**) before it will be shown on the main site.
You can check out the ads that have met the threshold with basic click stats [here](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/ads/display/4144).<issue_comment>username_1: [](https://twitter.com/StackAnime)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: [](https://movies.stackexchange.com/)
Upvotes: 3 |
2018/03/13 | 1,510 | 6,411 | <issue_start>username_0: Whatever the question is, a lot of questions don't get answers because people seem uninterested in it. These questions have one particular thing in common: The user has only 1 rep as a starter, and, the question's time of asking is almost the same as the time when the account is made, so it looks like the account was made for that question only.
That means that people tend to think that the user will probably not follow up and may not even accept an answer. When it may look like the user made the account only for that question, and the question looks rushed, I thought that maybe users with 1 rep should not be able to ask.
I see the point of having them ask or answer at 1 rep, as <NAME> pointed out in the answer below, but that is not exactly what I am trying to say. I am saying that just like tag wiki's low-rep-user edits, they are only visible to the poster until peer-reviewed.
Can we not maintain the site better if we implement that here on anime.stackexchange?
---
**EDIT:**
Let me just summarise what I want to say.
Why are first posts that are still in review queue visible on the main page? Just like tag wiki's, if a user has not enough reputation then it is only visible to the user himself/herself until peer reviewed. Similarly, if I don't have enough reputation and I edit a question, it will only be visible to me until peer reviewed.
So why aren't first posts treated in the same way?<issue_comment>username_1: Say you have a question, burning away at you as you can't seem to find any answer regarding it on the web. However, you managed to find this site advertising as a Q&A specialized in the area you want to ask this question about. You take some time to register and end up with unable to ask your question as you start off with not enough reputation to ask.
*would you have used that site?* *I sure wouldn't have*.
Users with 1 reputation can ask questions, as that is what this site is meant for, Q&A. Everybody starts off with just 1 reputation, and reputation only gives an indication of how much the community trusts you. However keep in mind
[Reputation is entirely optional](https://anime.stackexchange.com/help/whats-reputation)
>
> **Reputation is a rough measurement of how much the community trusts you;** it is earned by convincing your peers that you know what you’re talking about. The more reputation you earn, the more privileges you gain and the more tools you'll have access to on the site - at the highest privilege levels, you'll have access to many of the same tools available to the site moderators. That is intentional. We don’t run this site; the community does!
>
>
>
Nobody is perfect, and neither do we expect perfection in the first question asked, or any to follow. We hope people take the time to learn about A&M as a Q&A site through [our tour](https://anime.stackexchange.com/tour) and maybe even take the time to look through the [help center](https://anime.stackexchange.com/help). And over time develop the skills to ask good questions, and give good answers.
However, we as a community should try and help new members. Either by guiding them to the right resources, helping them by editing their questions to be acceptable by our norms, or pointing out through comments how they can improve.
This sometimes can be frustrating, as good answers might never be accepted. However, having an accepted answer or even gaining reputation should not be the goal. But as also mentioned on the about page:
>
> With your help, we're working together to build a library of detailed answers to every question about anime and manga.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: There's no reason we should be gatekeeping new users from a Q&A, unless they are spamming, consistent posting poor quality content, or something else that undermines the productivity if the site. Everyone should be given a chance to ask and answer questions on the Stack Exchange family of sites, regardless of age, race, or creed.
Certain site privileges need to be peer reviewed in order to maintain a consistent level of quality. Not everyone can be mature, it this applies many folds to fans of anime and manga fans as the demographic is made up of younger people.
The ability to ask and answer is the most basic of privileges given to new users so they go about using the site and it's community. A certain degree of trust is given to these new users that they will follow proper netiquette when going about asking and answering. By requiring new post to be peer review you remove this trust and assume most users are not up to your level standards. This is can be considered a selfish and may deter new users from joining and participating in your community. New users are the lifeblood of communities, without newcomer communities will stagnate. Users come and go all the time, like the wind. Sometimes they bring good things, other times the inverse is true. Its better to be welcoming to new users as you don't know what they might be able to bring to your community. Maybe they have a question about something you never thought about but find interesting, or maybe they asked something about a long forgotten series you enjoyed or forgot about.
We live in a world that's mostly about give and take. But there are times that its better to give first and take later. In our case, we are giving new users the opportunity to ask appropriate, on-topic questions freely, and perhaps have them answered just as freely. A few might stick around abd contribute to the site and community. It's an idealistic scenario, but we're not a serious community, nor are we treated as such other Stack Exchange communities. It's a place to take things easy and have some fun. We're a recreational Q&A site on the topic of imported Japanese media. Just as veteran fans don't have the right to tell other new or casual whether of not they are actual fans, we don't have the right to tell new users if they're questions/answers are acceptable or not.
Not everyone can ask or right good questions. Its up to the community to help the users. The Stack Exchange network is built upon the backs of their community. Elitism is abound on the bigger sites, but as we are now, we are neither big nor small. We're at a turning point, and its up to the community to decide what to do or how to go about from here.
Upvotes: 2 |
2018/05/11 | 2,950 | 11,904 | <issue_start>username_0: A [related question](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3939/do-we-think-questions-about-where-to-read-watch-legal-anime-or-manga-are-accep) asks if such questions are on topic. Result:
>
> All of these questioned should be marked as a duplicate of [this question](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/922/how-can-i-tell-if-a-site-is-legal/923#923).
>
>
>
Problem is, apparently we cannot mark questions on the main site as duplicate of questions on meta. On the other side, I cannot simply refer to the meta site in answer (see e.g. [this question](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/46981/where-can-i-watch-stream-english-subbed-yu-gi-oh-duel-monsters#autocomment61169)), my answer gets marked as trivial and the question remains open.
So the only insightful answer one could possibly give is an answer about site *specializing* in X, which seems to be very rare. In all other cases the question cannot be answered, except by repeating the list of the linked meta question or adding general entries (which may turn out to be illegal, or, if not, could just be added to the meta post).
On top of that, this kind of question is a list question and thereby not good by normal SE standards anyway.
---
The [help center](https://anime.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic) currently reads as such:
>
> Questions **requesting illegal or copyrighted information**: *Where can I watch anime X online? Where can I download chapters of manga Y?*
>
>
>
I hereby propose to change it to the following
>
> Questions **requesting illegal and/or copyrighted material**: *Where can I watch anime X online? Where can I download chapters of manga Y?* For a list of resources, see [here](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/922/how-can-i-tell-if-a-site-is-legal/923#923).
>
>
>
With that change in place, questions like [this one](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/46981/where-can-i-watch-stream-english-subbed-yu-gi-oh-duel-monsters#autocomment61169) can be faithfully be closed as off-topic. I think that this change will help this SE in the long term.
---
EDIT: To clarify, I don't say anyone asking for a read/watch source is looking for an illegal source. I say we should just ban the "legal" questions of this kind, too. At the other meta post, Gao had some good words:
>
> You could potentially ask this question for every tag there is/ever will be and in most cases they wouldn't be of interest to more than a few people. Heck, these kinds of questions don't even enrich our understanding of a series or anime/manga in general. They aren't even fun. Do you believe they have a place here?
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: First off i would be against using the illegal content close reason if we was to make them off-topic. while your suggestion to edit it is made in good nature, a user who reads that might not think the same.
when a *"where can i watch/read"* question appears we should assume good faith that the OP isn't looking to pirate but if we close every *"where can i watch/read"* question as asking for illegal sources then we aren't showing good faith (though though deep inside we suspect that what they are doing) and assuming everyone who asks is a pirate, especially in cases where it could be a legitimate reason like with *Tokyo Ghoul:re* where geoblocking is preventing US users from watching it on Chrunchyroll while UK and Ireland users can
---
My opinion is to not make them off-topic but rather following the suggestion that you quoted which would require [this question](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/922/how-can-i-tell-if-a-site-is-legal?noredirect=1&lq=1) to be moved to the main site which i am sure was suggested before too.
if it was i would however suggest it's gets marked as protected as a sorta barrier to prevent some users posting spam answers to illegal sites which does happen to some of the questions here (not just *"where can i watch/read"* ones)
this way when people google *"here can i watch/read x"* and we get high enough in the search rankings they'll find the duplicate question and get redirected to the list to find a legal source rather than risking an illegal one.
however we shouldn't be so quick to close as duplicate if the list was moved to the main site and rather have it as an option for us to use. reason being is because even if the user wants to stream a series the answer might be they can't for that language. the alternative could be getting the home release or that the release they want just doesn't exist (ie. wanting *Monogatari* dubbed in english but the best they can do is subbed)
---
in regards to your answer getting converted, in my opinion it is lacking as it just suggests to look at the list rather give a definitive answer of which site has the release the OP wanted. rather it's more suited as a comment
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: There is no reason that we should follow the normal SE standards (What is normal anyway? Who dictates it and why should we listen?), as they may not work for us. Unlike most established communities with a design, we don't really serve anything an mainstream topic that everyone can get into. We're a niche media, that some perceive negatively due to long standing prejudices. There's not much we can to convince those unfamiliar with the culture, except to make with what we already have.
I agree that oftentimes these types of questions asking where can I watch/read/download X series or media are just looking for places to stream or download such media for thinly veiled reasons of privacy. In an effort to appeal to the politically correct stance of media consumership we've disallowed these questions and oftentimes completely rewrote questions to ask for legal sources. As mentioned, on rare occasions, we do get a thoughtful question about where to find a series that is legitimately hard to find overall or a question about availability of a certain series on a certain type of media. While we are an English-speaking QA site, unlike most other recreational SE sites, we don't cater to a particularly homogenous culture or ethnicity.
Anime and manga, which being pretty niche, is not a product exclusive to Japan, despite being originated from there. Anime and manga has spread it's branches throughout the world in all sorts of places and shapes, some good, some bad, and some in between. How anime and manga are viewed differs significantly, by country and ethnicity, sometimes even drastically between the same groups within these countries. Just like fans of the same series/franchise can't agree with canon, it can get complicated for complicated reasons.
We can't expect everyone to agree and we certainly don't discriminate against newcomers who might not be as accustomed to the media or culture. Not everyone has immediate access to anime and manga for various reasons, such as might be due to censorship, availability, price, or social impression. The internet and streaming media opened a lot of doors for anime and manga, and games as well. The Japanese, being the traditionalist they are were not quick to capitalize on this mode of distribution. But that didn't stop pirates from taking advantage of opportunities.
Anime and manga piracy has been a very gray subject and still very much is. It's partially thank to piracy that we have such proliferation of anime and manga around the world. But rather than bore you with the history of it all, I'll cut to the chase. While piracy is harmful to consumer-based media industries, it's still a venue to introduce and make people aware and give exposure to different media. While not guaranteed, a pirate may eventually one day, become a loyal (and legal) consumer. People seek piracy for various reasons, some due to availability, so due to sheer laziness, some for other reason all together. I think we should judge these question by the amount of effort put into them.
We should ask users to put more context in these answers. If the user explains their situation and what they are looking for and/or gives a semblance of the reason and what they are looking for along with where they are from, I think we should take sometime to help them. However if they just post and request asking for help along the lines of `i want 2 find dis, where can it git it?` We'd be less inclined to help as these are the same type of "vampiric" users that are commonplace on Q&A sites that leech resources and offer little in return.
We are our own community, we don't have the ride the bandwagon just because other bigger communities do things a certain way. We can certainly take cues from them on what works and doesn't work, but we need to apply them to what best fits our community. They are them and we are us. We care as much about them as they care about us.
I am in agreement that these types of questions, the policy, and close reason is in need of a review. While you may not see eye to eye on all points, each of your make valid arguments.
1. These question don't serve to help anyone but the asker themselves
2. They provide little context most of the time and border on annoyance akin to identification questions
3. Most of the time the user just needs to be informed about the available sources of streaming media
4. While a list of legal sources cover most general cases, there maybe circumstances where someone wants to find a particular series that is obscure, or not readily available, due to reasons of distribution, age, or trade
Unlike many other SE communities his community seeks compromise and arbitration. Just like some people have long standing prejudices about anime and manga (particularly anime), people have long standing prejudices about certain types of questions as well. This is understandable as you don't want to see the site inundated with low-effort content.
Will we'll consider precedent, it is up to the moderators along with members of the community to interpret what's best for the community based on the rules and guidelines set by Stack Exchange. Open discussion and collaboration is encouraged, rather than forced.
I propose that we review the reason and deprecate simple request asking for media and require that they give a least a bit of minimal context such as:
* What they are looking for
* Why they are looking for it
* Where are they looking for it
Like identification questions, it's an effort have the user add more details to help us help them, but unlike identification questions, the one asking the should know what they are looking for. E.g. *I'm looking for or looking to watch X series on A media, I'm from Q country, because P reason.* We can better direct answers to suite their needs when we have more details and context as, we may know that the title may be banned for political reason, and that if they want it they have to import it, but if they do it might be confiscated via customs.
We can change the reason to say something along the lines of:
>
> Questions requesting where to find/read/watch media requires [additional context][`Link to yet to be made relevant meta`]. Questions requesting media from unlicensed sources are off-topic. For a list of legal sources for anime and manga, please see this [list](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/922/how-can-i-tell-if-a-site-is-legal/923#923).
>
>
>
With this we should no longer make any effort to edit simple questions requesting media from unlicensed sources and close questions that ask for such or are vague in context (*e.g., Where can I read the rest of X series after G episode?*).
It is in my opinion that if better context is given there are chances someone in similar circumstances may have the same problem, and the expanded detail will help them better find this question via a search engine. What does the community think on this?
Upvotes: 2 |
2018/05/11 | 2,519 | 10,530 | <issue_start>username_0: Recently, [Differences between the Overlord light novel and manga](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/38042/differences-between-the-overlord-light-novel-and-manga) was bumped due to a new answer. As it's quite an old question, I decided to review the whole Q&A. I thought the question was okay based on the title.
But the problem is it's **4\* questions**.
1. **What's the difference between the Overlord novel and manga? Are they the same?**
2. **If they are not, is the novel illustrated like the manga with visual presentation?**
3. **Does the English translation for the manga have some translation errors?**
I was surprised that the question was left opened and got answered as is!
And here is the 4th question, **"*would it be possible to share some contents in it by taking a picture and posting it?*"**. Do we need to do something in this post? Thanks.
---
**tl;dr** (or, "let's do meta seriously")
The question body has 4 questions which some of them are not related to *Overlord* (aka. too generic). However, it already got 4 answers.
1. Is the question as currently written okay? Does it need to be closed instead?
2. If it can be salvaged, how? What about the existing answers?
---
\*The original revision has 5 questions, 1 which was too opinion-based.<issue_comment>username_1: First off i would be against using the illegal content close reason if we was to make them off-topic. while your suggestion to edit it is made in good nature, a user who reads that might not think the same.
when a *"where can i watch/read"* question appears we should assume good faith that the OP isn't looking to pirate but if we close every *"where can i watch/read"* question as asking for illegal sources then we aren't showing good faith (though though deep inside we suspect that what they are doing) and assuming everyone who asks is a pirate, especially in cases where it could be a legitimate reason like with *Tokyo Ghoul:re* where geoblocking is preventing US users from watching it on Chrunchyroll while UK and Ireland users can
---
My opinion is to not make them off-topic but rather following the suggestion that you quoted which would require [this question](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/922/how-can-i-tell-if-a-site-is-legal?noredirect=1&lq=1) to be moved to the main site which i am sure was suggested before too.
if it was i would however suggest it's gets marked as protected as a sorta barrier to prevent some users posting spam answers to illegal sites which does happen to some of the questions here (not just *"where can i watch/read"* ones)
this way when people google *"here can i watch/read x"* and we get high enough in the search rankings they'll find the duplicate question and get redirected to the list to find a legal source rather than risking an illegal one.
however we shouldn't be so quick to close as duplicate if the list was moved to the main site and rather have it as an option for us to use. reason being is because even if the user wants to stream a series the answer might be they can't for that language. the alternative could be getting the home release or that the release they want just doesn't exist (ie. wanting *Monogatari* dubbed in english but the best they can do is subbed)
---
in regards to your answer getting converted, in my opinion it is lacking as it just suggests to look at the list rather give a definitive answer of which site has the release the OP wanted. rather it's more suited as a comment
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: There is no reason that we should follow the normal SE standards (What is normal anyway? Who dictates it and why should we listen?), as they may not work for us. Unlike most established communities with a design, we don't really serve anything an mainstream topic that everyone can get into. We're a niche media, that some perceive negatively due to long standing prejudices. There's not much we can to convince those unfamiliar with the culture, except to make with what we already have.
I agree that oftentimes these types of questions asking where can I watch/read/download X series or media are just looking for places to stream or download such media for thinly veiled reasons of privacy. In an effort to appeal to the politically correct stance of media consumership we've disallowed these questions and oftentimes completely rewrote questions to ask for legal sources. As mentioned, on rare occasions, we do get a thoughtful question about where to find a series that is legitimately hard to find overall or a question about availability of a certain series on a certain type of media. While we are an English-speaking QA site, unlike most other recreational SE sites, we don't cater to a particularly homogenous culture or ethnicity.
Anime and manga, which being pretty niche, is not a product exclusive to Japan, despite being originated from there. Anime and manga has spread it's branches throughout the world in all sorts of places and shapes, some good, some bad, and some in between. How anime and manga are viewed differs significantly, by country and ethnicity, sometimes even drastically between the same groups within these countries. Just like fans of the same series/franchise can't agree with canon, it can get complicated for complicated reasons.
We can't expect everyone to agree and we certainly don't discriminate against newcomers who might not be as accustomed to the media or culture. Not everyone has immediate access to anime and manga for various reasons, such as might be due to censorship, availability, price, or social impression. The internet and streaming media opened a lot of doors for anime and manga, and games as well. The Japanese, being the traditionalist they are were not quick to capitalize on this mode of distribution. But that didn't stop pirates from taking advantage of opportunities.
Anime and manga piracy has been a very gray subject and still very much is. It's partially thank to piracy that we have such proliferation of anime and manga around the world. But rather than bore you with the history of it all, I'll cut to the chase. While piracy is harmful to consumer-based media industries, it's still a venue to introduce and make people aware and give exposure to different media. While not guaranteed, a pirate may eventually one day, become a loyal (and legal) consumer. People seek piracy for various reasons, some due to availability, so due to sheer laziness, some for other reason all together. I think we should judge these question by the amount of effort put into them.
We should ask users to put more context in these answers. If the user explains their situation and what they are looking for and/or gives a semblance of the reason and what they are looking for along with where they are from, I think we should take sometime to help them. However if they just post and request asking for help along the lines of `i want 2 find dis, where can it git it?` We'd be less inclined to help as these are the same type of "vampiric" users that are commonplace on Q&A sites that leech resources and offer little in return.
We are our own community, we don't have the ride the bandwagon just because other bigger communities do things a certain way. We can certainly take cues from them on what works and doesn't work, but we need to apply them to what best fits our community. They are them and we are us. We care as much about them as they care about us.
I am in agreement that these types of questions, the policy, and close reason is in need of a review. While you may not see eye to eye on all points, each of your make valid arguments.
1. These question don't serve to help anyone but the asker themselves
2. They provide little context most of the time and border on annoyance akin to identification questions
3. Most of the time the user just needs to be informed about the available sources of streaming media
4. While a list of legal sources cover most general cases, there maybe circumstances where someone wants to find a particular series that is obscure, or not readily available, due to reasons of distribution, age, or trade
Unlike many other SE communities his community seeks compromise and arbitration. Just like some people have long standing prejudices about anime and manga (particularly anime), people have long standing prejudices about certain types of questions as well. This is understandable as you don't want to see the site inundated with low-effort content.
Will we'll consider precedent, it is up to the moderators along with members of the community to interpret what's best for the community based on the rules and guidelines set by Stack Exchange. Open discussion and collaboration is encouraged, rather than forced.
I propose that we review the reason and deprecate simple request asking for media and require that they give a least a bit of minimal context such as:
* What they are looking for
* Why they are looking for it
* Where are they looking for it
Like identification questions, it's an effort have the user add more details to help us help them, but unlike identification questions, the one asking the should know what they are looking for. E.g. *I'm looking for or looking to watch X series on A media, I'm from Q country, because P reason.* We can better direct answers to suite their needs when we have more details and context as, we may know that the title may be banned for political reason, and that if they want it they have to import it, but if they do it might be confiscated via customs.
We can change the reason to say something along the lines of:
>
> Questions requesting where to find/read/watch media requires [additional context][`Link to yet to be made relevant meta`]. Questions requesting media from unlicensed sources are off-topic. For a list of legal sources for anime and manga, please see this [list](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/922/how-can-i-tell-if-a-site-is-legal/923#923).
>
>
>
With this we should no longer make any effort to edit simple questions requesting media from unlicensed sources and close questions that ask for such or are vague in context (*e.g., Where can I read the rest of X series after G episode?*).
It is in my opinion that if better context is given there are chances someone in similar circumstances may have the same problem, and the expanded detail will help them better find this question via a search engine. What does the community think on this?
Upvotes: 2 |
2018/07/10 | 916 | 3,636 | <issue_start>username_0: After Identification Requests were removed we [kept Music Identifications](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/3868/1587) under the prevision that the asker knew the series it came from.
[A recent question](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/47779/what-is-the-name-of-the-song-playing-in-the-background) (while an answer to this Meta wouldn't make it any more on-topic regardless of the answer) asked about a Hatsune Miku song. it got me thinking that do knowing that a song is a Vocaloid song count towards our Music Identification Exceptions? do we need any more previsions in regards to Vocaloid Song Identifications beyond knowing it's a Vocaloid song? eg.
* Knowing which Vocaloid sang it (Hatsune Miku isn't the only Vocaloid, there's Rin and Ren, Luca, Kaito, Meiko)
* Having a link to the song
* etc.<issue_comment>username_1: My opinion would be that Vocaloid related music ID requests *can* be on topic, if they can be tied to, or related to anime. A sample of such is the question Aki linked [Origins and information about the song "Kokoronashi"](https://anime.stackexchange.com/q/26978), where the OP assumes it might be related or part of an anime based upon the images and some research.
I do however think that just *knowing* that it is a Vocaloid song, should not make it on topic. All though the avatars are often animated, and might even sometimes follow anime like styles. Vocaloid as is, is but a piece of software, allowing just about anyone to make a synthesized song, based on what they type.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: We have to be careful with these types of questions as they to dip quite a bit into the realm of user-created content such as doujinshi and user created music videos.
A Vocaloid characters are typically used with the music composing community for things related and unrelated to anime and manga, amongst them are some notable works such as Bad Apple!!, Just Be Friends, the World is Mine, Black Rock Shooter, Melt, and Rolling Girl, to name just a few. Many of these songs have had remasters, remixes, resamples, or even live/real voice covers. Just because an Vocaloid is identified, it doesn't mean there's a definitive version. There can be different versions of the same song by different Vocaloids form the same of different composers.
While we don't want to discourage question on fan made content, we should limit the scope of these questions to we're not looking for a needle in a haystack. Not all fan made content are created equal. We can't always know what someone else is thinking out and we can't expect them to give us the clues we need to find them. Therefore I propose the following.
Unless we definitively know which Vocaloid performs and at least the composer, and/or artist behind the work (like we as for a series, episode and approximate time for series-based music id-requests), music identification questions do not comply will be marked off-topic.
The ones that give at least include them must give at one of those artifact (image or clip linking the work with it's creator) that connect it to the work they are looking for. Such questions will be tagged with the [vocaloid](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/vocaloid "show questions tagged 'vocaloid'") as the "series" and [music](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/music "show questions tagged 'music'") as the accompanying tag.
Questions not related to music identification, but pertain to Vocaloids, whether that is music or art created using/of them and related fandom will still be considered separate and on-topic.
Upvotes: 2 |
2018/09/23 | 1,122 | 4,594 | <issue_start>username_0: I recently voted to close [Why wasn't the Death Note light novel animated?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/48884/why-wasnt-the-death-note-light-novel-animated) for being opinion-based, but it got me thinking: would a general version of this question (e.g. Why are light novels not usually animated?) be on-topic? It seems like it would have a non-opinion-based answer. But if it is on-topic, why is the more specific version not?<issue_comment>username_1: **Update**: The question has been posted at [Why do light novels tend not to be animated directly?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/48892/why-do-light-novels-tend-not-to-be-animated-directly)
---
If you can create a more general (or "canonical") Q&A for this topic, then go for it!
At least we have precedences for this:
1. [Why do anime have manga adaptations? Why don't authors just focus on one medium at a time?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/34119/why-do-anime-have-manga-adaptations-why-dont-authors-just-focus-on-one-medium)
2. [Why don't more video games get full anime adaptations?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/22559/why-dont-more-video-games-get-full-anime-adaptations)
The reason why (I believe) the *Death Note*/specific version one is off-topic is because we have to know *that certain reason* why it's not yet adapted. Unless it's mentioned somewhere else, then it's speculation at best. (note: I've done some quick research before closing it, but nothing came up, thus I feel it's better to close it before it gets speculative answers)
Providing a canonical Q&A at least can point the asker *safely* for "the possible reasons". (Whether to link it as "related", or close as a dupe, it's another question...)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The problem is not really about the question (and others like it), but our lack of expertise and inside knowledge. Questions such as "Why was X not B" expose an inherent flaw with our community -- the fact that we cannot are able to draw from industry specific knowledge even if it was made public in some magazine, tweet, or TV interview, simply because we are secondary consumer of the media.
I'm sure the question mentioned by the OP has been brought up by other fans in Japan closer to the source. Information from those involved in the production rarely ever trickles down from overseas unless it's a hugely popular and well-known franchise, simply due to costs. We can't provide non-opinionated sources unless we can either draw on anecdotal analogies or try to piece thing together from bits and pieces gleamed from Japanese media sources (magazine, videos, tweets, etc).
Stack Overflow and Stack Exchange by association has been overly rigid with criteria in an attempt to make things more readable. Questions that are answerable with simple yes or no are discouraged, you may say because it's a question and answer site. There are times that a question just does not have a concrete answer, but the question itself is still valuable and so are any answers. I believe that questions like the one mentioned by the OP are like these type of questions and we should look at approaching them in another direction in order to be more welcoming to new contributor.
Just like in programming, things like best practices, or conventional approaches, possibly what existing tools/frameworks/libraries might solve a problem. Yes, those are going to be opinionated answers. That doesn't make them not valuable. It also doesn't detract from more concrete questions and answers. I do not believe we have to budget space and needs to prioritize one set of questions/answers over another. We are a recreation site. We should at least explain why these questions are hard to answer. It frustrates new contributors when well simply close things and tell them it's too broad. Try as we they may to accommodate, but our lack of expertise on certain areas make it difficult to explain why we can't help them.
I am finding that the "downvote and move" methodology on has the be one of the worst internet philosophies to develop, when applied to literally anything other than spam or duplicated posts it poisons online communities. We should we try think or converse with new contributors and explain what the problem may be on both sides instead of hiding behind canned messages. We need new blood in order to grow, but in order to attract new blood we need to be more welcoming and empathetic. We're a niche space on a niche topic, we can afford to do some experimenting to see where we can go.
Upvotes: 0 |
2018/11/01 | 2,410 | 9,959 | <issue_start>username_0: There exist [a question](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/36522/who-is-the-most-connected-in-the-six-degrees-sense-seiyuu) asking about the most connected seiyuu by six degrees. As innocent of a question it may seem, but the foundations the question is based on is flawed and unreasonablely scoped.
<NAME> himself thinks this game was a joke in his TEDx talk: <https://youtu.be/n9u-TITxwoM>
He didn't invent the game, but it is permanently associated with him thanks to pop culture.
But what's the problem here? The problem is that we are using a fundamentally speculative assumption to pose another about a similar topic. This will only create more misconception if the basis is not first scrutinized.
The 6 Degrees of Separation from <NAME> Theory is based on a well known theory called the “small world theory,” a longstanding serious look at the degrees of separation between people. Some look for fun, some like <NAME> looked to explain how events like the atrocities of WWII could happen given how interconnected we all are.
Many “small world” studies have been done throughout the years, from radio inventor <NAME>’s thoughts on the subject in the early 1900’s (he guessed 5), to experimental social physiologist <NAME>’s small world experiments in 1967 (which showed 6 degrees), to Microsoft’s 2008 study (which showed average degree of separation is 6.6), and more.
Although most studies have showed the average degree of separation is about 6 (but not exactly), the Microsoft study showed some people are connected by up to 29 degrees. Others, like a person living alone in the jungle, could be completely unconnected. While it is true that <NAME> is connected to a lot of actors, but the same can be said about other actions that have been around for a while. Popularity and fame will get you a ways to to conbecting people, but it's not an end all be all, especially in this age of the internet. Small world studies typically look at who we know in any way, but each study is different.
With <NAME> game, there are specific rules to narrow the scope, such as one must have worked with <NAME> on a professional or personal level to count.
However, if we count just people we know in any way (including social media) there can be an argument that many people have less than 6 degree today.
To avoid the going on a long winded rant about the finer details of the theory, see this video for a summary: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TcxZSmzPw8k>
Such a theory was proposed long ago that everyone on earth is separated by 6 or less acquaintance links apart. This idea was first put forth by <NAME> in 1929, and popularized by a 1990 play written by <NAME>.
The basic concept (behind the Small World theory) is that due to technological advances in communications and travel, friendship networks could grow larger and span greater distances. In particular, Karinthy believed that the modern world was ‘shrinking’ due to this ever-increasing connectedness of human beings.
The small world and 6 degrees of separation theories have truth to them, but they are not true as absolutes (only as general rule-of-thumbs that speak of averages with outliers excluded).
Instead of saying “everyone has 6 degrees of separation,” it is much more correct to say, “the average person has around 6 degrees or less between them and another average person (including <NAME>)…. and with social media considered, those with similar interests may very well have less on average.”
Thus, the 6 degrees of separation rule is a rule-of-thumb, it is generally true for most of us, but doesn’t apply to outliers who live unconnected from modern society.
Trying to apply the same methodology to the Japanese voice acting industry is not a viable approach, in my opinion. Unlike the Hollywood movie industry the Japanese voice acting industry does not command as much respect, attention, or fame. Those that make careers out of it are few and far between, oftentimes the more successful ones move to other more profitable industries, retire, or just fade away into obscurity. Dude to social media the lines have been ever so blurred and hard to distinguish with reasonable objectivity.
The amount of effort to create an viable and objective answer is unreasonable for the average person. You can ask for all the data you want but if the criteria is too boardly, there will be no end to to comparisons. Do we care about the time period? Connected in terms of what? One assumes their voice actors, but voice actors are many different things, some are singers or idols, others are models, some are also stage or movie actors in their own right.
We had a similar type of problem with list requests, but in this case its more of a reverse list. Instead of questions like "how many have X in Y". We have "who is the most A in Z."
There is no reasonable scope or criteria preventing this question from being overly broad. If we limit it to a certsin period, we have limited data available. We can look at work history based on credits, but voice actors also do networking out sude of their roles? How can we talk factors as such into account?
It us in my belief thatanswers are not an appropriate place to be a plase to do a new small world study and we should not be encouraging questions where the answer may as well be a thesis on a bigger topic.
We need some sort of policy in place to keep questions within reasonable scope or it its founded on a controversial theory or topic. Such a question about voice actors cannot be properly answered without sorting and refercing large amounts of data. Furthermore fact checking such answer for bias is an equally cumbersome ordeal.
So I ask, what can we do about this issue.<issue_comment>username_1: **Update**: The question has been posted at [Why do light novels tend not to be animated directly?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/48892/why-do-light-novels-tend-not-to-be-animated-directly)
---
If you can create a more general (or "canonical") Q&A for this topic, then go for it!
At least we have precedences for this:
1. [Why do anime have manga adaptations? Why don't authors just focus on one medium at a time?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/34119/why-do-anime-have-manga-adaptations-why-dont-authors-just-focus-on-one-medium)
2. [Why don't more video games get full anime adaptations?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/22559/why-dont-more-video-games-get-full-anime-adaptations)
The reason why (I believe) the *Death Note*/specific version one is off-topic is because we have to know *that certain reason* why it's not yet adapted. Unless it's mentioned somewhere else, then it's speculation at best. (note: I've done some quick research before closing it, but nothing came up, thus I feel it's better to close it before it gets speculative answers)
Providing a canonical Q&A at least can point the asker *safely* for "the possible reasons". (Whether to link it as "related", or close as a dupe, it's another question...)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The problem is not really about the question (and others like it), but our lack of expertise and inside knowledge. Questions such as "Why was X not B" expose an inherent flaw with our community -- the fact that we cannot are able to draw from industry specific knowledge even if it was made public in some magazine, tweet, or TV interview, simply because we are secondary consumer of the media.
I'm sure the question mentioned by the OP has been brought up by other fans in Japan closer to the source. Information from those involved in the production rarely ever trickles down from overseas unless it's a hugely popular and well-known franchise, simply due to costs. We can't provide non-opinionated sources unless we can either draw on anecdotal analogies or try to piece thing together from bits and pieces gleamed from Japanese media sources (magazine, videos, tweets, etc).
Stack Overflow and Stack Exchange by association has been overly rigid with criteria in an attempt to make things more readable. Questions that are answerable with simple yes or no are discouraged, you may say because it's a question and answer site. There are times that a question just does not have a concrete answer, but the question itself is still valuable and so are any answers. I believe that questions like the one mentioned by the OP are like these type of questions and we should look at approaching them in another direction in order to be more welcoming to new contributor.
Just like in programming, things like best practices, or conventional approaches, possibly what existing tools/frameworks/libraries might solve a problem. Yes, those are going to be opinionated answers. That doesn't make them not valuable. It also doesn't detract from more concrete questions and answers. I do not believe we have to budget space and needs to prioritize one set of questions/answers over another. We are a recreation site. We should at least explain why these questions are hard to answer. It frustrates new contributors when well simply close things and tell them it's too broad. Try as we they may to accommodate, but our lack of expertise on certain areas make it difficult to explain why we can't help them.
I am finding that the "downvote and move" methodology on has the be one of the worst internet philosophies to develop, when applied to literally anything other than spam or duplicated posts it poisons online communities. We should we try think or converse with new contributors and explain what the problem may be on both sides instead of hiding behind canned messages. We need new blood in order to grow, but in order to attract new blood we need to be more welcoming and empathetic. We're a niche space on a niche topic, we can afford to do some experimenting to see where we can go.
Upvotes: 0 |
2018/11/12 | 2,144 | 8,539 | <issue_start>username_0: [What are the odds that Kirito can build a harem?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/49612/what-are-the-odds-that-kirito-can-build-a-harem)
I am unclear how asking for a number or set of numbers where I provide most of the input for a calculation is "primarily opinion-based".
For example, if we assume a 75/25 split of male to female players, and compute at the beginning of the anime, then the answer would be *(if I recall that semester of combinatorics and probabilities correctly)*:
>
> 1 in `2501*2500*2499*2498*2497`, which is a really small chance. *For reference, the chance of having 1 girlfriend is 1 in 2501, which is still pretty small.*
>
>
>
Details:
* 10,001 players (+1 for Yui, an AI)
* 7500 male
* 2501 female
* harem size of 5<issue_comment>username_1: Okay, so the first thing I must admit is that I am a mathematical dunce so there are factors that may be beyond my comprehension. That may even be one of the problems with this question in this regard: Some of the necessary evidence is outside of our specific field of expertise.
However, insofar as what I can consider, I suspect that the problem is with additional unknown or otherwise incalculable factors which further complicate the question beyond your expectations.
First of all, this might not be a question that can be answered purely by mathematics. The volition of the females to be in a relationship with a particular somebody, let alone a polyamorous one, may be an incalculable factor. Asuna's willingness to be with Kirito is probably predicated on a presumption of chastity, or in other words his ability to be faithful to a monogamous relationship. Kirito's charisma is considered to be especially high, and in an abstracted question like this it is difficult to ignore that he is the protagonist of the story, which may increase his odds of success beyond that of the average extra.
Second of all, how do you determine the average cross/gender encounter rate? If we assume that a woman has the same odds of being added to a harem at any given time, then odds of creating a heterosexual harem are zero percent if the player base is completely segregated for the entire duration of the game, and perhaps each time a person meets increases the likelihood that this person can be added to the harem. Now we know for a fact that it is not, but I suspect we still need to know how often people of opposite genders interacted within two years.
How many people constitute a harem? Can it be as few as three or five, or do there have to be at least a dozen women for it to count? You say at least five here, but it is not expressly stated in the question so it is left ambiguous for anybody viewing the question on the main site, and we base a question's open/closed status based upon the content of the question there.
Also, you should take note that your exemplary harem is impossible:
>
> Please remember that Sachi can not be in Kirito's harem because she dies before any of the other prospective members are introduced. We need to consider how the death rate affects the odds of being able to build a harem over the course of two years.
>
>
>
Now some of these concerns can be hypothetically addressed if we know enough of the facts of the story, and a question that can be based in facts is usually not Primarily Opinion Based. Moreover, S.A.O. is the sort of story that divulges demographical information, so it is probably one of the better candidates for this type of question because they are more likely to exist in this tale and we are better suited to knowing those facts than a mathematician. In this regard, I am not sure if the question is exactly P.O.B., but I think these are the sorts of factors which may have been considered, and they certainly seems to be a very complicated one that would be difficult to answer.
More importantly, I have difficulty believing that the volition factor can be anything other than pure guesswork, which is probably adequate grounds enough for closure unless a study can be produced which demonstrates otherwise.
One incidental note I would like to add is that, working with assumed rates may solve the P.O.B. issue by giving us objective numbers to work with, but at the same time it would distance it from being an actual question regarding the show so much as the numbers derived from it, and risk putting it outside of our scope.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The novel and anime mentions rough numbers about how *more than* thousand (2,000) died in the first month *before* the first boss raid (see episode 2 of the anime). Your question make many assumptions on what people should know or should regard as fact without providing any specific citations beyond stating certain numbers. Questions of the legitimacy of tertiary sources aside. This whole assumption is a bit "What IF" scenario with little to no bearing on the series or franchise.
The author does not give any indications of gender distribution amongst the 10k users, we can make a generalized guess based on the number of characters that have appear, but outright generalizing is biased. Furthermore, Yui is not a player and can't be classified as one. <NAME> is not one of the 10k players either as he just inserted himself into the game by digitizing himself (by remodeled FullDive machine to to transfer his consciousness into the virtual world, permanently, mentioned in epilogue/aftermath of the Ainclad Arc, with Rinko [Vol 4. Cp. 9]).
A harem builds itself by the whims of the author. You also forget that a harem does not have to be made up of a gender. Not all females will be interested in Kirito, despite his MC status. There are guys (Klein, for one) in Kirito's harem as well. Not all males won't be interested, for varying reasons. Without an acceptance criteria it's anyone's guess. As it stands as a question for this site, it's not a good fit. Maybe it would be for Code Golf or Puzzles. Claiming that is is based purely based in mathematics does not make it less opinionated. The math might not be but the context sure is.
This question is opinionated not unlike the if A and B fought who would win... The late Stan Lee [answers it](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4_zFYnnn2Y) well "The person who'd win in a fight is the person that the scriptwriter (i.e. author) wants to win." Making biased assumption to formulate the basis some sort of question isn't going to get us anywhere, except nitpick more are potential holes left by the author or writer. If we remove mentions of the series from the question it becomes a hypothetical statistical problem.
Adding math to an assumption does not may it any less of an assumption and just serves to skew public opinion of one's favor. Certain news outlets to it all the time to make ppl seem more favorable, while the information is technically true, the way it is presented is questionable.
tl;dr Because there as no acceptance criteria made and the assumptions were made with no regard towards actual canon ("every one know that..." is a very big generalization, and introduces a bit of cognitive bias [the question is leading]), with minimal use of citations from tertiary source. I am skeptical of the basis of the question, and regarded that it should be put on-hold is "generally opinionated".
OP should take some time to review the basis of the question by make necessary citations and connecting the questions to be better align with the series or franchise itself instead of posing one that can be regard as a statistical math puzzle with an SAO skinned setting.
Here is [a question](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/2235/how-is-misakas-railgun-so-destructive) asking how Misaka's Railgun can be so destructive? The sort answer is, from a pure real-life (RL) physics standpoint it's not. But there maybe in-series canon cite that there is some underlining at play in their in-series universe. The question is generally acceptable because the context asked is regarded to be in series. RL examples can be provided to prove of disprove the series, mathematical models can help but is not generally required to answer.
The mentioned question falls short of that as it is posed in the derived context of the OP's generalization (only females can be in be in a harem, all females are interested in becoming a port of the harem, the amount of female players [without subtext], who are considered players, the fact that Kirito would initiate such a scenario, etc).
Upvotes: 2 |
2019/01/14 | 895 | 3,743 | <issue_start>username_0: Sometimes the titles of questions arent descriptive at all. This isnt the case in most of the cases (perhaps 99% of the times the title is alright) but in some cases you have no clue what the question is about by reading the title. For example a topic like, "a question about x anime" isnt descriptive at all. Changing the title might be problematic, since you could change the intention of the asker about the question.
Is it ok to change the title of a question, if the question isnt descriptive at all?<issue_comment>username_1: Yes, it is okay to change the title.
However, be sure to inform the OP of the question as well, and guide them to resources to improve their title writing. This way the OP can also improve their future questions.
Some good guidance on writing titles can be found [How do I write a good title?](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/10647/how-do-i-write-a-good-title)
And off course you can also link to the [A&M help/how-to-ask](https://anime.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-ask) All though I personally prefer the title guidance as referenced on [SO's help/how-to-ask](https://stackoverflow.com/help/how-to-ask)
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: That depends on what you mean. Please keep in mind that [Stack Exchange has a greater bent on individual post ownership than Wikipedia](https://stackoverflow.blog/2009/03/04/the-great-edit-wars/), so the golden rule of [editing](https://english.stackexchange.com/editing) is "To clarify the meaning of a post (without changing that meaning)".
Editing a nondescript title into a descriptive one is permissible if you can interpret the question as a whole well enough to devise a title which reflects the probable intentions of the overall post. We may also incorporate information from the comments into an edit, if they accurately represent those intentions. Clarification of what was already expressed does require some amount of re-interpretation, so if you try to rewrite the title to better represent the probable intention so that people can understand the gist of the question better before clicking into it, then you should be fine. That makes it easier for people to find the question and know if they would be interested in viewing it.
However, if the post as a whole is so vague that you do not know what the question is probably meant to be, then you should probably leave the title alone, and vote to close the question instead. What we do not want to do is risk is a premature answer based on a misinterpretation of the questioner's intentions and have it rise to the top. If that happens, then it may garner premature votes and burden answers based on a correct understanding of the question with undue competition for the top voted answer. This is not only important because it helps find the questioner find the answer they seek more easily, but also because we want questions to serve all future visitors who find our website by making search engine queries which direct them to the question. Note that that [the closure system is meant in part to compel questioners to make necessary edits that improve a post to the point where it can be practicably answerable and reopened](https://stackoverflow.blog/2013/06/25/the-war-of-the-closes/). If clarification from the questioner is needed, and you can articulate what needs to be clarified, then please [leave a comment explaining it, since that's part of why we have comments.](https://english.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment).
Basically, you should try to leave the question in a better state than you found it, but not at the risk of biasing the question by adding meaning to it that was never there in the first place.
Upvotes: 2 |
2019/01/23 | 915 | 3,659 | <issue_start>username_0: 2019 is here! And with the new year, as usual, comes a new iteration of **Community Promotion Ads**! Let’s refresh these for the coming year :)
### What are Community Promotion Ads?
Community Promotion Ads are community-vetted advertisements that will show up on the main site, in the right sidebar. The purpose of this question is the vetting process. Images of the advertisements are provided, and community voting will enable the advertisements to be shown.
### Why do we have Community Promotion Ads?
This is a method for the community to control what gets promoted to visitors on the site. For example, you might promote the following things:
* the site's twitter account
* review blogs and research websites to keep on top of each new season
* events, meetups, and conventions
* anything else your community would genuinely be interested in
The goal is for future visitors to find out about *the stuff your community deems important*. This also serves as a way to promote information and resources that are *relevant to your own community's interests*, both for those already in the community and those yet to join.
### Why do we reset the ads every year?
Some services will maintain usefulness over the years, while other things will wane to allow for new faces to show up. Resetting the ads every year helps accommodate this, and allows old ads that have served their purpose to be cycled out for fresher ads for newer things. This helps keep the material in the ads relevant to not just the subject matter of the community, but to the current status of the community. We reset the ads once a year, every December.
The community promotion ads have no restrictions against reposting an ad from a previous cycle. If a particular service or ad is very valuable to the community and will continue to be so, it is a good idea to repost it. It may be helpful to give it a new face in the process, so as to prevent the imagery of the ad from getting stale after a year of exposure.
### How does it work?
The answers you post to this question *must* conform to the following rules, or they will be ignored.
1. All answers should be in the exact form of:
```
[![Tagline to show on mouseover][1]][2]
[1]: http://image-url
[2]: http://clickthrough-url
```
Please **do not add anything else to the body of the post**. If you want to discuss something, do it in the comments.
2. The question must always be tagged with the magic [community-ads](/questions/tagged/community-ads "show questions tagged 'community-ads'") tag. In addition to enabling the functionality of the advertisements, this tag also pre-fills the answer form with the above required form.
### Image requirements
* The image that you create must be 300 x 250 pixels, or double that if high DPI.
* Must be hosted through our standard image uploader (imgur)
* Must be GIF or PNG
* No animated GIFs
* Absolute limit on file size of 150 KB
* If the background of the image is white or partially white, there must be a 1px border (2px if high DPI) surrounding it.
### Score Threshold
There is a **minimum score threshold** an answer must meet (currently **6**) before it will be shown on the main site.
You can check out the ads that have met the threshold with basic click stats [here](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/ads/display/4218).<issue_comment>username_1: [](https://twitter.com/StackAnime)
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: [](https://movies.stackexchange.com/)
Upvotes: 2 |
2019/03/13 | 3,628 | 12,304 | <issue_start>username_0: In late 2017 [we were asked if a design for this site was being worked on or not](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4125/49), and at the time the design team was stretched pretty thin, to the point where I wasn't able to provide this community with a reasonable and realistic ETA for when they'd be able to work on it.
**But now I'm back with some good news!** One of our newest designers, Lisa, has reached out to me saying that [the DAG team](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/q/351751/1328704) is starting to work on new site theme implementations again — and that Anime & Manga's on the top of the list! \o/
We know some of you [were working on an unofficial site design](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4038/49), and we've also had idea collection posts [back in 2012](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/135/49) and [again in 2015](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2392/49), **but we're here to get some new feedback and ideas thrown around!**
As other previous discussions noted, we're prolly gonna wanna stay clear of design ideas and concepts that put us into a niche-y kinda place, as we wanna try to make something that's "Anime & Manga" as a whole, and not just representative of a particular subgenre — so as much as some of you may love (for instance) Naruto, let's try to avoid *shuriken* :P
**So, yeah: leave your thoughts, ideas, and suggestions below as answers.**<issue_comment>username_1: Something simple and seasonal would be idea. One of the hallmarks of anime is it's seasonal nature. Many series are short-lived. But every season fans look forward to a new menu of anime programs, sometimes for the better or for the worse. A static layout that accents the seasons and changes by the season would be nice.
Each season could outline a popular genre of anime and manga. The badges could be something that fit the season -- like a leaf for fall, droplet for spring, snowflake for winter, and a sun for summer.
One of the biggest challenges with making a banner about anime is being able to capture the essence of the subculture without using and specific IPs. Sure we can loosely imply parodies though commissions, the results will likely skew towards popular mainstream tastes. The anime and manga industry is the way it is through the diversity of talents of the content and tastes creators.
While I initially proposed a os-tan style mascot/idol type poster character, I such a meme would be of any help to promote. This SE site. Character design guidelines, branding guidelines take too much time and effort. A simple picturesque seasonal vector landscape shot with the silhouette of a few more well known characters in the background might suffice.
Maybe it can be a bench at a trains station or storefront with anime and manga in the background (on a bill board or station sign billboard) a tree to on each side, or in the background. Make be something like a cross between:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/VPJwy.jpg)
and/or
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/rY3oI.jpg)
But not with as much detail.
**The scene:**
One single location, as the seasons pass. The only real color palette, might be the primary/secondary color for a season plus the badge icons.
Nothing too tall or wide. Naturally with not as much detail. Shorter and narrower to keep up with the standard banner sizes.
The overall look and feel can be simple caricatures or veil/full silhouettes like these:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/RWdPd.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/eDPEe.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/vyAVY.jpg)
**Simple and flat looking, with layers like the above.**
In general, something low-key yet recognizable by fans like this background:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/vMnbx.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ge3mS.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/PBq2J.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Fpc6n.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ewjUI.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/IK91k.jpg)
**The Theme:**
Subtle, simple, yet picturesque.
**If the concept of changing seasons is too complicated, then it's probably best to pick the ONE season you like best (I would summer or winter) and run with that.**
The meta site can be just the line art of the main site to accent a conceptual nature motif or something, like a behind the scenes making of banner.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Manga and anime as a whole...
That's *tough*. This is a **very** diverse subject. To illustrate this point, my four favorite series are:
* Outlaw Star (space punk, cyberpunk)
* Cowboy Bebop (space)
* Last Exile (fantasy, steampunk)
* Samurai Champloo (fiction based in non-fiction, samurai/ninja/shogunate)
...and there aren't many similarities between those themes, except for *maybe* the [panning sky shots](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PanUpToTheSkyEnding) we get.
Instead of looking in-universe to tie these themes together, why not look outside of the universe to?
(I can't draw so please use your imagination.)
Let the setting be a manga cafe. I haven't had an opportunity to set foot in one myself, but the idea here is that we want to capture **all** of the possibilities of Anime. At the top we have what looks like a fairly rudimentary-looking cafe, with someone tending the shops and a handful of patrons looking at either anime or manga, but when you scroll down to the bottom, you see one or more people reading manga or watching anime evoking some or all of the different genres mentioned above.
Why a manga cafe?
* It's not just one thing - cafes often support multiple formats and multiple different genres.
* It gives us some liberty to illustrate to casual passers-by that this site is about *all* anime and manga, and not just the most popular handful out there.
* It allows us to design our icons and look and feel off of a unified and common theme as opposed to picking some sub-genre of anime or manga itself.
Everyone likes something *specific* about anime and manga. This design should reflect how inclusive we want to be of it.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I like username_1's ideas and wanted to see what they'd look like in on an SE page, and so I edited the HTML and CSS. I now know how SE have done their site design. And I think it's pretty basic, *but looks very nice*. I focused on the navbar and the background, as picking colours is beyond me.
1. **Navigation bar**
* The height is always 70px.
* The width can be any size. (Images here have to support 4k and UW screen resolutions, and whatever the future has instore.)
* It can be an opaque colour or image, or transparent.
2. **Middle navigation bar**
* The height is always 70px.
* The width is can be any size to a maximum 1264px.
* The top-left is where the site logo and name are located.
* The bottom-right is where a custom image can go. ([Meta](https://meta.stackexchange.com/) and [Arqade](https://gaming.stackexchange.com/))
3. **Custom image**
* The height is at most 70px.
* The width can be any size up to 1264px. (Arqade has this.)
* You can have multiple images, but they all align with the bottom-right corner. (Arqade has 3 different ones here.)
4. **Background**
* The height and width can be anything.
* Most sites have repeating images or a solid colour.
* It looks like you can get extravagant backgrounds, but these are repeating patterns. ([Worldbuilding](https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/))
Shop custom image and sky navigation
====================================
For the first image I:
* Kept the background a solid colour.
* Made the navigation bar an image.
* Added the shop as a custom image.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ptlEp.png)
Bus stop custom image and sky background
========================================
For the second image I:
* Made the background an image that fades into a solid colour.
* Made the navigation bar transparent.
* Added the bus stop as a custom image.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/HAnqi.png)
---
If you want to mess around and see what you can come up with editing the page is *really easy*, and mostly comes down to changing the styles on *three* elements.
Changing the logo is the hardest part. Inspect the "Anime & Manga" element and add the following inside the tag. (replace the icon with yours)
```
```
After this you can replace the CSS styles. The following are what I used to get the above images:
```
// Store Front
.site-header {
background-image: url(https://wallpapercave.com/wp/lhngQ0o.jpg);
}
.site-header .site-header--container {
background-image: url("https://i.stack.imgur.com/kZrMD.png");
background-size: 180px 64px;
}
// Bus stop
body {
background-color: #09515D;
background-image: url("https://i.stack.imgur.com/wM5xg.png");
background-repeat: no-repeat;
background-position: 0 50px;
}
.site-header {
background-color: transparent;
}
.site-header .site-header--container {
background-image: url("https://i.stack.imgur.com/9jS3B.png");
background-size: 252px 64px;
}
```
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Just a short idea for the header, I imagine **a left-to-right sequence of manga & anime production**:
1. a rough sketch of a character\*
2. expanded to [a storyboard (name)](https://www.manga-audition.com/japanesemanga101_024/)
3. inking/toning/finishing (traditional B&W manga - done)
4. adding color (digitally-colored manga - done)
5. animating/[color-coding](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/5378/what-are-the-different-colors-in-anime-production-drawings-for)/tweening/[layering](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/3941/are-background-and-foreground-delegated-separately-in-anime-production)
6. a single-frame, finished scene of an anime (anime - done)
Reference: [What are the steps involved in making a professional manga?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/13620/what-are-the-steps-involved-in-making-a-professional-manga), [What are the steps involved in producing an anime?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/2506/what-are-the-steps-involved-in-producing-an-anime)
**Super-duper simple representation**:
```
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | | | | | |
Anime & Manga | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
| | | | | | |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
```
---
As for the object of this process, since we certainly don't want to infringe copyright, and since I missed [What should our "unofficial" community name and logo or mascot be?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/426/2516), I just wanted to propose a mascot ala [OS-tan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moe_anthropomorphism) as Stack-ko (スタッこ, *sutakko*), comprising of *Stack* (as in, "Stack Exchange"), and *ko* (子/娘, child/daughter)... but any other idea is welcomed...
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I think having the badges as *a cherry blossom leaf* would be inclusive to most anime/manga. (Not too sure how they'd look in bronze, silver and gold)
---
Here's [an article](https://www.fandom.com/articles/cherry-blossoms-significant-anime) that lists quite a few animes that have them. I've seen them in various animes and mangas ranging from Shōnen (<NAME> - Bleach & Kirsch Vermillion - Black Clover), Shōjo and Seinen (Elfhelm - Bezerk).
Upvotes: 1 |
2019/04/30 | 5,928 | 19,445 | <issue_start>username_0: **Some quick notes based on the feedback provided here and in chat:**
On the original feedback gathering post [Catija left a really relevant link](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4229/gathering-ideas-for-the-site-design-2019-edition#comment8591_4229) that **I failed to put in a more conspicuous location**, which coulda helped in managing expectations for this — **I'm sorry about that, really!** The comments links to [this MSE post](https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/319274/208518), in which it's made clear that future site designs are not gonna have the level of detail that sites like Worldbuilding have, but instead more in the lines of the Blender, Travel, or Puzzling sites' designs. Having said that: *this design actually probably has way more elements than any of the upcoming site designs will*.
It's obvious not everyone will be happy with what we come up with, but given the feedback we gathered in the idea gathering post and the constraints the above puts in place, I feel like our designer did a good job trying to incorporate most of the thoughts y'all put into that post: the design is simple, yes, but its atmosphere feels anime-esque to me. Again, not everyone will be happy, but if there are small tweaks that could make it look better, they're welcome, and we'll try to incorporate 'em into the final design!
And if you have any questions, feel free to ask 'em too :)
---
Earlier last month, we collected some new [ideas](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4229/49) for the site design. You suggested that the design be simple, picturesque, and representative of the anime and manga culture.
It's been a long time coming and I’m excited to share what the design team came up with for our community! \o/ You can see it live in the site now (along with updated reputation thresholds), but here are some screenshots too:
Design Concept
--------------
*Home Page:*
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/rKi2m.jpg)
*Question Page:*
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/4SWjA.jpg)
*Meta Home Page:*
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/0csBu.png)
As it was brought up in the previous meta post, our designer also created a variation of the community [logo](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/459/49) with the original sources of inspiration in mind.
We know, again, that coming up with a design that represents the Anime & Manga community as a whole is not an easy task, but we hope this design is reflective of the community without focusing on any specific niches.
**We hope that you love the design we build in this phase but we expect some minor adjustments may be necessary. So you have have any feedback, please let us know.**<issue_comment>username_1: [feature-request](/questions/tagged/feature-request "show questions tagged 'feature-request'")
Can the `body` [background-image](https://cdn.sstatic.net/Sites/anime/img/site-background-image-clouds.png?v=079ae907b8d2) have less blur. To me it makes the entire page look like one big blur, making the content harder to read.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_1: [bug](/questions/tagged/bug "show questions tagged 'bug'")
The meta `body` background image doesn't support ultra-wide screen resolutions, where main does.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/TlS0B.png)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/zjdwE.png)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_1: [feature-request](/questions/tagged/feature-request "show questions tagged 'feature-request'")
Can the favicon have an easy to tell difference between meta and main.
Such as make one gray and the other black.
Currently they're the same making it harder to tell at a glance which tab is on which site.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Yhzvf.png)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: For me, the lack of a distinct edge here bothers me. It feels like the questions pane is bleeding into the background, and it's making me want to squint for some reason.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/zEPZ4.png)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: One small detail that I do appreciate: The bus at the bottom of the page [is going in the right direction](https://sharpbrains.com/blog/2007/02/24/exercise-your-brains-visual-logic-brain-teaser/)! Good.
>
> Because in Japan, vehicles drive on the left side of the road.
>
>
>
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/gILiR.png)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: **Badges**
It would be nice to use a cherry blossom petal instead of a peach blossom. As the cherry blossom is most synonymous with spring overall, which I assume is the theme by the header.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/CH48d.png)
Petals from right to left: Plum, peach, cherry.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: Remove the bus shelter at the top and the bus at the bottom. While it's apparently too late to come up with a design that would actually represent anime and manga, removing these elements would be a significant improvement. As it stands, the current design can only confuse the visitors as to the purpose of the site.
I can't say I've watched a huge amount of anime, but I like to think I've watched a broad range of it. From the 70's to the present, across various genres and target audiences, I don't see this "public transportation" theme representative of the anime I've seen or heard of, either broadly or narrowly. A generic transit bus that could be seen anywhere in a the world. A bus shelter that maybe kinda looks like a broken tori gate if you squint your eyes but wouldn't look out place in North America or Europe. Even limiting yourself to public transportation you can find better things to represent Japan, if not anime and manga.
As a result, I can't see why anyone would think these bus elements represent anime and/or manga. It doesn't help that you just simply asserted that the design "feels anime-esque" to you, without explaining why. Absent any reason to believe otherwise, I think these elements would only suggest something different to people visiting the site and so should be removed to prevent confusion. While the resulting, simpler, design wouldn't be any more anime-esque than it is now, it a least won't be giving the impression the site is supposed to be about public transportation.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_1: Firstly it looks like [my suggestion](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4234), [may have heavily influenced the outcome](https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/50121764#50121764). Sorry everyone :(
**tl;dr:**
* The colour pallet, bus stop and bus are cool.
* Only having bus and nature as the theme makes this look like a design for Travel.SE.
* Having a hyper-realistic clouds, flat design and a travel theme knocks the anime aspects down a couple of pegs.
Whilst these by-themselves in an anime theme would work, having the entire theme be somewhat tangentially related makes it look like it's not an anime theme.
* The clouds look like CGI not anime.
Something similar has been said in chat. [[1]](https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/50123705#50123705)
---
**Pros:**
* Despite what some others say, I really like the the bus stop. (I may be biased) And some people have said it has a Monogatari feel.[[1]](https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/50120860#50120860) [[2]](https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/50123918#50123918)
IMO, except a little contrast issue, it [perfectly fits my second design](https://i.stack.imgur.com/1gVmx.png).
* I think the lime/green background is quite nice, and reminds me of [this suggestion](https://i.stack.imgur.com/PBq2J.jpg).
IMO it'd be cool if there were chunks/segments in the gradient, like the linked image. However it doesn't look like you can do that with `radial-gradient`. :(
**Neutral:**
* I think having a bus and a bus stop is pretty cool. However, if the bus wasn't there I wouldn't mind. I also don't get a 'that's cool' vibe from it alone.
However, given that the core of our theme seems to be a bus driving into the sunset, it seems more like a theme that is intended for [Travel.SE](https://travel.stackexchange.com/), or more specifically 'Bus Travel.SE'.
**Cons:**
* This is related to [a previous answer](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4247), they're too blurry. To me they look like clouds that were designed to be a quarter, or smaller, than the size they're meant to be and so were blown up and had the blur turned to 80% to remove the pixelated edges.
I also don't like how they look 'hyper-realistic'. This may be because inspiration was taken from these pictures: [1](https://i.stack.imgur.com/vMnbx.jpg), [2](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ge3mS.jpg) or [3](https://i.stack.imgur.com/IK91k.jpg).
I like the style of cloud shown in [1](https://i.stack.imgur.com/PBq2J.jpg) and [2](https://i.stack.imgur.com/HAnqi.png) the most. However whilst I don't like the artistic styling as much, I think the clouds in [1](https://i.stack.imgur.com/VPJwy.jpg), [2](https://i.stack.imgur.com/rY3oI.jpg), [3](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Fpc6n.jpg) and [4](https://i.stack.imgur.com/ptlEp.png) also exhibit an anime style.
* The sun at the bottom of the screen does nothing for me.
+ It kinda explains why there's a gradient from green to lime in the center of the page.
+ To me a sunset is orange and red, and so makes me question the colour pallet.
I don't think an orange/red colour pallet would look nice for a background.
+ Is this an obscure reference to the flag of Japan?
+ Since the sun and the bus are in the same image I can't see what it would look like without the sun, so can't say if it makes the bottom of the page not look barren. (Which would turn this into a neutral/pro)
---
**What do I think would fix this?**
1. Animeify the clouds.
They're going to be seen by 100% of people that visit the site, are part of the first thing most people will see and are the largest, size wise, part of the design.
If they don't scream anime, then the first impression won't be that this is an anime site.
2. Add some people.
>
> They more often use a X amount of characters across the page to visualise it
>
> - Dimitri mx in [chat](https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/50123946#50123946)
>
>
>
Whilst this was suggested in [this answer](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4235), there seems to be a lot of conflict over this idea.
1. It seems like people want to have the characters based on ones they like from animes. And so could lead to licensing issues.
2. People want diversity.
I have a bit of a problem with this argument, as there's only a finite amount of characters we can have, but an infinite variate of characters. So some are going to be missed.
Overall to me it seems making at least two generic anime characters would fix this.
From here you can do cool stuff like have them waiting in the bus-stop, and then have them in the bus.
If resources were infinite you could also do:
>
> Maybe a girl chasing the bus with toast in her mouth. :P
>
> - forest in [chat](https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/50123880#50123880)
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I confess - I have failed you.
No matter how many times I tried to come to this post and actually put together some reasonably scoped (i.e. "tweakable") criticism about this theme, my tendency to conflate this with some existing Stack Exchange-level communication breakdown keeps getting in the way.
So, I'll repeat what I said in the comment I left on this post and hope that this actually keeps me on the straight-and-narrow. No promises though; I'm not on a tightrope.
>
> I'm not a fan of this design and I wish it had incorporated other elements from other suggestions.
>
>
>
By that, I mean:
* ***Something*** recognizable about Anime or Manga should be in the theme. In my mind, a Japanese bus stop and a Japanese bus are more artifacts of the culture. Left-side drive nations have buses which can look similar to this, so I don't find this to be particularly striking.
* The color scheme is unique and calming, but...there's nothing to tie it together to anything specific to either Anime or Manga. Maybe the color was meant to evoke a reference to [matcha](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matcha), but that's a Japanese culture thing, and not an anime/manga culture thing.
* I'm not left with a sense of wonder. I'm left with a sense of bewilderment. To try to mitigate my unconscious and conscious biases, I showed the site to a few friends of mine whom I trust with UI/UX opinions, and they didn't really see the "anime" in it. Admittedly they have their own biases about anime in general which I won't repeat here, but the consensus was fairly universal - didn't seem like enough.
...but none of that can be taken back to a designer to "fix", because the end result is "change it", which isn't the kind of feedback I wanted to give, nor is the kind of feedback that gets attention. It's basically me just saying, "I don't really like it and I want it all changed," which is *hardly* a good way to get constructive criticism going here.
But in an effort to remain as optimistic as I ~~normally am~~ once was, I decided to look around at prior art to regain some positivity and look at this from a different perspective. I wanted to see what the feedback loop has been in the past for sites who have changed who *weren't* the larger, more prominently themed sites.
...
I'm making a conscious observation about the feedback loop we've got going on here. Just [referencing the Meta post](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/319274/responsive-design-themes-what-can-sites-customize-and-how-can-they-get-changes) that was meant to be more obvious, the two main sites mentioned who stated that there was some kind of deficiency in their layout have had radio silence on their feedback, even if it's been prominently stated or displayed as something that's looked at or into.
[DBA.se](https://dba.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3077/suggestions-for-a-better-headline-graphic) hasn't had an official response to it since it was created.
[SciFi.se](https://scifi.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12110/what-should-the-new-background-theme-look-like) received *one* comment on *one* answer in regards to constructive criticism towards a suggestion for improvement. Beyond that...nothing really concrete in the lines of what I would want to see as "progress" since it was created.
There's also a discrepancy here. At least it seems that SciFi [had a chance to trial the theme out](https://scifi.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12073/science-fiction-fantasys-updated-site-theme-is-ready-for-testing/12093#12093) *before* it went live. Had we had the chance to do that there, I think there wouldn't be quite as much angst with it. Kinda feels like this is what we're getting and we can tweak it *slightly* from here, and the team is then "off to the next one".
To hammer home the point of the reason why this matters at all:
This site is *tiny*. A theming change will either entice or repel people from our community. An unsuitable theme won't entice *anyone* to stay around.
======================================================================================================================================================
We want to be putting the best foot forward, and I don't think we are right now.
But again, I've failed to put this in terms which I feel like are actionable. Sorry.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_1: I got bored of waiting for some of the easier changes.
* [Changes badges to look more like more like cherry blossoms](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4254).
* [Change logo to look more like cherry blossoms](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4245#comment8672_4254).
This only changes the main A&M logo, favicon and featured on meta are the same.
* [Add borders to the site](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4250).
* [Fix background on meta](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4248).
* (Disabled by default) [Remove bus-stop and bus&sun](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4255).
To enable disabled ones delete the space between this `* /` on the ones you want to enable.
```
/* Bus stop * /
```
To
```
/* Bus stop */
```
To disable others do the inverse, add a space there.
Tested on FF 67.0 + [Tamper Monkey](https://www.tampermonkey.net/).
```
// ==UserScript==
// @name A&M changes
// @grant GM_addStyle
// @run-at document-startc
// @include /^https:\/\/anime.stackexchange.com\//
// @include /^https:\/\/anime.meta.stackexchange.com\//
// ==/UserScript==
let url = window.location.href;
if (url.match(/^https:\/\/anime.stackexchange.com\//)) {
GM_addStyle(`
/* https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4254 */
/**/
.site-header--link img {
clip-path: polygon(
0% 0%,
0% 100%,
calc(26.864 / 353 * 100%) 100%,
calc(26.864 / 353 * 100%) calc(26.552 / 60 * 100%),
calc(32.825 / 353 * 100%) calc(26.552 / 60 * 100%),
calc(32.825 / 353 * 100%) calc(32.519 / 60 * 100%),
calc(26.864 / 353 * 100%) calc(32.519 / 60 * 100%),
calc(26.864 / 353 * 100%) 100%,
100% 100%,
100% 0%
);
}
/**/
`);
} else {
GM_addStyle(`
/* https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4248 */
body {
background-size: 2880px 1008px;
}
/**/
/* https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4254 */
/**/
.site-header--link img {
clip-path: polygon(
0% 0%,
0% 100%,
calc(26.864 / 389 * 100%) 100%,
calc(26.864 / 389 * 100%) calc(26.552 / 60 * 100%),
calc(32.825 / 389 * 100%) calc(26.552 / 60 * 100%),
calc(32.825 / 389 * 100%) calc(32.519 / 60 * 100%),
calc(26.864 / 389 * 100%) calc(32.519 / 60 * 100%),
calc(26.864 / 389 * 100%) 100%,
100% 100%,
100% 0%
);
}
/**/
`);
}
GM_addStyle(`
/* https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4250 */
#content {
border-left-width: 1px;
border-right-width: 1px;
}
/**/
/* https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4254 */
.badge1, .badge2, .badge3 {
clip-path: polygon(30% 0, 100% 0, 100% 100%, 0 100%, 0 30%, 35% 35%);
}
/**/
/* https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4255 */
/* bus stop * /
.site-header--container {
background-image: unset!important;
}
/**/
/* bus and sun * /
.site-footer {
background-image: unset;
}
/**/
`);
```
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_1: **Note**: Based off this [Code Golf answer](https://codegolf.meta.stackexchange.com/a/17767).
Could you change the [error](https://anime.stackexchange.com/error) and [404](https://anime.stackexchange.com/err%C3%B6r) text to be inline with the sites colour scheme.
The blue, IMO, looks out of place.
Upvotes: 1 |
2019/05/04 | 1,747 | 6,409 | <issue_start>username_0: To clarify, what I'm describing is a discussion where the question is about a series' soundtracks and the answer would list the soundtracks used, the approximate time it occurs and a brief description of the scene when it occurs **per episode**.
I was planning on doing this on short series, for a start, so that others would simply have to look for one question, and see if the soundtrack they are looking for is already known or not.
Would this be alright? Will it not count as a duplicate question if some soundtracks were already answered before? Or should questions about soundtracks be separate questions only?
If it's okay to do this, would it be better off as a community wiki rather than a regular question and answer?
Edit: As requested, below is an example of what the answer might look like:
Anime Name - Season Number (if multiple seasons)
------------------------------------------------
OP 1: **Song 01** by Artist, *Album*
ED 1: **Song 01** by Artist, *Album*
OP 2: **Song 02** by Artist, *Album*
ED 2: **Song 02** by Artist, *Album*
OP n: **Song n** by Artist, *Album*
ED n: **Song n** by Artist, *Album*
Episode 1
1. [hr:min:sec] **Song 01** by Artist, *Album* - a short description of where this occurs is put here
2. [hr:min:sec] **Song 02** by Artist, *Album* - a short description of where this occurs is put here
3. [hr:min:sec] **Song n** by Artist, *Album* - a short description of where this occurs is put here
Episode 2
1. [hr:min:sec] **Song 01** by Artist, *Album* - a short description of where this occurs is put here
2. [hr:min:sec] **Song 02** by Artist, *Album* - a short description of where this occurs is put here
3. [hr:min:sec] **Song n** by Artist, *Album* - a short description of where this occurs is put here
Episode n
1. [hr:min:sec] **Song 01** by Artist, *Album* - a short description of where this occurs is put here
2. [hr:min:sec] **Song 02** by Artist, *Album* - a short description of where this occurs is put here
3. [hr:min:sec] **Song n** by Artist, *Album* - a short description of where this occurs is put here
I think it is alright not to include links as the information is sufficient enough such that the reader can search for it himself/herself across the web.<issue_comment>username_1: I personally would advise against it. It might work, but the level of effort is not ideal as it can become burdensome to maintain and update, therefore I do not recommend doing this. Such question can become very broad and hard to maintain and sustain for the the long run (i.e. copyright issues with linked content, lack of embedding for ease of access, linkrot), given the varying depths of media for each series or franchise.
We have tried to compile similar resource threads in the past of narrower scope, but the problem always leads back to the users. The types of questions related to music are often times less desirable to answer and oftentimes fall by the wayside. Most users that ask these questions are typically quite new and/or lazy and won't typically make an effort to look through a resource list even if it was placed in front of them on a silver platter.
It eventually gets quite tedious for people to maintain lists it resources over time due to the ever so decreasing gratitude and feedback given over time. But I won't stop you from making one if you feel that it may be helpful. Just make sure that you are not the sole contributor to such a list.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: It *might* work. The only advantage I can see for having it here on Stack Exchange as opposed to on a Wikia/Wiki is that Markdown is more user-friendly than WikiText, so the barrier of entry might be lower. And so more people might actually be bothered to type in that sort of information.
One possible issue I can see is the [30,000 character limit](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/176445/knowing-your-limits-what-is-the-maximum-length-of-a-question-title-post-image) for posts (I think this applies to both questions and answers). So this may be a problem if you try to tackle really long-running series such as *Naruto* or *One Piece*. With something of that scale, it might be better just to outsource the information to an actual wiki, which is better equipped to handle that quantity of information.
I don't know of many wikis that actually have this sort of information though. Maybe those wikis could use some more promotion :P
On the other hand, it's possible have [really long chains of answers](https://codegolf.stackexchange.com/questions/102370/add-a-language-to-a-polyglot?answertab=oldest#tab-top) on Stack Exchange, so it's not unfeasible. It may be doable by, for example, splitting the listing into multiple answers; I wouldn't shut the door on this one. If such a mega-question existed, most likely I would occasionally drop in to insert a soundtrack listing here or there. (I already have a few incomplete partial lists in my personal notes from my sporadic *Naruto* rewatches.)
In any case, there are two main use cases that I can think of where a song-episode index might be useful:
**1. Finding the song from the episode + timestamp**
This might be helpful if someone comes across a song in an episode and wants to know which song it is.
In these cases, an episode + timestamp index would be helpful.
The [Puella Magi Wiki](https://wiki.puella-magi.net/Madoka_Magica_Soundtrack) has something like this. (It's not complete though.) [Example](https://wiki.puella-magi.net/Madoka_Magica_Soundtrack#Episode_1):
[](https://wiki.puella-magi.net/Madoka_Magica_Soundtrack#Episode_1)
**2. Finding the episodes + timestamps from the song**
This might be helpful if someone is trying to find all the occurrences of a specific song in the anime. Or if someone is listening to the soundtrack and they want to know which scene it reminds them of.
In these cases, a song index would be helpful.
I know that [Nichijou Wikia](https://nichijou.fandom.com/wiki/Category:Soundtrack) has something like this. (Not every song has a complete listing though.) [Example](https://nichijou.fandom.com/wiki/Poem_of_Yukko):
[](https://nichijou.fandom.com/wiki/Poem_of_Yukko)
Upvotes: 1 |
2019/07/09 | 3,353 | 11,427 | <issue_start>username_0: **As you may have already noticed, our new design is live!** ✧\*｡٩(ˊᗜˋ\*)و✧\*
Thanks for all the input over the years, and particularly in the most recent Meta posts around this ([here](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4245/49) and [here](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4229/49)). As was mentioned in [last month's update](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4264/49), we commissioned an artist with experience in the style to execute this community's design, and I'm *really* excited to present y'all with the final work, which I believe addresses most (if not all) of the concerns y'all had raised about our previous attempt.
Here are some screenshots, for posterity:
**Main site:**
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/svTS9.png)
**Meta site:**
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/MVgRX.png)
As mentioned previously, the logo also got some tweaks ([feedback](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4254/49)), thanks to Lisa! Our chat theme and [Twitter account](https://twitter.com/StackAnime) also got a refresh and will be updated soon, and you should also see some changes in the newsletter!
I mentioned in the last update that since the design would be generated outside our usual process, we'll only be doing any styling tweaks, or fixing egregious issues we somehow missed — so **if you stumble upon bugs, please post 'em as an answer here!** :)
I'd like to once again thank everyone here for their feedback and patience, and hope everyone enjoys this design! :D
---
Thanks for all the feedback below. I've added [status-completed](/questions/tagged/status-completed "show questions tagged 'status-completed'") to stuff we worked on, and cleared some other doubts around stuff we didn't work on. In addition to that, there were also a few things we spotted we'd missed the first time around:
* Fixed contrast issues on "site rooms" button in chat;
* Fixed contrast issues on "help | faq | legal | privacy policy | mobile" links at the bottom of the page in chat;
* Added the flying hat to the chat bar, to spruce it up a bit (will prolly take a bit longer to build, FYI);
* Some fixes to the Twitter logo.<issue_comment>username_1: [status-completed](/questions/tagged/status-completed "show questions tagged 'status-completed'")
The meta icon has a white artifact:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/qM0aV.png)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_1: [status-completed](/questions/tagged/status-completed "show questions tagged 'status-completed'")
Can the white outlines on the Meta images be removed?
There doesn't seem to be, on the surface, any extra border on the images on main.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/w3xOr.png)[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/iOMfZ.png)
These are more easily seen when using something like [Dark Reader](https://darkreader.org/):
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/8Rnhd.png)[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/2IF1y.png)
Below shows the difference between the two. It looks like the transformation sets the background to white when metaizing the images, and doesn't accurately handle alpha-transparency because of this. As it seems to only remove pixels that are exactly #ffffff.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/MKD66.png)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/H8duG.png)
---
**Note**: [The meta footer doesn't have these white borders](https://i.stack.imgur.com/dBuHk.png), but [main's footer does](https://i.stack.imgur.com/DAWN0.png).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: We were discussing the design a while ago in chat, I wrote this and [the comment](https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/50119499#50119499) received four stars:
>
> @Jnat It's hard to pin style down into precise words. To me the mockup looks like somebody was told to make something look japanese, but rather than using the vibrant colors and thick outlines characteristic of comics and animation, they went for more of a traditional style with soft pastels and thin lines more characteristic of traditional Japanese art, kind of like this:
>
>
> 
>
>
>
*[Utagawa Hiroshige, 1st Station: Shinagawa from series The Fifty-three Stations of the Tokaido, 183(3/4)](http://blog.japanesecreations.com/traditional-japanese-art-the-floating-world-of-ukiyo-e)*
I feel like you folk did a great job listening to that feedback and that the new background design is a good improvement in these regards, and the flatter more vibrant look helps to give it a look much more characteristic of anime. Moreover, I feel like the specific design choices invite a sense of an impending adventure with the way the folliage spreads out and the hat being blown away by the wind, just begging somebody to up between the grassy hills to get to the other side and retrieve it.
I am pleasantly surprised to say that I like the new design overall, and find it more befitting of our particular scope than what we had before. It reminds me of the appearance of a Studio Ghibili film much more-so than I anticipated. I think the only thing left is to make minor tweaks to fix minor errors such as what the others have demonstrated.
Speaking of which, if I may make one comment, I think the C.S.S. colors used in chat still appear to be optimized for the prior background. We may want to make the greens *somewhat* darker and earthier so that they match the grass better. It applies especially so to the area containing the chatbox.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: [status-completed](/questions/tagged/status-completed "show questions tagged 'status-completed'")
On Firefox, Windows 10, with a screen size of 1920x1080, the leaves seem to overlap the word "licensed" on the footer.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/wWrge.png)
As pointed out by [username_1](https://chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/50966048#50966048), on higher resolutions, it seems to overlap the footer even more.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/4Thcp.png)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: [status-bydesign](/questions/tagged/status-bydesign "show questions tagged 'status-bydesign'")
Not sure if this is a bug or not, but [the hat](https://cdn.sstatic.net/Sites/anime/img/site-background-image-hat.png) on the left doesn't scroll, compared to [the kite](https://cdn.sstatic.net/Sites/anime/img/site-background-image-kite.png) on the right. Not sure which behavior is the correct one, but currently it feels inconsistent.
Observed on Chrome 75, Windows 10, with & without userscript, and additionally in incognito mode.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: A nice to have but not necessarily required (and might be controversial?),
since the kite is already scrolling, make the whole 5 clouds ([top-left](https://cdn.sstatic.net/Sites/anime/img/site-background-image-cl-tl.png), [top-right](https://cdn.sstatic.net/Sites/anime/img/site-background-image-cl-tr.png), [mid](https://cdn.sstatic.net/Sites/anime/img/site-background-image-cl-mid.png), [bottom-left](https://cdn.sstatic.net/Sites/anime/img/site-background-image-cl-bl.png), [bottom-right](https://cdn.sstatic.net/Sites/anime/img/site-background-image-cl-br.png)) also scroll very slowly to simulate [parallax effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallax_scrolling).
... unless the scrolling kite is actually a bug and should be static (then this is all moot)...
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: I'm faced with a paradox.
On the one hand, this still doesn't *really* incorporate the designs we talked about in a few of these sessions. I use that loosely since we still got the [panning sky shot](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4231/102).
...and yet, I actually *like* this. The theme fits well. There are stylistic choices which I feel just click together instead of it feeling awkward or rash.
I kind of wish it were a bit...*more*, since not every series deals with panning sky shots, and on its face this is actually fairly blank without any real indication that there's anything to do with anime or manga *except* the look and feel, but this is definitely good work. I'm satisfied!
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: [status-bydesign](/questions/tagged/status-bydesign "show questions tagged 'status-bydesign'")
<https://anime.stackexchange.com/404> is still generic. Can we spruce that up, too?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_6: [support](/questions/tagged/support "show questions tagged 'support'")
Why is footer taking too much space when compared to other graduated sites with custom design?
Following is Anime main site footer which is leaving empty space
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/jH6WP.jpg)
When I compared with other sites with a custom design, the footer is looking like it is taking more space.
Is this intentional to give space for the picture?
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/TPGeM.jpg)
These screenshots are taken on 1024x768 resolution with responsiveness enabled.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_7: As [Aki](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4278/45677), [Dimitri](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4276/45677), and [Nog](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4283/45677) have all mentioned: the variety of appearances for different users ought to be amalgamated somehow. I can't reproduce the appearance of [Jnat's view](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4272/45677) by any combination of browser or "Hide Left Navigation" and "Hide Hot Network Questions" [checkbox settings](https://anime.stackexchange.com/users/preferences/current).
Instead of seeing this on the bottom (or Jnat's view):
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/UviuI.png)
I see this (full page, and bottom):
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/GcaSH.jpg)
Even playing with "Hide Left Navigation" and "Hide Hot Network Questions" checkboxes doesn't bring the kite into view.
Using an unusual browser (TubeMate) produces a slightly better view (though it's unlikely many people use it):
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/u3Akb.jpg)
I believe that the genius and subtlety of the CSS positioning is lost for many.
A fix would be to push everything to the bottom when the user is at the bottom of the webpage and proportionately scroll the kite, hat, and their 'background clouds' upward when the user is at the top of the webpage - thus providing a parallax movement that works for a majority of our users and doesn't leave some elements always hidden.
Upvotes: 2 |
2019/09/17 | 1,471 | 5,757 | <issue_start>username_0: why I am asking for help, it is basically because I am new to anime. I am also a user of other communities like StackOverflow and puzzle exchange. but I don't get the reasons why the questions are put up on hold. please let me know someone who is good with explanations or can provide me better answers with anime meta links...
Question links
I asked krazer but he didn't say a word, I update question still no response from his side...
[How Professor ox discovered Ash's pikachu? it is a still Pokemon mystery [on hold]](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/55312/how-professor-ox-discovered-ashs-pikachu-it-is-a-still-pokemon-mystery)
I don't know what he is trying to say there? all the theories have proper reference.
[Is Ash is he Pokemon Master now? after winning Alola league championship? [on hold]](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/55309/is-ash-is-he-pokemon-master-now-after-winning-alola-league-championship)<issue_comment>username_1: I'll try and help you to understand it a bit better.
Lets start off by breaking down your [first post: is ash is he pokemon master now?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/55309/is-ash-is-he-pokemon-master-now-after-winning-alola-league-championship)
**The question**
>
> It is mentioned in many anime theories
>
>
>
Here you mention that there are anime theories, theories are usually opinion based, and not necessarily based on cannon content. Because you did not reference any of these sources by for example, quoting or linking(!) to said theories it also becomes very hard for anyone to determine otherwise.
Without any other context, or details, this sounds like it is based on a opinion, and you are looking to confirm said opinion.
**the answer**
The answer starts off nice, you convey that you tried to obtain the information directly from it's source, but could not obtain it.
However, the second part of your answer mentions a lot of theories. Yet again without any source of said theories. Just looking at the content tells me that it is most likely copied verbatim from some site. By not mentioning which site, you are actually [committing plagiarism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism). If you wish to quote something, always refer to where you got it from.
Just as the answer, theories implies that it is 'opinion' based. And without any source to really confirm the quotes (manga chapters, episodes, wiki articles, author notes) it becomes really hard to proof otherwise.
---
Next up, lets cover [How Professor ox discovered Ash's pikachu? it is a still Pokemon mystery](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/55312/how-professor-ox-discovered-ashs-pikachu-it-is-a-still-pokemon-mystery)
**The title**
The title has me a bit confused. You are asking about a non existing professor, and follow it up by making a statement that it is still a mystery.
A good title would tell somebody that looked at it what the question is about. I think this would have made for a good title, if you would have omitted the part after the ?
**The question**
You give a pretty elaborate explanation all though I have a very hard time tieing the knots together. Using some of the episodes as a reference as to when something happened, or manga chapters there where applicable would significantly help understanding your explanation there.
Later on in the spoiler block, you mention a theory, once again without a source, which goes and ask (3) different questions from what you tried to ask in your title. By the end of the question, I, personally, am still unclear on what you actually want to ask here. Did you want to know how Proffesor oak found pickachu? Or why pickachu didn't evolve? Or what happened ash was born?
All together it is a fairly confusing question.
---
Now just because the questions are closed, doesn't mean you won't be able to open them again. However you will need to improve them some what. In the [help center](https://anime.stackexchange.com/help) you can find some more guidance on what makes a good question/answer as well. And as you have enough reputation already, you can also join us in the [chat](https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/6697/maid-cafe-), where you can also ask people to help if they want and have the time.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: Your questions and answers make very broad and biased assumptions even if you claim to cite a specific reference or references. You are drawing the conclusions you want and then centering the basis of your claim as if they were a fact. They simply are not. A theory based off a theory is what it is, a theory. Without specific canonical sources or references to reinforce those theories they remain a fan-theory, and non-canonical.
While fan-theories based on actual facts are not off-topic, your questions and answers stack theories upon theories. It's much like saying if Theory A, B, D is true then X, Y, Q, must be as well, therefore W, V, F, must've happened.
Whether you like it or not, questions on the Stack Exchange series of sites should be based on facts. How else would you be convinced? By facts or just someone else's opinion? By facts of course. If a question only attracts opinionated answers, it is not possible to distinguish the right answer from the wrong one.
The nuanced presentation your questions have provided reflects your stubbornness to to push an particular idea to an audience. But your articulation of the so-called facts leaves bit to be desired and comes off as unconvincing. IF you feel that you are correct then I would invite you to provide a more detailed explanation of why you believe something is what it is instead of resorting to ad hominem rebuttals.
Upvotes: 2 |
2019/12/11 | 608 | 1,971 | <issue_start>username_0: Tags under review here:
>
> * [blend-s](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/blend-s "show questions tagged 'blend-s'")
> * [how-clumsy-you-are-miss-ueno](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/how-clumsy-you-are-miss-ueno "show questions tagged 'how-clumsy-you-are-miss-ueno'")
>
>
>
---
I am thinking of adding some descriptions for these tags. The [blend-s](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/blend-s "show questions tagged 'blend-s'") tag has been used in numerous posts (including my own) here, and [how-clumsy-you-are-miss-ueno](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/how-clumsy-you-are-miss-ueno "show questions tagged 'how-clumsy-you-are-miss-ueno'") was only been used once (by me) so far. Neither of them have their own tag wiki descriptions, and I would like to request the tag wikis for the two tags be created.<issue_comment>username_1: You should be able to propose these yourself, by hitting the "help us create it" link on the tag page:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Efogt.png)
After you do so, your proposed edit will go to the suggested edits queue, where other members of the community can review it — and either reject, improve, or approve it.
Have a look at [How do I make good Tag Wikis/Excerpts?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2747/49), for some tips on how to write good tag wikis.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: [status-completed](/questions/tagged/status-completed "show questions tagged 'status-completed'").
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tag descriptions for the two tags has been implemented:
>
> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/kxlDD.png)
>
>
> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/mOH69.png)
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
2020/01/05 | 1,502 | 5,678 | <issue_start>username_0: Recently we've had our stellar diamond moderators step in the gap and close questions on the site which shouldn't be kept open for *too* long (mostly identification requests).
It got me to thinking - if we didn't have those diamond mods around, we wouldn't be able to get those kinds of questions closed fairly quickly.
Does anyone think that we should consider asking Stack Exchange to lower the close vote threshold to 3?<issue_comment>username_1: I don't have any privs here, but here's my general thoughts on the question
How many active reviewers are there?
====================================
If there's not a lot of active reviewers, that's a good reason to lower the threshold. The [close review stats page](https://anime.stackexchange.com/review/close/stats) seems to indicate there's not a lot of reviewing going on. The fact that there's two moderators in the top 10 also doesn't bode well (it typically means that moderators are cleaning out the queues because the community isn't voting enough).
How many close votes age away?
==============================
A problem I [noticed on DIY.SE](https://diy.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1478/can-we-get-the-close-vote-threshold-lowered-to-3) was that a lot of votes weren't being done to completion. A lot of times, it was due to votes aging away. If this is a persistent problem, it means the voting culture needs some help.
Is closure timely?
==================
A major reason we close questions is so you don't wind up with [terrible questions you can't get rid of](https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/6723/could-the-enterprise-beam-a-vampire-into-a-house-she-didn-t-have-permission-to-e). Once a question gets answers, it often starts garnering upvotes and the whole process [breaks down](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/258087/what-should-we-do-about-users-who-are-proud-to-be-help-vampires#comment34293_258088).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Some of you may have noticed the Meta Stack Exchange post - [Testing three-vote close and reopen on 13 network sites](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/364007/testing-three-vote-close-and-reopen-on-13-network-sites) (it's linked in the featured on meta sidebar) - we've finally got this project under way and Anime & Manga is one of the sites we'll be running the test on.
Starting tomorrow, I'll be changing the site setting and closing and reopening will require only three votes. This test will run for 45 days and will be turned back to five votes to close and reopen while I review the data from the 13 sites. After we've seen the impact, I'll be posting results and, if there aren't negative impacts, we will change the setting to three permanently.
A few weeks into this, I'll be posting a question here on meta to ask for your thoughts about this change, so you will have an opportunity to discuss the impact.
Thank you so much for your patience while we got this prioritized and scheduled. There's a lot more information in the MSE post, so please review it.
---
On a more specific note, I did read your answer to my MSE post and I understand your concern. This is on me. When I started this project in earnest in 2019, we were preparing to start running tests in January - and by "we" I mean Shog and I - he's written all of my queries and I'm a novice at best with SQL. And, well... he got fired - and I felt a little stuck because I wasn't sure how to pick up without his help.
Part of the delay in this is just practicality - we had only four CMs and couldn't keep up - and that's why we're finally able to get this out now - it was both prioritized and I felt like I could finally actually do it *well*. Because that's really important to me and I need to be able to focus on it and really analyze the data I get.
If the mods on this site are closing 98% of all questions that get closed and - even then - y'all still only have 66% of questions that get nominated to close actually handled (these are real stats for y'all)... then there *is* a big problem and I'm not even sure whether this will fix it. The mods here are doing a lot of great work but if there isn't a community here participating in reviewing, there's a lot bigger problem than this can fix and, well, while I hope this does help a lot, there may be more efficacious options.
One of the other reasons for the delay is that we did [roll out changes to review](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/360198/visual-design-changes-to-the-review-queues) in an attempt to get more people involved, help them understand how to review and make reviewing easier - and we didn't want to be testing two changes simultaneously.
As to not responding, that's on my plate, too. I should have - and [a comment I left on the question](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/364007/testing-three-vote-close-and-reopen-on-13-network-sites#comment1214748_364007) on MSE specifically recognizes that I've been remiss in keeping people updated, though I did [write an update answer on MSE](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/357750/what-is-the-status-of-three-vote-closure-testing-on-non-so-sites/358188#358188) to let people know what was going on in December, that wasn't necessarily visible to individual sites. I apologize for that. I struggle with giving people "bad" news ("this project is delayed") - but I'll try to work on that, too.
So, I'm very sorry about the delay in this project and the silence on my part - it is important and I want to find ways to ensure that close-worthy questions are getting closed on sites without putting a ton of pressure on moderators to do all the work.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2020/02/24 | 384 | 1,553 | <issue_start>username_0: This is just to discuss the on-topicness of [this question](https://anime.stackexchange.com/q/56875/52087).
What do you guys think?<issue_comment>username_1: The on-topicness is questionable. You make little to no case about how the theorem relates to the UI in question on Maya's screen.
The Riemann zeta-function is about reciprocal derivatives. It's representation here is within 3 dimension, with color representing depth.
You question may be more on-topic if it were worded more in regards to what inspired the interface design than assuming it had something to do with the Riemann zeta-function, besides the fact that they seem similar.
We cannot migrate this question because such a topic is not on-topic with any of the math-related SE sites. Please consider rephrasing your question to me more in scope with the aesthetic design rather than any mathematical theorems that you believe it may represent (you may still mention it in passing, but it should not be the main focus as it will skew the topic towards it rather that what inspired the design).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: The question *could* be on-topic if the UI in question is *really* showing the Riemann zeta function. I believe the question would be then also on-topic under [symbolism](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/symbolism "show questions tagged 'symbolism'").
However, since the current premise is very weak that even the OP later doubt themself, it is hard to assume if the current wording is on-topic.
Upvotes: 1 |
2020/03/23 | 684 | 1,986 | <issue_start>username_0: About a week or two ago I realized that Love Live's school idol music NEVER uses the diminished chord out of the seven [diatonic chords](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Function_(music)#Viennese_theory_of_the_degrees) in a key.
In major keys, the diatonic chords are:
>
> I / ii / iii / IV / V / vi / viio
>
>
>
And in minor keys:
>
> i / iio / III / iv / v / VI / VII
>
>
>
But the thing here is, that neither the viio chord in major keys nor the iio in minor is used in Love Live's music. In minor keys, sometimes even that v chord is used. Love Live tends to use both major and minor keys, and uses all of the diatonic chords EXCEPT for the viio and iio.
For example, in [this song](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUvNP_BsU6E) in D minor, I hear:
>
> Dm, F, Gm, A, Bb, C (i, III, iv, V, VI, VII)
>
>
>
But I cannot find Edim (iio) ANYWHERE in the song.
Also in [*Aishiteru Banzai*,](https://tabs.ultimate-guitar.com/tab/misc-cartoons/love-live-school-idol-project-aishiteru-banzai-chords-1502626), you could definitely see E, F#m, G#m, A, B, C#m, but **there is no D#dim AT ALL.**
Now I am curious about is there a particular reason why Love Live does not use the diminished diatonic chord. Will my question be on-topic if I post it on A&M?<issue_comment>username_1: No, this would not be on topic on A&M.
This question would not be about Anime or Manga as defined in the scope in the [help center](https://anime.stackexchange.com/help), as it is not about Anime or Manga, but about musical analysis.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Music theory is most certainly not on-topic.
Progressions using
vii∘ (I–IV–vii∘–I and I–ii–vii∘–I) are less common because of the instability of diminished chords. The diminished tone dilemma you pose is encapsulated in [this question](https://music.stackexchange.com/questions/79438/are-the-diminished-chords-not-that-common-in-modern-popular-music) on music.se.
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer] |
2020/04/16 | 974 | 3,342 | <issue_start>username_0: This is a follow-up to [this question.](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4340/are-questions-relating-to-musical-analysis-of-anime-songs-on-topic-or-not)
Now I want to ask for some examples of Love Live OST songs that use the diminished viio chord, if they DO use the chord.
Will THIS be on-topic, then?
---
Because it is strange that Love Live very often uses the six major and minor diatonic chords while trying their best to **AVOID** using the diminished diatonic chord. ***Yes, that particular chord.***
It is VERY interesting. I've never seen Love Live use that chord so far while in other anime songs it is used quite often.
For example, the Blend S OP theme (Bon Appetit S) begins with "flip-flopping" I, bVII, and viio chords all over a tonic bass pedal.
>
> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/efW0d.png)
>
>
>
Would you ever think Love Live would write such a harmony like this?<issue_comment>username_1: No.
Say what you will about relativeness, but keep in mind we explicitly stated to you prior that music theory questions are off-topic. The subject of diminished cords is music theory. No matter how much you try to twist things it is still music theory and not on-topic. Please keep in mind that we do not have the expertise to answer these questions, and that is why they are considered off-topic.
To understand what a diminished chord, one must first understand the basics of music theory. We cannot assume that lay users of this recreational Q&A site (as diverse as it can be) can understand such concepts and comprehend your intent. Such is why the question is considered off-topic. Lack of knowledge or expertise to discern context, due to specialized knowledge beyond the current scope of the site (anime and manga *fans*, not professionals).
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Krazer says:
>
> **No.** To understand what a diminished chord, one must first understand the basics of music theory. We cannot assume that lay users of this recreational Q&A site (as diverse as it can be) can understand such concepts and comprehend your intent. Such is why the question is considered off-topic. Lack of knowledge or expertise to discern context, due to specialized knowledge beyond the current scope of the site (anime and manga **fans**, not professionals).
>
>
>
---
But even if it's not on-topic, I don't know what to say.
Earlier today I was looking up on some sheet music of anime songs. When I landed on the Love Live OST *Phychic Fire* by Nico, Eri, and Maki, **this is what I found:**
>
> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/IV5El.png)
>
>
>
The key of the OST is D minor. I was totally shocked because I see a E half-diminished chord (Em7b5, iiø7 of D minor) hanging all over measure 20. This was already surprising enough, but I reached a point where I peed myself (without even making it to the restroom) when I noticed the cadence of Em7b5-A-Dm (iiø7-V-i, with the soprano ending on F5) on measures 20-22, known as a **root position IAC.**
---
**Now** what I am curious about is why the diatonic half-diminished chord (or diminished triad) is used more often as iiø in minor than in viiø in major.
Upvotes: -1 [selected_answer] |
2020/04/23 | 2,654 | 11,400 | <issue_start>username_0: Maybe there's just some confirmation or recency bias going on, but it feels to me that in recent months there's been a large upsurge in questions of the form "What is the song playing in Episode X of show Y at time Z?" - for example, there are plenty of recent questions including [what song](https://anime.stackexchange.com/search?tab=newest&q=%22what%20song%22) or [name of the song](https://anime.stackexchange.com/search?tab=newest&q=%22name%20of%20the%20song%22), and indeed 7 of the 15 most recent questions are asking some form of song identification, of which a grand total of 1 has received an upvote, and 1 has received an answer.
It looks like there was [some discussion 3 years ago](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4026/should-music-requests-stay-on-topic) (and about a year after show identification requests were disallowed from the site), but as I said they seem to be on the rise, at least as a proportion of new questions.
While song identification requests don't have quite the same problems as show identification ones, there are some reasons why I think they don't necessarily provide a lot of value:
* As in show identification questions, the askers rarely do much more than ask their question and leave.
* The questions are typically poor quality - the complete question is generally exactly as I described at the start, there is no evidence that the asker has done any of their own searching, and it doesn't seem like there's much follow-up done on most of them either to provide more information or to thank the people who track down an answer.
* Frequently, the questions are asking about a recent episode of a currently airing show. In those cases, it's likely to be some time before the soundtrack gets released, which is the best opportunity to actually identify the tracks by name, but by that time the asker has probably forgotten they even asked about it.
* Sometimes, the question has no available answer ever, because the show's soundtrack doesn't get released, or it's released without that particular piece of background music included. *Sometimes*, that fact is interesting in and of itself, but then there usually isn't enough information to provide any answer other than "We don't know".
Short of someone going back and trying to answer all the song identification questions that might now be answerable, is it worth revisiting the question of whether to make these kinds of questions off-topic?<issue_comment>username_1: Probably.
Personally, I am currently undecided as to whether these questions should remain on-topic. Although, yes, I agree that there have been a lot of music identification requests lately that are unclear and some do not even log back to re-edit their questions, there are also some okay, if not good, quality music identification posts. There are also those who reads and accepts suggestions to make the question clearer. There are those who actually put effort on finding out what they were and make you want to help them, albeit rarely.
However, if this influx of low-quality music identification requests go on for some time, making it off-topic seems fair, too, as it might put off visitors, expecting probably more interesting topics on anime and manga, only for the latest topics to be mostly identification requests of low quality.
If these questions should remain off-topic, it would be possible to, like with identification questions, create a topic/thread where we redirect the asker, if there are those willing to do so. This page would contain resources, like for example, common websites where OSTs and the like are usually found and/or some tips on how to search for OST's on their own. Similar to this [one](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/21618/where-is-this-picture-from-how-do-i-use-reverse-image-search-to-find-the-source). Or we can simply redirect them to chat. This, to me, would be fair to those who are actually making an effort in trying to find an answer to their question.
It might be worth mentioning, however, that making questions off-topic do not necessarily prevent users from asking them. Some do not read or skim through the tour page, of which I am guilty on my first time here (sorry). Identification requests are still here, even though they were already off-topic. Maybe we probably need to do something else other than making these questions off-topic so users would stop or can't ask them? Although, I am out of ideas as to how this would be done.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Personally, I have no interest in music identification questions. If we continue to allow them, I think that [music](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/music "show questions tagged 'music'") should be renamed (and re-wiki’d) to [music-identification](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/music-identification "show questions tagged 'music-identification'") and then we create a new tag for non-id music questions (as this seems to be less work; non-id music questions are rare but still exist: [How are the themes and songs picked for a particular series?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/q/3744/50617)) so that music id questions can be easily ignored. (I think we would also need to add the tag to some questions that only have an anime tag.) It also opens the door for employing [tag warnings](https://english.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11865/191178) to try to address the issues with these questions so long as OPs are using the tag (as opposed to having it edited in).
So long as it’s easy to ignore music id questions I don’t care if they’re allowed or not.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It *is* starting to get to that point, isn't it?
So I have two thoughts to this - one and half of them are pessimistic, the other is largely a question for us all.
To start off with...
What kind of community do we want to be?
========================================
Do we *want* to be the place where people can ask us the question about what music was used in the 38th episode of *Pokemon*, just before Pikachu let loose a Thunderbolt? (Note: this particular episode would be *really* bad to try to find the song for...)
Do we want to be the place that offers discussions about the motifs of songs played throughout shows, such as when *Blumenkranz* started playing during an early fight scene with Ryuuko in *Kill la Kill* after a transformation?
Or do we not care enough because it's easy enough to ignore?
My personal opinion is that **I would rather not permit music identification requests for the same reason as show/manga identification requests**. It's not going to *stop* them, but it'll give us more cover/impetus to start closing those questions.
My second thought:
Would we get the support from Stack Exchange to make this change?
=================================================================
Behold, my pessimism laid bare: I'm not so sure that, with the current situation in the world and with Stack Exchange Inc. that they can really spare the resources to help us out here.
But, do we need them? If we had enough of a quorum to decide this, I *think* diamond moderators could just change the verbiage of the close vote reason to make it work.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: If the majority of the community does not enjoy seeing these types of questions, I am all for rolling them under the music identification questions. But there might be more to all of this besides music id-reqs.
I've been pondering about this and issues like for quite a while. It's about time we considered looking deeper instead of just scratching the surface.
What might be lurking beneath
=============================
I personally feel that there is a deeper underlying issue that lurks beneath it all. Instead of picking off types questions we don't like, I'd prefer to ask the community about what types of questions and content they wish to see more of. But I do realize that it's not an easy task due to ambiguity, so perhaps listing potential problem areas or pain points can be helpful in finding the underlying issue. Getting rid of certain types of questions feels more like addressing symptoms than addressing the cause imo.
We are what we are
==================
We're not going to get much support from SE, inc, in developing the community, so we need to look at ourselves and see what we want more of. We've ask for feedback in the past, but most of what we got back was just numbers and data. We're free to develop our community as we like. We don't have have to commit to the same culture as other SE sites. We can set our own precedence as long as we are within SE, inc's terms and guidlines. Various incidents in the past have displaced much of the previously active community, so there have been less and less incentives for participation. We should take the good and the bad and find a way that works for us with what we have.
Us, the community, and where we are now
=======================================
The disinterest and distate in music request become apparent in a vacuum of activity as more pop up than new questions. From past experiences, I've come to understand that the community is divided or unsure on what it likes and/or would like to see, but they tend to be more united on what they wish to see less off.
We're a loose gaggle of people (with the occasional duck wandering in) from different backgrounds located in differ areas, from past experiences, coordinating an event to get together with will be tricky.
Finding focus on the community
==============================
If we want to discuss the removal of music id-reqs we should also looking at addressing less desirable content across the site and community. Once we have a idea of the undesirable areas we can work on recifying or incentivizing the community to help contribute to the betterment of these problems, through rep bounties or other extrinsic and intrinsic means (potentially sponsored by the mods and anyone interested in contributing), via something like a bounty or quest board.
Finding what's right for the community
======================================
Finding the right content to drive user interest is tricky. Chat lately has been a very contemptuous place for certain types of anime content, so interest and activity has waned considerably.
Forcing content or participation can cause interest to fizzle out with time. We are community on a recreational topic so we don't command much authority in anything besides Japanese and like style cartoons. It's an interest and past time not to be take seriously by most people, despite the work that a few do to nurture what they enjoy.
The past, present, and what's to come
=====================================
In the past we've tried throwing things at a wall to see what sticks. The results, sadly, didn't develope into much. Do instead of focusing on ambigious and potentially naive like to haves. Let's focus on a listing things the community finds less desirable. If we can collaborate on that perhaps it's a direction to move in winning back participation in the community.
It's about time we thought about putting the people back into the community. Every bit of feedback from the community matters. After all, with out its users, a community is nothing but a shell. It's about time we started talking more.
Upvotes: 3 |
2020/05/11 | 7,306 | 28,249 | <issue_start>username_0: Dear Fellow Members and Lurkers of the Community,
In these trying pandemic times, we find ourselves with an excess of time and a need to apply it. Since our graduation and our “design graduation” we’ve had many bumps in the road arriving to where we are today. Due to various personal obligations and political turmoils, the community has stagnated a bit and could use some revitalization. To start rectifying, the active moderation staff here, <NAME> and myself, have gotten together to make plans to clean up and revitalize that which has been lost throughout the years. We do not expect immediate results, but we intend to do some clean up and enhancements where we can. Any community members willing to contribute are welcome to join and reach out, even if it is to provide minor feedback.
The some of the objectives of this initiative we have planned include, but is not limited to:
* Consolidating all current site policies in an easy to reference and
provide a platform to review and propose changes to these
policies.
* A better, more customized FAQ (i.e. a how to use guide) for new users
for introducing them to the Q&A site format as well as the community
culture in general.
* Investigating, exploring, and deprecating unpopular questions and
topics.
* Exploring avenues to raise user interests, such community content
corners for engagement.
* Opening up a new venue for private feedback (positive and negative).
With this initiative, the active moderation staff intends to provide better transparency on efforts concerning this site and it’s community in general. We intend to post an update to the community at least once a month (tentatively set for the first weekend of each month). Users are free to provide feedback as an answer via the meta post, contact form, or by email as they find appropriate.
Why do this?
------------
Since the concept of this community from Area 51, to the beta, to it’s graduation, until now. There have been many great policies created by new and old members of the community that have persisted to the present day. Unfortunately there hasn’t been an efficient means to catalog these answers, so some of them have been collecting dust.
What's on the agenda this month?
--------------------------------
This month, we are looking to create a consolidated master list of current and existing site policies, with the intent to create a system for better tracking, updating, and providing feedback and revisions for these policies. We intend to use this as a springboard for enhancements to various areas of on-topicness, consistency on how to use certain tags, possibly provide a style guide for consolidating tag wikis and wiki excerpts, and possibly also provide guidelines for those answers that “need citations”. This is a long term endeavor, so we don’t intend to roll out everything all at once, we also expect to make changes to existing plans as we move forward.
Additionally, because the community has spoken out about it we will be working on the depreciation of music id-requests and providing a written policy to discourage these types of unpopular questions. Specific details beyond the previous meta post concerning the topic are pending as we are still in the process of discussion.
Anything else?
--------------
As a bit of a side note, we are looking to implement a content corner of sorts mostly for the amusement of the community. It’s mostly for the enjoyment of the community to top-off every announcement. Participation is optional, feedback would be appreciated.
Contributions and coordination from the community (no matter how minor) is welcome and appreciated at all times. We also understand that some people would feel uncomfortable with public forums, for those you can also reach out to us directly (via the contact form or by email). You will find the means to contact us in our A&M community profiles.
Without wax,
Your friendly neighborhood Anime & Manga Moderators (кяαzєя & dimitri mx)
---
With all that out of the way, here's something for your amusement:
**Did You Know? – Anime and Manga Edition**
When you read a manga or watch an anime, so you ever wonder what those seemingly permanent lines on the cheeks of characters are?
They are called "kote lines" (コテ線) likely originated from KoteKoteJapan コテコテJAPAN, a column in a 90's magazine that focused on arcade games.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/5lhqX.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Eqaea.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/WJdb2.jpg)
These lines are not there to express emotion, but are there to give dimensionality to the cheeks or make them seem more rosy. Variations can be expressed in many ways with dark colored lines or red color ones. Notable examples include the main protagonist of the Pokemon, Fafner, Slayers, Sailor Moon, Hidamari Sketch, amongst other series. Sometimes you they can be referred to as "whiskers" (ヒゲ, hige) by those unfamiliar with the term.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/8mz3A.png)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/NiaN2.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/byaCq.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/caMWW.jpg)<issue_comment>username_1: Consolidating all Site Policies
===============================
To be fair, we don't have a whole lot in the way of this...
* [What identification requests are acceptable here? Otherwise, where else can I possibly get helped with it?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4189/102)
* [What topics outside of anime and manga can I ask about?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2535/102)
* [How do we deal with copyrighted material on our site?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/404/102) (only because this one [wound up biting us pretty hard a while back](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4050/102))
The big thing is to make it obvious and up-front about what policies we've formed as a result of our community being around for a while. The big ones that I can think of are up above.
I want to make it clear that:
* We're perfectly OK with questions about Manwha.
* We're cool with Avatar, RWBY and Legend of Korra.
* We like talking about Anime games, like Touhou, Kantai Collection and iM@S.
* Light novels are cool tool; we like to read as well.
* Visual novels are games first (so no gameplay pointers), but plot and story aren't out of scope.
* We don't tolerate links to fansubs/fandubs or any sites which encourage the piracy of Anime/Manga.
* We can *talk* about music in anime, we're just [trying to decide if we're as keen on *identifying* it for you](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4350/102).
How should we go about conveying this?
--------------------------------------
The above is all meta content, and would ideally be the first thing someone sees when they post a question on the site.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/AyMEh.png)
It can't be shoved off to the right since no one will ever look at it, and it would make this whole exercise fruitless. We could hope for someone to - maybe - put in some regular expressions to filter out obvious phrases like, "I forgot the name of" in a question, or "I'm looking for this anime/manga/show/book/etc", but honestly that involves a dev's time and I get the distinct impression that's costly right now.
How should we go about revising, revisiting and updating these policies?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
One thing I noticed that we lack is a FAQ meta post which contains a link to all of our FAQs. I may create one before the end of the weekend just to get that ball rolling, but this can serve as a main hub of where information is added which pertains to the actual FAQ of the site. This can also give us the appropriate visibility into what we're saying are our policies, or what we're thinking about should become our policies.
At the end of the day, it might turn out that we have too many.
A better FAQ
============
I feel like this is a separate page that is built by Stack Exchange and maintained in some capacity by us. I don't want to even think about *how* to wire it up, but the stark reality is that what we get "for free" doesn't seem to cover it, nor does it give us the ability to freely elaborate or describe why we don't want questions of type X on the site without making someone go on a treasure hunt on Meta.
Maybe something that is rooted in Community Wiki which gives us the same presentation abilities as the [actual on-topic page](https://anime.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic).
This, too, would require dev/CM attention, though.
---
I'm guessing then that if we're looking to improve on these things and really make it clear what we're about (e.g. celebrating what we want to talk about and letting everyone know what our scope is which *also* serves to inform what we don't want to talk about), we may have to get on Stack Exchange's radar sooner rather than later. I don't believe that we can motivate a lot of change without their involvement, unless I'm not thinking outside the box enough here.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: That Did You Know should really be an answer to [What are those weird three-line blushy things on some anime/manga characters cheeks?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/45087/what-are-those-weird-three-line-blushy-things-on-some-anime-manga-characters-che) ;)
I started on this endeavor of consolidating a master list of current and existing site policies privately some years ago and stopped prematurely (it was a monumental task). I recall <NAME> also did the same things independently. I will probably not revisit them anymore, so I post them below for anyone who's interested (they're very disorganized though). Take them or leave them.
---
Anime & Manga StackExchange Meta
================================
Continue from [Should we ask answerers to give a reference?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/191/should-we-ask-answerers-to-give-a-reference)
[allowed-topics](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/allowed-topics "show questions tagged 'allowed-topics'")
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
### [Are animations or comics inspired by Japanese culture or styles considered on-topic?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1/8486) [How is anime defined?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/157/8486)
E.g. Avatar, <NAME>, Dreamland (French "manga", read right-to-left?), OEL manga.
Where to draw the line?
* People tend to agree that manhwa and manhua should be on-topic.
* None of the above examples are catalogued by MAL (although they used to be).
* To the Japanese, there are only anime and manga — reason to be more permissive?
* Should have Japanese influence (Japan has historical dominance of East Asia, so manhwa and manhwa count). Otherwise, might as well call Cartoons and Comics SE. Aarthi's post is conflicting itself, e.g. whether on-topic shouldn't be based on what looks like manga, but rather the strength of Japanese influence (but this is subjective and not determinable). However, anime-inspired (read: influence :x:) Western shows should be disallowed. (What about cartoon/hollywood-inspired Japanese shows like Oblivion Island?) Since anime is outsourced so much these days, does it still matter?
* Some of the episodes in the second season of Avatar/TLoK are done by Japanese studio, but they're usually not considered anime, so the best indicator is probably if the original audio is in Japanese or not. (<NAME>)
* My viewpoint: since anime and manga are loan words from Japan for terms that already exist in English, should restrict to that which are originally Japanese, unless if there is an e.g. all-English anime from Japan, then also restrict to from Japan (how to determine, though, because outsource; which parts of production are the deciding factors?). For the time being, could be lenient to manhwa and manhua. Other option is to expand to CJK countries.
>
> ANN editors identify two technical definitions of anime, 1) by origin and 2) by style. They agree to "by origin" definition.
>
>
> Both Wikipedia and Anime News Network apply the "per origin" definition.
>
>
>
### [Can we also discuss Visual Novels, Light Novels and other related media?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3/8486) [Are questions about VOCALOID allowed?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/133/8486)
Case in point: Melty Blood (LN-ish).
* OK if asking about plot (in particular, play order), but not mechanisms (Arqade).
Argument: Part of otaku culture. OK if there is a "main" anime/manga. Some say only OK if making comparisons to the anime/manga.
Note: VNs are welcome on Arqade (e.g. Analogue: A Hate Story).
### [Are questions about technical aspects of visual novels on-topic?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/11/8486)
Pro: Nearly computer-illiterate users wouldn't know how to ask this question at a site like Super User or Digital Signal Processing, and even if they gave the right answer (which anyone will tell you is AGTH/ITH, both of which are VN-specific) said user would likely not be able to follow the instructions. What problem does allowing occasional technology-related questions that are also anime-related cause, so long as they don't overwhelm the other questions?
Con: By extension, we would allow "I can't play Episode X of anime Y from group Z, help!" or "Why can't I play Visual Novel X?"
Refute: First one is illegal, moot. Both are not interesting (low votes and helpfulness). Too localized become close reason.
### [Are questions about how to make anime and manga off-topic?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/6/8486)
Generic techniques or software should be asked on Graphic Design or Video Production because that's where the experts are. The question must be focused tightly on the knowledge of how Japanese actually make anime, not on how they might. Acceptable: in the booklet of Hoshi no Koe, the first self-producted anime by username_1 Shinkai, software he used back in early 2000 are listed: Photoshop 5 (2D), Lightwave 6.5 (CGI), Commotion DV3, Adobe After Effects 4.0.
### [Are live-action series based on anime/manga/light novels on topic here?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/13/8486)
Yes, if tied/compared to anime/manga. (Not sure about light novels.)
### [Are stage productions based on anime/manga on topic here?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/36/8486)
Seijitsu's answer. In short, allow anime musicals, audio dramas based on manga/anime, and manga-based novels as on-topic.
### [Should event-related topics be allowed?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/51/8486)
Should we allow questions like "Where AnimExpo will be?" or "How many people went to Comiket 83?" No. Use meta or chat for that.
### [Is discussing hentai allowed?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/21/8486)
Yes, but only if you keep them scientific. (Note SE site used by 13 age and above, and site policy forbids pornographic materials.)
### [What do we do with questions about future events/releases?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/27/8486)
Grace: "A news outlet needs to be on top of their topic, they need to be proactive about their information before the masses even know they should ask about it. We're restricted on this front because we are a reactive service - we provide answers only in so far as people come in to our service. Which means that our ability to provide updates and news is only reflective of those who ask about it on our site. We don't have a motivation to seek out the latest and hottest out there because it's not in our mission to distribute this manner of information."
"I think that our system is very inefficient for this kind of distribution. It would be wiser for us to leave the distribution of news to other sites, and keep our strength at Q&A knowledge." So off-topic.
### [Are “Identify this” questions on-topic?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/56/8486)
Jeff's opinion: <http://meta.stackexchange.com/a/76024>
Being good at story identification is definitely a benchmark at how attractive a discussion site about SF is. If the questions offend you, put story-identification (or whatever we end up using) in your ignored tags list. And if the question is really terrible (“I read a book and it maybe had a green cover”, it can be closed, on merits, not because of its nature.
On Arqade, no (except if have screenshot).
### [Should we allow questions that are about Japanese language use in Anime/Manga?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/69/8486) [Are Japanese Sound Symbols on-topic here, or on Japanese Language & Usage](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/173/8486)
In a case such as this, where the use of a certain language quirk is a central part of a character's personality and/or their backstory, it should be on-topic here.
Questions about Japanese itself (e.g. "Translate this") should be considered off-topic, but questions which are in some way connected to the plot (e.g. "What is character X implying by saying ") are fine so long as they can't be answered by merely a translation but also require some understanding of the plot.
Sound symbols off-topic. Ask on Japanese.SE.
### [Should we allow “I want to skip the filler in series X” questions?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/74/8486)
What is filler/canon? "Things in are decidedly not canon, as created by the original author or production company."
Trigun, which started as an incomplete manga where the anime filled in some of the story gaps.
In Naruto's case, the author has acknowledged that anime filler in Naruto is non-canon (as seen numerous times by when the anime does something that the manga contradicts later).
The One Punch Man re-draw has new scenes added to existing material and new side stories that weren't in the original web-comic, however all the changes were ok'd/written by the original Author and simply enhance the series as a whole.
A question of this nature could be asked at most once per series.
"Filler content" is a slightly ambiguous term. For instance, many manga have extra chapters that get animated but aren't related to the plot of the story. It's not clear whether or not these should count as filler. I'd suggest that these sorts of questions are better phrased as comparisons between the anime and the source material, e.g. "Which Naruto episodes are not based on content from the manga?" As far as I know filler content is almost never added for anime-original series, so this doesn't seem terribly restrictive.
The answer is usually easily searchable. Most series have their dedicated wikis, where this information is available complete with color-coding. As a result, asking this question in itself, constitutes poor research and as per SE rule/etiquette, would be closed.
In many cases, episodes cannot be separated easily into "canon" and "filler". Several canon episodes have some amount of filler in between. It would be impossible to give a perfectly correct answer, because it would involve, "from 4:30 to 8:00 in episode 487, the main characters just fool around, which is not in the manga, and hence filler."
### [Should we allow “where can I find X info / resource about anime / manga”?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/81/8486)
Main or meta? C++ booklist is on main (unlocked and updated only once in a while), but SE discourages poll type question. But attracts many users in the short run, so post on main and close as OT but for historical purposes? Quality will degrade in the long run if not closed.
### [Can you ask questions even if the answer is easily found elsewhere?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/112/8486)
"Too Simple" is something which has been discussed on Stack Exchange before, and was implemented on other sites with a General Reference close reason. It was considered a failure though, since all it results in is users drawing arbitrary lines in the sand for when a question is "too simple", and what sites are considered general reference.
Furthermore, a tool already exists for questions which are too simple, it's called a downvote.
### [“Why did they write it that way?” questions should be off-topic](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/150/8486)
Need to draw a line somewhere, but no consensus exactly where. It's not good to ban all such questions because it might be answerable sometimes, which requires great expertise.
### [Should we allow recommendation questions](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/117/8486)
No.
### [Are "What episode does [event] happen in [anime/manga]" like questions on-topic?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/190/8486)
No. That's what downvotes are for. But EL&U has General Reference as a close reason.
[tags](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/tags "show questions tagged 'tags'")
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
### [Should anime/manga names/tags be in English or romanized Japanese?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/35/8486)
Choose most popular as primary. Synonimize others (but they don't show up in search).
Consistency, English is official language at SE, and most new comers to anime only know English names.
### [Should tags about specific characters always use English naming order or the original order from the series?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/38/8486)
Use the conventions of the culture that the name is from, but respect the intent of the original work. So if an English name is used in a Japanese series, then use the English/Anglicized name, as the creators of the series intended for the name to be represented in that way.
Accept both and use English ordering as the primary tag. See 35, same reasoning.
[spoilers](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/spoilers "show questions tagged 'spoilers'")
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
### [What should our policy be regarding spoilers?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/46/8486) [What do we do with questions which are spoiler by nature?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/100/8486)
Spoiler can be in title, but avoid as much as possible. Most important is the title is good. Basically common sense and if you think spoiler, edit it with spoiler tag.
### [Making the spoiler markup more accessible](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/95/8486)
That's how it should be. Spoiler markup - which hides information - is by-design a reader-hostile feature! It should be used sparingly, and avoided whenever possible.
The last thing you want to do is encourage new users to start spoiler-marking every last detail of their posts on the off-chance that someone doesn't know them yet. This is supposed to be a community of experts and those seeking expert knowledge - don't hide your light under a bushel.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: If we want to make sure a (new) user sees that questions about identifying music or anime from descriptions will probably be deleted, we need to be able to:
* Write some detection algos (maybe just Regex will not be enough for this, maybe we'll need some complex if-else expression engine, idk);
+ This would require SE developer time, but I think if we present it right, other sites will also find this very useful and it will not be just for A&M
+ I think having a testing page like for SE database queries would be ideal. I don't know if it's reasonable to ask SE to develop that, but I also have a hard time imagining how one would test a proposed change without it;
+ Moderators might have to edit them after voting and agreeing on change proposals from the community on Meta;
* As the user types their question title and body, run it through the detection algo and if there are any matches with potential rules this question might break, show them as bright yellow/orange list items that pop up either on top of the question form or in the sidebar (popping up and doing a short bright CSS color transition should attract attention).
+ Make sure the message is clear that these autodetected issues are potential and if the user knows what they're doing, their question could be fine to post, because this is not a hard blocking rule that prevents from posting, but a very loud warning that, let's be honest, it's very likely that it's probably an ID request that will be removed soon after posting.
---
Regarding reviewing all the policies. If the goal is to review all policies and see which ones are no longer in power, and which ones are still active, we're gonna need better tools than what the SE Q&A engine provides natively.
Maybe check out one of your local country's online legal directories - lawyers generally have a better than average user interface for keeping track of updates and deprecation notices on complicated webs of laws. This is pretty close to what we would be trying to achieve here.
Things I would look for in such a tool:
* Screen space would need to be packed with items.
* Immediately visible [active](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/active "show questions tagged 'active'") and [deprecated](/questions/tagged/deprecated "show questions tagged 'deprecated'"), [merged](/questions/tagged/merged "show questions tagged 'merged'") tags for policies which make it easy to focus on the ones that are still worth attention;
* List of Reviewed / Unreviewed meta posts;
+ A meta post can be:
- Policy - with optional tags like [proposed-change](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/proposed-change "show questions tagged 'proposed-change'") (not yet approved or rejected), [approved-change](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/approved-change "show questions tagged 'approved-change'"), [rejected-change](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rejected-change "show questions tagged 'rejected-change'")
* Timeline of changes to a given policy to visually keep track of meta posts throughout history advocating for establishment / change / abolishment of a policy, and the result of each meta discussion's outcome (as written by reviewers, see next point);
* List of Reviewed / Unreviewed policies - compiled from Meta Posts which were deemed to establish or alter specific policies;
* Compact review action log in form of usernames/avatars and text descriptions or icons like so:
+ Policy 1 - anime ID requests are not allowed
- confirm - see MetaPost1 - User1;
- confirm - see MetaPost2 - User2;
- reject: - I think MetaPost3 and MetaPost4 said they were still allowed? - User3;
* MetaPost4 and MetaPost5 which were posted after MetaPost3 confirm that the community decided to ban them - User2;
* Understandable, have a nice day :p - User3;
* A threaded comment space under each policy to discuss its review activity, to come to agreement on what the result of the meta post is;
SE's native tools definitely don't have anything close to this, and I don't know how to make it comfortable for collaboration if users wish to stay more than less anonymous to each other in this effort as they are in using SE sites normally without hindering their ability to use these tools.
This will be a lot of effort, and my first thought is "I sure don't want my effort to go to waste", so I would make sure the work will be available publicly for backup and the tools be made with effort preservation and reuse in mind.
Personally, I can see myself developing parts of these tools or taking part in designing the workflow, but to do the entire thing on my own... And then someone would have to use the tools to actually review all the meta posts. You know. Mixed feelings and all that :p
Upvotes: 2 |
2020/06/16 | 974 | 3,487 | <issue_start>username_0: From [What topics can I ask about here? - Help Center](https://anime.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic "What topics can I ask about here? - Help Center - Anime & Manga Stack Exchange"), [all identification questions](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/2725/4663) or recommendation requests are off-topic. However I'm not sure if asking for a scene in a particular anime/manga is off-topic or not.
Here is my question:
>
> ### Is there any scene in Dragon Ball that's about helping a rival to their maximum potential before taking them down (steelman argument)?
>
>
> The "steelman argument" or "[Rapoport's rules](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Rapoport%27s_Rules "Rapoport's Rules - RationalWiki")" is a protocol to compose a successful (and helpful) critical commentary:
>
>
> 1. You should attempt to re-express your target's position so clearly, vividly, and fairly that your target says, "Thanks, I wish I’d thought of putting it that way."
> 2. You should list any points of agreement (especially if they are not matters of general or widespread agreement).
> 3. You should mention anything you have learned from your target.
> 4. Only then are you permitted to say so much as a word of rebuttal or criticism.
>
>
> [I heard that](https://movies.stackexchange.com/questions/109575/is-there-any-movie-scene-about-helping-a-rival-to-their-maximum-potential-before?noredirect=1#comment186257_109575) half of the scene in Dragon Ball is about this concept. Can you help me?
>
>
> **Note:** it's not just simply waiting for the opponent to heal themselves, but actively helping them reach their the best form and then argue/fight with this.
>
>
>
I wonder whether the question is still fine if instead of just one anime/mange, I provide a list of anime/mange?<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I wonder whether the question is still fine if instead of just one anime/mange, I provide a list of anime/mange?`
>
>
>
Given the questions current phrasing, I would say no, it would not be on-topic.
The question would likely become too broad, and not meet the criteria required for a list question anymore.
The policy regarding this can be found over here [What is the status of list questions on this site?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/348/1458), but for convenience I have included them below as well
* The list criteria is specific and to the point.
* The list criteria is not asking about a list of abstract concepts or anime series featuring some theme.
* The list items can be determined objectively, without need for opinion.
* The list is reasonably scoped.
* The list isn't prone to rapid change.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I feel like the question could work if you elected to narrow the scope a bit more.
As opposed to looking for *any* scene in Dragon Ball, it'd be first worth...
* ...specifying which franchise you're referring to (e.g. Dragon Ball, Dragon Ball Z, Dragon Ball GT, etc).
* ...specifying which arc within that franchise you're referring to (and you get DBZ arcs since that's all I remember!) (e.g. Frieza arc, Cell arc, Buu arc, etc).
But most importantly...be willing to accept different perspectives and that your exact and precise answer may not be applicable. That is to say, if I were to answer your question today as written, using a specific arc as an example, I would consider what's going on a bastardized Steelman argument as opposed to a full-fledged Steelman argument.
Upvotes: 2 |
2020/06/19 | 6,170 | 25,636 | <issue_start>username_0: I would like to revisit the reasons for using SE Q&A sites, and A&M in partucular, and whether you still feel like it's something you're interested in using as an average user would, or if something changed for you and why.
Please reflect on these thoughts:
* Do you ask questions?
* Do you post answers?
* Do you engage in Meta more often than on the main site?
* Do you still find it worthwhile to ask new questions, or do you now not bother because it would not be as interesting to know the answer (because it's something trivial or not that important and you can live just fine without knowing the answer)?
* Would you rather (and do you) talk about anime/manga/VNs/games in a free format (chat/forum) than engage in Q&A activities?
* Do you think in recent years fewer question-worthy works have been produces in the anime and manga space which led to the expected result of fewer questions being asked?
* Or do you think that over the years of experience watching and reading, you have come to understand Japanese culture and anime/manga industry background more, so that you usually can figure out the answer to your questions on your own, and so asking (or posting a question and the answer) does not seem worthwhile to you?
* Do you think posting trivial facts about minor mysteries would not be a worthy addition to the site's list of questions and so you often choose to not post these types of questions?
And lastly:
* How do you think this site could benefit from (more or different) user interaction?
* Would it go too far out of scope of the Q&A site's purpose and/or introduce too much responsibility for the moderating part of the community?
* Do you think we need more of the same activity?
* Do you think we should find new interesting ways to engage old and new users? Perhaps going out of the limited scope of just questions and answers? Something we could do in chats or revitalize the group anime watching sessions?
* What are your thoughts on related forms of entertainment and how do you think they could be introduces more into this community?
* How would you like to have fun spending time with other people interested in anime, manga and related entertainment?<issue_comment>username_1: Personally, I have started using A&M when I was relatively new to anime and unexperienced in my tastes, and also wanted to know answers to some obscure questions, or finally ask things that have been bothering me for a long time before I knew there was a place I could ask them and receive an answer.
After a while I have explored my tastes enough to not want input from general audience with whom our tastes greatly differ. And after watching enough anime, I realized I don't care as much to learn about different mini-trivia, and thought it would clutter the site and would be looked down upon by regulars. Now I wouldn't even remember most of the questions I've had without looking them up in my question history, so it's difficult to say anything we ask here is "important" :p And in general, I just found other new ways to entertain myself and put watching anime and reading manga on hold for a couple years.
---
I think there is an arc to an average anime (and movie) question asker on the internet. You live your life without Q&A sites, watch anime, and a bunch of unresolved mysteries collect in your mind. Then you find a Q&A site or a forum and ask your accumulated baggage of questions, or find them already asked and answered. After that you might still ask a few more in the coming years. And after a while you learn how to search for these questions better and you find your answers without needing to ask on your favorite Q&A site. And then you grow up or life goes on and you lose interest in asking these sorts of questions. At least that's how I see an average user. All of us here on Meta.A&M are obviously outliers, so it might be hard to identify with this arc, but that is what I believe the "average" experience is.
Also, I think that with the passing of time (years, decades), the internet in general and this site in particular will be (and already is to a significant extent) saturated with most of the questions worth asking and keeping. So this is also a reason why the site is slowly but surely becoming "complete" and the need for filling it slowly but surely fades. At least now that we've had time (this site and internet at large) to discuss all interesting anime questions, the ratio of Asked/Unasked questions is nearing `1.0`.
And with that, I don't think it makes sense to expect a normal user to perpetually want to engage in normal Q&A activities. Anime industry can't keep up with viewers asking and finding answers to unknowns. It might be wanting impossible from users to keep asking new interesting questions when there just are no more, and new ones are not created as quickly as before. So I don't know if we should limit the focus on only the Q&A portion of the Anime and Manga community on StackExchange, and I think it would be a good idea to seek engagement outside this scope if you don't mind stepping out of SE or maybe even asking SE devs for some integration with other Anime&Manga related entertainment platforms (anime/manga databases, forums, discord chats, what else is there in the greater interent).
---
Oh, and I don't think I could be as engaged in asking/answering questions as I once were, because I can't see myself doing "more of the same" for so long, after so long. I want to do different things now. But I can wander back here every couple years or so and chime in on community development and user experience :p Maybe propose some tools or describe how to develop them.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I stopped participating in this site because the Q&A format made it awkward or impossible to talk about anime in the way that I was interested in doing.
The Stack Exchange Q&A format was designed for programming. It works well for programming. It works well for other tech topics. It works pretty well for mathematics, engineering, and hard sciences like physics and chemistry. It works okay for writing, languages, music theory, and law, because those topics have bodies of rules that are widely accepted. It sort of works for parenting, pets, interpersonal relations, cooking, personal finance, travel, and the outdoors, because people can share their experience in a focused way.
The Stack Exchange Q&A format does not work well for fiction. I've participated in this site, Literature, Sci-Fi and Fantasy, and Movies and TV, and none of them lent themselves to the Q&A format. The community had to search for a way to pound their topics into the Q&A format. On Sci-Fi and Fantasy, there was a known canon of popular universes with large bodies of complex rules, so the site organized itself around rules lawyering in fictional universes---"What if <NAME> disarmed <NAME> who married <NAME> who owned the Elder Wand? Would <NAME> own the Elder Wand?"
Movies and TV and this site both organized themselves around plot explanation and trivia. This site also got some mileage out of explaining Japanese cultural references and the genre conventions of anime, like why the characters all look white or why they get nosebleeds when they're horny. Those all fit neatly into the Stack Exchange format. You link an old Answerman column and you're done. The kinds of things I wanted to talk about didn't. I was more interested in literary analysis of anime---story structure, character, theme, symbolism, historical context, intertextuality.
You can kind of do that in the Q&A format. Literature has been more successful at fostering it than the other media sites. But even on Literature, I've always found the format constraining. Sometimes I observe something interesting and want to write it up and share it, but the only way to do it was through self-answers to awkwardly worded questions that presume the answer. We had similar cases on Anime and Manga; people would write interesting, detailed, well researched essays analyzing an anime series, and then they would tack on some clunky verbiage at the front for that "Question" box that the site makes you put something in.
And the community three years ago was in a bad spot. We were already running out of general interest questions and plot questions for the most popular shows (*One Piece*, *Dragon Ball*, *Naruto*, *My Hero Academia*, *Bleach*, *Death Note*). The site was flooded with lazy identification requests. There was a bitter fight to ban them. Even people from other sites waded into the fray to fight over it. They were finally banned, and site activity slowed to a crawl. A squad of users who didn't post questions or answers at all anymore began squatting on the review queues and closing or deleting anything that didn't look like it could be answered with a compiler. It was more fun to write on my blog. There, I didn't have to tack on pointless leading questions to make some Javascript accept my post. I didn't have to worry about catching shit from some squad of people who deemed my post too opinion-based. I could scrawl down messy thoughts and refine them in a later post. I could write things as dumb or as poorly researched as I wanted, and learn from it, and do better next time.
I'm too used to that freedom now, and I won't be coming back to this site as a regular user. This is a Stack Exchange site, and anyone who chooses to participate here is stuck with that restrictive Q&A format. I see that as the question that someone needs to answer if this site is to become a healthy community again: what's the value of a Stack Exchange-style Q&A site about anime and manga? Why would anyone want to talk about anime in this restrictive format meant for programming questions when there are blogs and forums and subreddits and comment sections where they can just love anime and talk about it however they want? What value do the Stack Exchange rules add to the discussion of anime? And how do you keep the community friendly and accepting while hewing to Stack Exchange's rules? How do you work with people who are probably quite young, who probably speak English as a second or third or tenth language, who post a badly written question that violates multiple rules, so that they come away feeling welcomed and satisfied while also getting to participate in the site on its terms?
Personally I don't think it's possible. I don't think the Stack Exchange format adds any value to the discussion of anime. But I hope y'all who are still on this site asking what can be done to make it better can prove me wrong.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Personally I have been participating less then I did prior.
When I first came to the platform of A&M, I was enthusiastic. At that point in time, anime and manga made up a big part of my life.
Most if not all of my friends where in to it, and I occasionally visited conventions with like minded people.
Having a place to ask the questions that poped up in those scenarios, to like minded people, was a mind blowing concept to me.
It's been an learning experience for me overall, not only in the field of anime, but also in how to write.
I learned how to source questions, and back information with facts. I learned some grammar and sentence building, even though this can still improve :)
As I went, I learned how to mostly distinguish goals and intent from questions, and how to assist/edit these to be more clear.
As Years started to pass, my google-foo skills started to increase. And soon after I started to find most of the answers I wanted on my own.
With this also came the added doubt
>
> if I am able to find the answer this easily, does it really make for a good question?`
>
>
>
From that point onward I started asking less, and answering more.
However, answering the questions I considered fun where relatively labor intensive to answer, and with diminishing time, I also started to slow down on this.
Somewhere along the lines I also became a mod, and generally started to enjoy having casual chats with people in chat more.
Helping people along on their ways with exploring the platform, and myself having less burden of proof and more casual banter.
---
I still think there are plenty of questions to be asked, and answered. And with us not being limited to series specific questions only, I think there are still plenty of interesting questions to be asked.
Given that we might lack the expertise to answer some of those questions.
I also think that A&M could greatly benefit from more ways to interact. However in the view of SE, I am not sure a form of open interaction, as commonly seen around anime and manga would be a good fit.
Going beyond the scope of A&M as a Q&A platform is something I have voiced in my conversations with Krazer recently as well, in particular, reviving the concept of a anime and manga discord. I think having a place where a more open form of communication is acceptable can greatly improve community bonding and interaction.
I don't think that moderating such a thing would be necessarily be more of a burden, if set up correctly. However getting it up and running, and garnering animo for it, would likely be as complex as drawing more attention to A&M in and of it self.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Had an anime question that even google image search couldn't answer. Figured I'd try here before movies and TV.
I tried to use keywords that would help others with the same question find my post so the answers wouldn't just help me. Thus helping the site build a knowledge base.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Well...I didn't think I'd be writing a response in this fashion, but these are questions that need to be answered. I'm thinking that after this, we may need to have a good, long hard look in the mirror and answer the blatantly obvious question - do we as a community have a chance without Stack Exchange's support, or should we start branching out elsewhere?
>
> Do you ask questions?
>
>
>
I don't for two distinct reasons.
1. I've asked all of the "simple" questions that I can think of, really. I don't think there's more that I could drum up to be answered for the simple sake of seeding the community.
2. The questions that I have that are really hard and really niche, well...my Google-fu skills have improved to a degree that I could either find an answer or motivate myself towards an answer on my own these days, or...get a solution from another community.
My biggest issue is that we don't have enough *active* subject matter experts on hand to be able to answer the questions I have, and it's entirely too time consuming to become a subject matter expert in more niche animes just to answer one or two burning questions.
>
> Do you post answers?
>
>
>
*Sometimes*. Only when I feel like I can answer a question will I try to answer a question.
But looking back... I've answered a grand total of **five** questions this year, and **eight** last year. Those don't hold a candle to my '18 or '17 campaigns, and even then...I feel like only 92 answers on a site that I've been a member of since late 2012 is pretty...pathetic. That averages out to something between 11-13 answers a year.
The real issue is that I'm finding it difficult to answer the questions being posed. Do I want to really hunt down what specific music piece is playing in this anime on this episode between the 5 and 6 minute mark, or do I want to answer something *better*? Obviously I want to answer something better but I'm clearly not finding it here.
>
> Do you engage in Meta more often than on the main site?
>
>
>
I think it's mixed. I do show up on Meta "often" but I also show up on the main site about as often.
>
> Do you still find it worthwhile to ask new questions, or do you now not bother because it would not be as interesting to know the answer (because it's something trivial or not that important and you can live just fine without knowing the answer)?
>
>
>
I may have answered this earlier, but I feel like it would be more worthwhile to ask questions if I could be reasonably assured that there was more than one or two people that heard of some of the series I was referencing, and would be willing to engage in a Q&A about it.
>
> Would you rather (and do you) talk about anime/manga/VNs/games in a free format (chat/forum) than engage in Q&A activities?
>
>
>
Funnily enough, [username_2's answer was eye-opening on this](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4372/102).
It's something I've kept tucked away in the back of my head for years now, but seeing it laid so bare and out in the open made me realize that the kinds of discussions I want to really have about anime and manga *can't* happen in a Q&A format.
I won't mince words here - I originally came from Stack Overflow and I've been over-indoctrinated in how that site works. The problem is that the same pattern does not exist and cannot exist for non-technical sites, since we're not really trying to ask questions - we're trying to have discussions. To be fair, I was probably one of those reviewers trying to shut down things that weren't really in a Q&A format.
I'm starting to regret that now. We had a chance to form a community based around what we wanted early on as opposed to fitting our shape into Stack Exchange's mold.
I may be seeking a more free-form environment to engage since I really do value anime as a passion.
I'm starting to consume less and less of it - and subconsciously I suspect that it's because I want to use it as a way to seed more interesting questions here, and I'm finding that hard to do or even desirable to do at this point.
>
> Do you think in recent years fewer question-worthy works have been produces in the anime and manga space which led to the expected result of fewer questions being asked?
>
>
>
No, there's been *plenty* of interesting and diverse works that have had questions.
It's not that the works themselves are without question or don't have an audience asking questions, we're just not doing anything to capture or welcome that audience *here*. To *further* complicate things...if we're talking about just manga, then there's a really really strong chance that we won't be able to have conversations about **a lot** of them. I hate to say it, but compared to the scanlations works that are going on and the actual series that have been serialized and distributed for mainstream production, and given our reasonable rule about not offering any links to pirated works, we're effectively snuffing a large portion of people who actually *do* consume this material and want to ask questions on it because it's not legal.
>
> Or do you think that over the years of experience watching and reading, you have come to understand Japanese culture and anime/manga industry background more, so that you usually can figure out the answer to your questions on your own, and so asking (or posting a question and the answer) does not seem worthwhile to you?
>
>
>
Ironically, I've just completed two semesters of basic Japanese **for the sake of consuming media from Japan**, and while I feel pretty good about that, it does seem like a hollow goal. Am I only just learning Japanese so I can reference original Japanese material without fear of getting called out for sourcing something pirated, or do I really want to learn the language and culture? I feel it's more the latter, and in recent months I've been more engrossing myself in the culture and the language itself rather than just aiming it to be about anime and manga. I don't think that the question or answer piece matters much at that point since, at that instant, I have the ability to figure things out for myself and I can find different communities and areas to pull insight from as opposed to Stack Exchange.
>
> Do you think posting trivial facts about minor mysteries would not be a worthy addition to the site's list of questions and so you often choose to not post these types of questions?
>
>
>
I don't think they're worthy so I wouldn't bother adding them. If it's Googleable in about 5 seconds, then I'd really rather not bother.
>
> How do you think this site could benefit from (more or different) user interaction?
>
>
>
I think we're stuck.
We don't have a convenient means for people to engage with the community-at-large to talk about series or discuss things that are more nuanced than a simple question and answer.
It doesn't matter who we bring on or who we attract; that limitation exists so long as we're on Stack Exchange.
>
> Would it go too far out of scope of the Q&A site's purpose and/or introduce too much responsibility for the moderating part of the community?
>
>
>
Unquestionably, yes.
>
> Do you think we need more of the same activity?
>
>
>
No, since the kind of activity we are getting right now [isn't the activity we want](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4350/102), when to be fair we haven't shown examples of what we've actually wanted in the past.
>
> Do you think we should find new interesting ways to engage old and new users? Perhaps going out of the limited scope of just questions and answers? Something we could do in chats or revitalize the group anime watching sessions?
>
>
>
Commitment and dedication have to exist for that to happen. I worry that we're all so far detached from what we had several years ago that we're not going to be able to reach the older users. To further complicate that, if we don't have support from Stack Exchange Inc. in this mission, then we're burning *tons* of energy. I don't use software or hardware systems without *some* level of support, and I feel like I should hold my communities to that same standard.
>
> What are your thoughts on related forms of entertainment and how do you think they could be introduces more into this community?
>
>
>
I feel like we've been very accepting of visual novels, manga and anime from China and Korea, and some American produced anime-style cartoons as well. The problem is that no one's really asking about those things.
>
> How would you like to have fun spending time with other people interested in anime, manga and related entertainment?
>
>
>
I'm weird about my anime; I like to consume it in isolation and in peace. I like to engage with others if I have questions or if I want to talk about a plot point that I think comes up during the show, but that's about the extent of it. The problem is that I want to *talk*, not just ask questions.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: I started browsing this site in 2013 and stopped regularly using it last year, for a mix of reasons. I did not consume as much anime and manga as I did in the past; questions about series that I knew well stopped appearing as much, so there wasn't much for me to answer; and posts about series that interested me were uncommon to begin with. It is not a question of whether or not I know enough about animanga or even Japanese culture now to know the answers to my questions: my questions are generally about plot and language. I still come to the site periodically to browse the front page and the review queue, but invariably, nothing interesting comes up. I visit Meta even less: presumably because I am rarely on the Anime & Manga SE, I do not know to check Meta because I do not see posts when they are featured, which have generally been what prompts me to visit. I did not even know that there was a move to ban music ID requests until this week, when I visited Meta for something else. (As to the discussion about the ban, while I understand that music ID requests are often low quality, I will probably also visit and engage even less if or when that is implemented. I browse music ID requests occasionally because they can be answerable with a bit of work, even without knowledge of the series, and sometimes involve classical music, a topic which I know relatively well and find interesting.)
The shift in my interests aside, I think there is a place for the SE format in discussions about animanga. While relatively literary discussions (and in general, those about subjective topics, like writing or probably even relationships) generally are not suited for SE, I like that the site is relatively organized, in that repeat questions are generally closed as duplicates and linked, and that the writing generally avoids a certain kind of excessive speculation and indulgence, unlike that in other internet communities for certain series. (See [this Tumblr post](https://justroyai.tumblr.com/post/69770837860/colonel-mustang-people-like-to-talk-about) that came up when I wanted to find information about how characters are addressed in *Fullmetal Alchemist* for an example of what I mean.) I tend to view this site as more a place for questions about cultural context, language, and plots, rather than serious literary discussions. This is also a result of how I consume animanga: I am generally looking for entertainment, rather than something to potentially analyze. For people who do consume animanga with such intentions, the format will be a bigger issue.
In my case, I am obviously a lost cause, being someone who moved onto consuming other media. If I were not, however, more of the same activity—the questions about *One Piece* and *Naruto* and identifying music—would definitely not encourage me to participate more on the site. At the same time, I do not have a particularly good idea of what *would* revitalize the site.
Upvotes: 2 |
2020/07/07 | 5,347 | 20,330 | <issue_start>username_0: As another month goes by the moderation team has been discussing a list of topics to hopefully improve user experience within the community. The topics for this month includes:
1. A plan to deprecate music id-requests and what we're planning to do with similar "help me" style questions.
2. A barebones proposal for a bounty board system in order to collect and push topics the community would more likely enjoy having.
3. Some organizational work with site policies, specifically about how we plan to categorize existing policies, deprecated one, and propose new ones moving forward.
---
The road to music id-request deprecation
----------------------------------------
The topic of id-requests are much maligned across many Stack Exchange communities including ours. The basic sentiment seems to be that these questions are very localized to the individual and don't really provide anything for other people.
A common adjective people within the SE communities use to describe these questions is "vampiric". They leech resources and attention from elsewhere that could be applied elsewhere. The frequency of these questions are a turn-off to many and overtime has been one of many factors contributing to users becoming disengaged with the community.
We will now be deprecating these types of questions starting with music identification requests as we feel that don't provide anything meaningful for users to return to.
These questions typically contribute to an "one and done, ask and leave" type interaction that paints the community as more of a help desk than a Q&A site.
We'd like users to stick around and use the site as a resource to not only help themselves but help others, but these types of questions typically just result in short one line, and/or link only type questions that don't provide much context on why the answer maybe correct.
For now we are only moving to deprecate music id-request questions due to their prevalence but we will also be looking a similar questions of the same style. Some examples (but not limited to) would question like "where can I find/watch/stream/buy X merch/show/disc set" type questions and merchandise/cosplay/itasha id-reqs.
We will be implementing the following procedure:
1. Making a note in the help center and tour of the off-topicness
2. Provide a policy post noting and explaining the reason like we did with regular requests
3. Providing a [feature-request] for the CMS historical lock all current and older questions. Either deleting all unanswered music id-request questions and/or post with removing low question/answer score
4. Edit the existing close reason for id-requests to include a mention and link to the policy about music requests
The post here is to solicit feedback, comments, or objections about the proposed depreciation, with action expected to be taken a month from now, if there are no major objections. Any chances otherwise to the procedure will be made iteratively. Please leave your thoughts and comments as an answer to this post.
---
A proposal for a bounty board system to find questions the community would like to see more of
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The bounty board system is an attempt by the moderation team of this community to seek a focal point where users can propose types of topics for questions they like to hear and also provide a rep bounty reward for those who provide good and interesting questions and answers. The intent is in part to gather ideas and gauge interest on potential topics to ask and also spread the site ripe amongst the community to grow the active user base and give more users access to the tools to help with moderation of the community.
This is still very much a work in progress and might not be feasible in the long run but it's and idea we'd like to float and try out.
*Proposed format:*
Bounties change ever month.
Moderation staff will look at providing a base set of topics for bounties each month. Staff can provide 2-3 topics per month, along talking points examples to get started.
All normal user to contribute bounties on specific topics related to anime and manga. Can suggest topics can be series or genres they want to see more of or hear about.
Users band together and pool rep for bounties to find answers to existing questions as well.
Bounty rep minimum: 100-300 rep minimum, up to 1000 rep for staff bounties. Bonuses for great questions and answers.
Bounties must be elected by the user that takes them. They can do so by post a reply to the bounty board with intent to post or link to their question.
Users have about a week to make a post related to the topic. Users may withdraw but they need to explicitly make notice within a week’s time. No penalty for withdrawals. A bit like a contract.
---
A suggested system to better tag and organize site policies
-----------------------------------------------------------
Since the inception of the site from Area 51 thru our graduation, and design graduation, there have been a lot of changes to policies, new, old, and now deprecated. We realize that we haven't really done a good job in keeping track of what policies are where and how up to date they are. The typical process has been just to search and trudge thru the results for the one you're looking for. We find this process to inefficient and a bit tedious.
We're looking are ways to better tag questions based on what the community has been accepted. There's also been some ambiguity in what is policies are generally accepted by the community and what's still disputed or just up in the air. We're looking to implement clearer guidelines for what is accepted and what is not.
For policy tagging, we are looking to implement the following procedures to new and existing posts.
Retagging post with accepted policy with [policy-accepted](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/policy-accepted "show questions tagged 'policy-accepted'") for community accepted policies.
New tagging for proposing future policy [policy-suggestion](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/policy-suggestion "show questions tagged 'policy-suggestion'") for new policy suggestions.
For policies that have no-consensus (a proposed criteria will be explained below) [policy-deferred](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/policy-deferred "show questions tagged 'policy-deferred'").
For rejected policy suggestions posts [policy-declined](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/policy-declined "show questions tagged 'policy-declined'")
For policies that needs clarification or an update [policy-clarification](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/policy-clarification "show questions tagged 'policy-clarification'"), including old policies that are a bit dated due to changes within the network
For policies that are old and or outdated [policy-deprecated](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/policy-deprecated "show questions tagged 'policy-deprecated'")
As a catch all for other policy post that don’t fall under any of the above categories [policy-other](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/policy-other "show questions tagged 'policy-other'")
We'll be doing categorizing and tagging existing posts based on this manually so it may take a bit of time to get things all in order due to the amount of meta posts that currently exist.
**Acceptance criteria for policies moving forward**
I'd like to propose using using vote score on the policy proposal, at least 5, ideally 10 vote score to secure consensus and be considered accepted by the community.
Policy proposals (in the question body or in an answer to a clarification question about a policy) should be given at least a week's time for review (more if it is a major policy change, at least a month) before they are regarded as accepted, regardless of the amount of votes on the post.
If there are objections or concerns that need to be addressed, they should be upvoted (be it an answer or comment) to bring attention to them. A policy cannot be considered accepted until these concerns or objection are at least address in a satisfactory manner. If the concerns or objections were made without reasonable merit, an explanation must be made to address it.
If a policy cannot reach a consensus (at least 5 vote score) cannot be made within a months time, the policy will be regarded as "disputed" (<5 vote score, with up and down votes or low amount of upvotes), or "declined" (0 or negative total vote score) and regarded as not accepted (set as [policy-declined](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/policy-declined "show questions tagged 'policy-declined'") or [policy-deferred](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/policy-deferred "show questions tagged 'policy-deferred'")). Revisions can still be made and can be open for re-review at a later time (will need to readd [policy-suggestion](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/policy-suggestion "show questions tagged 'policy-suggestion'") to the post).
*Examples:*
[Are "Identify this" questions on-topic?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/56/) [policy-deprecated](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/policy-deprecated "show questions tagged 'policy-deprecated'")
[Policy Suggestion: Applying series continuity and franchise tags globally on this site](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/3906/) [policy-deferred](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/policy-deferred "show questions tagged 'policy-deferred'")
Feedback from the community on the such a proposal would be appreciated. There are likely quite a few kinks and wrinkles that need to be worked out and ironed out, so will take all reasonable feedback in considering as we look to implement such a process.
---
**Anime Tidbit of the Month:**
Ever what wondered if the iconic anime/manga glare (¬\_¬) had a name? It does. It's called a "jitome" (ジト目) it comes from the Japanese onomatopoeic expression for staring (じと～っ) which is from じっとり (damp, as in clammy feeling). It's typically used as a negative expressions of contempt, suspicion, rebelliousness, amazement, or plotting. It's differentiated from the typical glare (睨む) by having the nuisance of being more of piercing glance than a typical glare, depicting clear hostility or dissatisfaction. Aside from the realm of light novels along with anime and manga, this term is not often used in the literature.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/SpU58m.jpg)<issue_comment>username_1: >
> I'd like to propose using using vote score on the policy proposal, at least 5, ideally 10 vote score to secure consensus and be considered accepted by the community.
>
>
> Policy proposals (in the question body or in an answer to a clarification question about a policy) should be given at least a week's time for review (more if it is a major policy change, at least a month) before they are regarded as accepted, regardless of the amount of votes on the post.
>
>
>
Having a policy be accepted by the question's score seems like bad design.
1. When upvoting a question it is unclear if you're saying "yes I agree" or "yes this should be discussed".
2. Lumping all these votes together can cause policies that shouldn't be accepted to be accepted.
"Should we X?" which is upvoted to 20, but there is no clear winning side in the answers.
3. If you decide on a policy saying all votes on a question should be counted as "yes I agree". This can cause policies that should be discussed from not getting a score high enough to hit the community bulletin, under Hot Meta Posts. And may not get the score they need to get tagged correctly. (disputed vs declined)
This can be solved by just measuring answers.
---
Some of the suggested policy seems incomplete or undefined. Who deicides what is "a satisfactory manner"? If everyone wants the policy to be accepted, but there's a conflict on something small what happens?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Re: Music identification questions
==================================
As someone who's answered a good chunk of these types of questions, I wanted to weigh in a bit with my perspective.
Back when I was a fairly new user to this site, I remember looking for a way to get enough rep to do basic things like type in chat and other things, and I remember zeroing in on music identification questions in the "not answered" category as something I actually had a shot at answering. In other words, answering music identification questions was how I first started getting more active on this site :3
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/oaYMy.png)
Here's an breakdown of the Naruto music ids I've answered over the years:
* Released track: [1](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/42355/whats-the-song-that-plays-when-naruto-and-sasuke-fight-with-rasengan-and-chidor/45082#45082), [2](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/43675/what-song-plays-at-naruto-shippuden-episode-119-that-sounds-like-denkousekka/45080#45080), [3](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/47648/name-of-soundtrack-in-shippuden-episode-485-when-sasuke-and-orochimaru-were-talk/47661#47661)
* Variation of a released track (e.g. with a certain instrument removed, etc.), with a link to an unofficial fan-spliced version: [1](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/36694/what-is-the-song-when-sakura-sees-narutos-fox-form-in-naruto-shippuden-episod/47274#47274), [2](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/41717/what-song-is-playing-in-naruto-shippuden-episode-114-at-0637-on-orochimarus-fl/52914#52914), [3](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/47810/whats-the-song-that-plays-when-sasuke-and-kakashi-arrive-at-round-3-of-the-chun/47811#47811), [4](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/50832/song-from-naruto-episode-12/50836#50836)
* Unreleased track, with a link to an unofficial fan-spliced version: [1](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/44470/what-is-the-song-when-obito-attacked-naruto-and-sasuke-in-episode-378-of-naruto/47254#47254), [2](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/46806/a-sad-violin-song-in-most-of-flashback-scenes-like-obitos-flashback-and-the-sto/47275#47275), [3](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/47586/whats-the-music-playing-in-naruto-shippuden-episode-1-when-naruto-and-jiraiya-a/47587#47587), [4](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/52716/anyone-know-the-name-of-the-song-in-naruto-shippuden-episode-471-min-1050/52731#52731), [5](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/53094/ost-in-naruto-shippuden/53115#53115), [6](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/54083/whats-the-name-of-the-song-that-plays-on-naruto-episode-172-at-728/54145#54145), [7](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/55268/what-is-the-ost-at-episode-156-of-naruto-shippuden-at-4-minute-mark/55292#55292),
Answers with:
* 3 upvotes: 1
* 2 upvotes: 1
* 1 upvotes: 5
* 0 upvotes: 7
Some random thoughts, in no particular order:
* Most of the time, the users who asked the question don't even come back to accept or upvote the answer. But that might have been because I was necrobumping a bunch of really old questions.
* It's really awesome when you go to the profile of the question asker and the "last seen" timestamp is more recent than the "question asked" timestamp. That means they're checking back at the site and there's a chance they'll engage more later on!
* It's *really* rewarding if the question asker actually comes back and upvotes and/or accepts your answer.
* Some songs end up being asked more than once. In particular, the unreleased "Minato saves Kushina" track shows up in a lot of these questions. And that's because it's a really **good** track. The feels ;\_;
* YouTube & copyrighted music. Hmmmmm . In any case, I was careful to avoid directly linking to any of the actually released soundtracks in my answers.
* <NAME> OST III was released in 2016, 7 years after OST II. So you never know when new soundtracks might come out.
Personally, I don't particularly mind music identification questions. It's not a particularly large time investment to try and answer one of these. I just load up the appropriate timestamp, and then I either know the song or I don't. If I'm not familiar with the series, I just ignore the question, like any other question I don't know the answer to.
Though obviously, as an occasional contributor on this site, my perspective will differ from the heavy-usage moderators who likely have to go through a lot of low quality content every day in the queues.
It's not like I'd particularly miss music ids either, since I don't answer them that often anymore. It's just that I don't see the need to explicitly disallow them either.
Slightly off-topic rant
=======================
Like, every time I see a new user ask a question and it's downvoted and closed for being off topic, I feel kind of bad for them. Like, some people may think "oh, they were probably a help vampire who wouldn't have checked back for replies anyway". But they might not have been. Downvotes are a huge turnoff.
It's bad enough that there are no clear guidelines for what you can ask on this site and what you can't. "But what about the tour?" No one reads the tour. If you were to install a new IDE and it prompts you if you want a tour of the interface, would you go through with it? I mean, it sounds pretty optional to me. "Nah, I can figure it out." I think many of us would think like this.
"But [on-topic](https://anime.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic)". It's *buried* behind multiple layers of links. And hidden behind really optional sounding language like "Find more information about how to ask a good question here". If a new user finds their way to the "Ask Question" page and there's no **clearly** labeled "Rules" section on the same page with the ~5 most salient points to know, including the thing about identification requests (the user shouldn't have to click away into a new page), then that's a UI/UX failure imo.
A lot of these types of questions/closings feels too reactive. Like, "Can I ask this" "No you can't". It'd be better if this site were better designed towards proactively informing the users ahead of time to prevent off-topic questions in the first place.
"But users won't read" **Then make it more concise.** No one's going to read a wall of text, and it's unreasonable to expect them to. At the very least, it should more clearly link to the "on-topic" page as a "these are the expectations of you" so that I'd feel less bad for the user if their question gets closed. So that for the new user, it's less of a "did I do something wrong??" and more of a "oh, right, that, ok".
But anyway, that's probably a bit out of scope for this question -\_-;; This is more of a general Stack Exchange-wide design grievance.
Back to music identification questions
--------------------------------------
Idk I think overlegislating is harmful but at the same time it's not like I would particularly miss music id requests or anything. There are far better and more active places to ask these types of questions, anyway.
**tl;dr** [Neutral response](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ussCHoQttyQ).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: When posting proposals, poster should put some (agreed upon on meta about this workflow) template text at the top which very clearly says something like:
>
> Upvote/downvote the wiki answer (anchor link maybe) under this question to vote for or against this proposal.
>
>
> Upvote/downvote this question if you think it is a valid, clear proposal worth voting on.
>
> read more on how to vote on proposals here (link to a meta post explaining everything in detail)
>
>
>
---
Below this proposal, a template wiki answer with the agreed upon neutral descriptive text about how to vote should be posted for users to cast their vote upon.
---
I think it would be worthwhile to implement a network-wide system for this, but since we can't expect such attention from SE developers, this system will have to do. It's a bit tedious but meta users can make it work.
Upvotes: 2 |
2020/09/30 | 762 | 2,759 | <issue_start>username_0: **Thanks for the interest, folks. We've now set a date for the election to start question collection next Monday, October 12th, 2020. Nominations will open the following week in the [4th moderator election](https://anime.stackexchange.com/election/4).**
---
It's time for us all to consider holding an election for a new volunteer moderator on A&M.
The last election we have held was [back in 2017](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4089/2017-community-moderator-election-results), at which point I joined the moderator team.
Ever since the [Moderator Questionare](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4080/1458) of that year, I wanted to see if we could diversify our community. And very recently [кяαzєя♦](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/users/63/%d0%ba%d1%8f%ce%b1z%d1%94%d1%8f) and I started the chain of monthly engagement posts, in part to see if we could achieve just that some how.
Hence we could use another set of hands to help us with moderation, and improving the community.
In the end, it's not a lot of work to being a moderator, and this is a relatively small SE site
You can also take a look at [Who are the site moderators, and what is their role here?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/help/site-moderators) and the [Theory of moderation (revisited)](https://stackoverflow.blog/2018/11/21/our-theory-of-moderation-re-visited/) to get a bit of a feeling as to what being a moderator actually entails.
**Please leave an answer if you'd be willing to run for a moderator position, should we decide to run an election.**
NOTE: This is not an official election nomination thread, just a "pulse check" to get a notion of how many people here would be willing to step up.<issue_comment>username_1: Just to start the ball rolling, **I'm interested in running as a moderator on Anime.SE.**
While I'm already a moderator on Android.SE, there's really nothing much to handle with the current mod team on there (just a daily NAA and explicit off-topic questions clean-up, nuking a handful of spam, etc...), and I'm still able to put some time to visit Anime.SE daily to check almost all of the new posts.
However, *I'm also encouraging other users who haven't already been a mod on any SE site to join this mod team and taste the experience* :)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Following username_1's encouragement, I too am interested as running for a moderator on Anime SE.
Arqade SE, the site I am primarily active on, held a moderator election last year. I considered participating in the election, but the responsibilities would have been too much for me to handle at the moment in time. Since Anime SE is smaller, I would like to put my name into the hat as a future moderator
Upvotes: 3 |
2020/10/12 | 1,725 | 6,623 | <issue_start>username_0: >
> **The purpose of this thread was to collect questions for the questionnaire. The questionnaire is now live, and you may find it [here](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4402/49).**
>
>
>
---
Anime & Manga is scheduled for an election [next week, October 19, 2020](https://anime.stackexchange.com/election/4). In connection with that, we will be holding a Q&A with the candidates. This will be an opportunity for members of the community to pose questions to the candidates on the topic of moderation. Participation is completely voluntary.
Here's how it'll work:
* Until the nomination phase, (so, until October 19, 2020 at 20:00:00Z UTC, or 4:00 pm EDT on the same day, give or take time to arrive for closure), this question will be open to collect potential questions from the users of the site. Post answers to this question containing any questions you would like to ask the candidates. Please only post *one question per answer*.
* We, the Community Team, will be providing a small selection of generic questions. The first two will be guaranteed to be included, the latter ones are if the community doesn't supply enough questions. This will be done in a single post, unlike the prior instruction.
* If your question contains a link, please use the syntax of `[text](link)`, as that will make it easier for transcribing for the finished questionnaire.
* This is a perfect opportunity to voice questions that are specific to your community and issues that you are running into currently.
* At the start of the nomination phase, the Community Team will select **up to 8 of the top voted questions submitted by the community** provided in this thread, to use in addition to the aforementioned 2 guaranteed questions. We reserve some editorial control in the selection of the questions and may opt not to select a question that is tangential or irrelevant to moderation or the election.
* Once questions have been selected, a new question will be opened to host the actual questionnaire for the candidates, typically containing 10 questions in total.
* This is not the only option that users have for gathering information on candidates. As a community, you are still free to, for example, hold a live chat session with your candidates to ask further questions, or perhaps clarifications from what is provided in the Q&A.
If you have any questions or feedback about this process, feel free to post as a comment here.<issue_comment>username_1: Here is a set of general questions, gathered as very common questions asked every election. As mentioned in the instructions, the first two questions are guaranteed to show up in the Q&A, while the others are if there aren't enough questions (or, if you like one enough, you may split it off as a separate answer for review within the community's 8).
* How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?
* How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?
---
* In your opinion, what do moderators do?
* A diamond will be attached to everything you say and have said in the past, including questions, answers and comments. Everything you will do will be seen under a different light. How do you feel about that?
* In what way do you feel that being a moderator will make you more effective as opposed to simply reaching 10k or 20k rep?
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: A user has posted a question which by itself is fine and is answerable, however the user's actions involving the question has been troubling (ie. spamming non-answers, spamming the question link in comments across the site, defacing edits, harassing/abusive behavior to other users who answer/comment/discuss).
Along with sanctions against the user, do you think any action should be taken against the question?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> You (a moderator) and another community member both answer a question on the site. The other answer is well written but (objectively) incorrect, and has gathered a similar amount of upvotes to yours. What do you do?
>
>
>
[Copied from Arqade's 2019 Mod Election](https://gaming.meta.stackexchange.com/a/13376/124566)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> What should responsible moderators not do with their power? What behavior have you disliked in moderators (on any SE or elsewhere) that you vow you'll never do?
>
>
>
[Copied from Anime & Manga's 2015 Mod Election](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2524/20275)
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: I feel like [Senshin's question](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4070/20275) from the 2017 Mod election is still applicable today, with slight modifications.
How much do you know about the following series: *Naruto*, *One Piece,* *My Hero Academia*, and *Attack on Titan*?
These series are some of the [top tags as of 2020](https://data.stackexchange.com/anime/query/1310219/2020-anime-manga-top-questions) that I see more of than others. To date, I still see many (mostly poorly written) questions regarding the *Naruto* series despite it officially coming to an end in 2017. And as far as I can tell, My Hero Academia and Attack on Titan are becoming more popular as the days go by.
As Senshin also posted as well:`
>
> Knowing about these series is by no means a requirement, of course. But if candidates A and B are identical except that A has an encyclopedic knowledge of Naruto while B has an encyclopedic knowledge of (say) Doraemon, I would vote for A.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: A question was asked [a while back](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4314/48808) about lowering the close vote threshold from 5 to 3. Since moderator support for such a move is critical, do you think the current threshold is fine or should it be lowered, and why?
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: The community as a whole has many things that are can be seen as lack, underdeveloped, or could use further development, compared to other sites or communities (such as our sister sites within the some category).
* What do you see as the top three immediate things that you would like to tackle as moderator that you cannot do as a user.
* Why do you think these points are important and should be prioritized?
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: * Where do you want to see the site and/or community go in the near future?
* Where *don't* you want to see it go?
* (Optional: Provide the rationale behind your decisions.)
Upvotes: 2 |
2020/10/19 | 5,755 | 22,801 | <issue_start>username_0: In connection with the moderator elections, we are holding a Q&A thread for the candidates. Questions collected [from an earlier thread](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4393/49) have been compiled into this one, which shall now serve as the space for the candidates to provide their answers.
Due to the submission count, we have selected all provided questions as well as one of our back up questions for a total of 10 questions.
As a candidate, your job is simple - post an answer to this question, citing each of the questions and then post your answer to each question given in that same answer. For your convenience, I will include all of the questions in quote format with a break in between each, suitable for you to insert your answers. Just [copy the whole thing after the first set of three dashes](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/revisions/58d218a5-aebc-4c15-bfab-3872d83a1783/view-source). Please consider putting your name at the top of your post so that readers will know who you are before they finish reading everything you have written, and also including a link to your answer on your nomination post.
Once all the answers have been compiled, this will serve as a transcript for voters to view the thoughts of their candidates, and will be appropriately linked in the Election page.
Good luck to all of the candidates!
Oh, and when you've completed your answer, please provide a link to it after this blurb here, before that set of three dashes. Please leave the list of links in the order of submission.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To save scrolling here are links to the submissions from each candidate (in order of submission):
* [Wondercricket's answers](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4404/20275)
* [Aki Tanaka's answers](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4405/2516)
---
>
> 1. In your opinion, what do moderators do?
> 2. How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?
> 3. How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?
> 4. What should responsible moderators not do with their power? What behavior have you disliked in moderators (on any SE or elsewhere) that you vow you'll never do?
> 5. A user has posted a question which by itself is fine and is answerable, however the user's actions involving the question has been troubling (ie. spamming non-answers, spamming the question link in comments across the site, defacing edits, harassing/abusive behavior to other users who answer/comment/discuss). Along with any possible sanctions against the user, do you think any action should be taken against the question?
> 6. A question was asked [a while back](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4314/48808) about lowering the close vote threshold from 5 to 3. Since moderator support for such a move is critical, do you think the current threshold is fine or should it be lowered, and why?
> 7. You (a moderator) and another community member both answer a question on the site. The other answer is well written but (objectively) incorrect, and has gathered a similar amount of upvotes to yours. What do you do?
> 8. Where do you want to see the site and/or community go in the near future? Where don't you want to see it go? (Optional: provide the rationale behind your decisions.)
> 9. The community as a whole has many things that are can be seen as lack, underdeveloped, or could use further development, compared to other sites or communities (such as our sister sites within the some category). What do you see as the top three immediate things that you would like to tackle as moderator that you cannot do as a user? Why do you think these points are important and should be prioritized?
> 10. How much do you know about the following series: *Naruto*, *One Piece,* *My Hero Academia*, and *Attack on Titan*? These series are some of the [top tags as of 2020](https://data.stackexchange.com/anime/query/1310219/2020-anime-manga-top-questions) that are seen more of than others. To date, there are still many (mostly poorly written) questions regarding the *Naruto* series despite it officially coming to an end in 2017. My Hero Academia and Attack on Titan appear to be getting more popular as the days go by. Knowing about these series is by no means a requirement, of course. But if candidates A and B are identical except that A has an encyclopedic knowledge of Naruto while B has an encyclopedic knowledge of (say) Doraemon, it may make a difference for voters.
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: >
> 1. In your opinion, what do moderators do?
>
>
>
Moderators are more than just users – they are leaders. Being elected as a moderator means the community has put their trust in you to lead by example while maintaining a positive and friendly experience to all users in the community.
>
> 2. How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?
>
>
>
A user who posts high quality questions and answers are not automatically exempted from following the rules.
The first thing I would do to resolve this is handle any flags accordingly, and then talk to the user about their behavior in the site. If the user complies and I see a noticeable change, then no further action would be required.
If the user continues to raise issues, then I give would them a warning and reach out to another moderator to talk to the user about their behavior. Who knows, I may have rubbed them the wrong way in the past and they do not want to listen to me specifically.
After given a warning by myself and a secondary moderator, and there are no changes in their behavior, then I would discuss with moderator team about initiating a suspension.
>
> 3. How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?
>
>
>
If felt like the question shouldn’t have been closed or deleted, then I would reach out to the moderator who handled the question and inquire about the reason that lead to their conclusion. Single-handedly undoing their action would be an abuse of power.
If resolution is met and both parties agreed on re-opening or un-deleting the question, then I would let them handle it as such.
>
> 4. What should responsible moderators not do with their power? What behavior have you disliked in moderators (on any SE or elsewhere) that you vow you'll never do?
>
>
>
This one ties back to #3. In my experience as a general user in other another site, I have seen a moderator close a question because they believed to be off-topic. The question was reaching into some gray areas and the on-topicness was questionable to begin with, but the community disagreed with the vote and the question received enough votes to have it re-opened. In-turn, the moderator closed the question again.
In this situation, closing the question a second time was an abuse of power and overruling the decisions of the community. Unless it is explicitly off-topic (anime/manga identification requests, recommendations, a question that isn’t even a question, etc…), I would leave it up to community to submit their close votes and flags before stepping in.
>
> 5. A user has posted a question which by itself is fine and is answerable, however the user's actions involving the question has been troubling (ie. spamming non-answers, spamming the question link in comments across the site, defacing edits, harassing/abusive behavior to other users who answer/comment/discuss). Along with any possible sanctions against the user, do you think any action should be taken against the question?
>
>
>
I say this would depend on the quality and value of the question. If it were a simple question – music identification request tagged to a specific anime for example – I would move forward with deleting the question. While these questions are answerable, they are not highly sought after and likely will go unnoticed.
Now say the question was something that would receive a lot of attention, such as [Where is Eren's father Dr. Jaeger?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/19724), then I would say leave the question open and allow people to answer. Since the user had that much negative activity, they were likely either suspended or were deleted all together (which I have seen to be the case for new or unregistered users). The question may go unaccepted, but it would be a highly valued question that people would want answered.
>
> 6. A question was asked [a while back](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4314/48808) about lowering the close vote threshold from 5 to 3. Since moderator support for such a move is critical, do you think the current threshold is fine or should it be lowered, and why?
>
>
>
I am in full support on moving forward with lowering the close vote threshold to 3 for Anime & Manga. In the last few months, I have seen many reviews struggle to past 3 votes and the last vote has typically been a moderator.
In the past there has been, and possibly can be again, a steady amount of users who go through the review queue where 5 votes would be easily achievable, but I do not believe that holds true for the time being. While being a moderator means I can finalize the close, that doesn’t mean the community should rely on moderators for such action.
>
> 7. You (a moderator) and another community member both answer a question on the site. The other answer is well written but (objectively) incorrect, and has gathered a similar amount of upvotes to yours. What do you do?
>
>
>
It is not up to a moderator to throw down the hammer and delete answers that provide incorrect information. I would simply comment on the answer to provide information on why it is incorrect, and then go on my merry way. From there, it is up to the user to decide on whether they should edit the answer to become valid and useful, or delete it entirely.
>
> 8. Where do you want to see the site and/or community go in the near future? Where don't you want to see it go? (Optional: provide the rationale behind your decisions.)
>
>
>
A majority of this section can be seen in my answers for #9. I want Anime & Manga to be a welcoming site that gives provides users with a great experience when inquiring about anime and manga. However, I feel like the scatter and confusing policies can make the site feel unwelcoming to new users and not give them much incentive to return.
>
> 9. The community as a whole has many things that are can be seen as lack, underdeveloped, or could use further development, compared to other sites or communities (such as our sister sites within the some category). What do you see as the top three immediate things that you would like to tackle as moderator that you cannot do as a user? Why do you think these points are important and should be prioritized?
>
>
>
1. Ever since I joined this community, I have seen a lack of community events. I remember there were a few watch parties in my early days, but those have since fade away. I am interested to starting these back up. Community events can provide users another kind of experience that is more than just your typically Q&A.
2. Back in July, the [A&M Monthly Engagement Post #3](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4381) was initiated to help move the site forward in implementing upcoming features and changes. Among the three topics, I would focus on organization and cleanup of tags and policies. As mentioned, there are policies that are now deprecated, and these need to be consolidated where needed and have them up-to-date.
For example, let’s look at identification requests. In the help guide, it states questions asking to identify an anime or manga are off-topic regardless of how much information is provided. However, unless you read the meta-posted that is linked to it, you wouldn’t know that anime/manga identification requests based on cosplays or merchandise are accepted. Even though it does say you can ask about merchandise, it’s ambiguous on whether it’s acceptable criteria for identification requests (and cosplay isn’t even mentioned here).
3. In addition to #2, I would work with the moderator team and community to move forward with making music identification requests off-topic (which has been mentioned in the Anime & Manga engagement questions for both July and May). I have answered a few of these in the past, but I find them tedious and sometimes difficult to answer; especially if the track was unofficially released.
A majority of the time, the OP (original poster) will lack the required information to allow the community effectively answer the question. The question will become unanswered for an indefinite amount of the time because the OP has left the community and leaving the question untouched.
Another thing I would like to mention regarding these questions is that, when provide,
timestamps could be different based on the streaming service they view it on (which I have seen a few times). When this occurs, it could effectively change the track that is being asked about and the community may provide potentially incorrect information – and we wouldn’t know until the OP says otherwise
>
> 10. How much do you know about the following series: *Naruto*, *One Piece,* *My Hero Academia*, and *Attack on Titan*? These series are some of the [top tags as of 2020](https://data.stackexchange.com/anime/query/1310219/2020-anime-manga-top-questions) that are seen more of than others. To date, there are still many (mostly poorly written) questions regarding the *Naruto* series despite it officially coming to an end in 2017. My Hero Academia and Attack on Titan appear to be getting more popular as the days go by. Knowing about these series is by no means a requirement, of course. But if candidates A and B are identical except that A has an encyclopedic knowledge of Naruto while B has an encyclopedic knowledge of (say) Doraemon, it may make a difference for voters.
>
>
>
I am seasoned in the realm of Naruto. A majority of my answers are on questions asking about this series as well as it’s squeal Boruto. While most of my knowledge comes from watching the Anime, I will provide manga references to better support my answers whenever possible. The same is also true for Attack on Titan
I have very little knowledge when it comes to both One Piece and My Hero Academia, however My Hero Academia is next on my to-watch list :)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: ### [username_2](https://anime.stackexchange.com/election#post-60909)'s answers to the questionnaires
For additional context, [here are my answers to the previous 2019 Android.SE election](https://android.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2525/44325).
>
> 1. In your opinion, what do moderators do?
>
>
>
Borrowing the terms since then, moderators are "super janitors" and "exception handlers"; "super janitors" because they are basically unrestricted in cleaning up the sites, and "exception handlers" for issues that regular users cannot handle by themselves.
While in general moderators should be the "exception handlers" and let the community moderating the site, Anime.SE doesn't have enough high-rep regulars to moderate efficiently. This is where moderators can support them by being the "janitors".
>
> 2. How would you deal with a user who produced a steady stream of valuable answers, but tends to generate a large number of arguments/flags from comments?
>
>
>
In general, I will be quite direct in following and enforcing the [Code of Conduct](https://anime.stackexchange.com/conduct): warning, account suspension, and account expulsion.
However, Anime.SE is lacking experts. Making them left the site because of arguments/flags is the very last action I want to take. With help of other moderators, I'll try best to make a compromise and persuade them to improve their behavior while still reducing/preventing the friction within the community.
>
> 3. How would you handle a situation where another mod closed/deleted/etc a question that you feel shouldn't have been?
>
>
>
Discuss with them casually but politely, just like how I will do even as a regular user. Our moderators are very rational and open-minded, and I believe we can give feedback to each other constructively without being intimidated. If it is just a single instance of disagreement, then I can live with it ;)
However, if it becomes a pattern, I will request the moderator to discuss the cause of the issue ("focus on the content, not the user") on the meta with the community, just like how regular users can and should do.
>
> 4. What should responsible moderators not do with their power? What behavior have you disliked in moderators (on any SE or elsewhere) that you vow you'll never do?
>
>
>
The obvious one is not abusing their mods' powers, including their binding votes and potentially biased/unreasonable deletion (which might be considered as "censoring") since *mods don't really own the site*.
Though, I can't remember a specific case for any behavior that I dislike for now...
>
> 5. A user has posted a question which by itself is fine and is answerable, however the user's actions involving the question has been troubling (ie. spamming non-answers, spamming the question link in comments across the site, defacing edits, harassing/abusive behavior to other users who answer/comment/discuss). Along with any possible sanctions against the user, do you think any action should be taken against the question?
>
>
>
SE has a motto to "focus on the content, not the user", which means to moderate each post as isolated as possible without bias from the poster. Depending on the quality/issue of the questions, they should be generally left open to be moderated by the community instead.
Unless, if the question is also a part of the problem (e.g. edit war), it probably needs to be locked, or in the worst case, deleted.
>
> 6. A question was asked [a while back](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4314/48808) about lowering the close vote threshold from 5 to 3. Since moderator support for such a move is critical, do you think the current threshold is fine or should it be lowered, and why?
>
>
>
It should still be lowered. With one of the candidates being elected, it also means that the site "loses" a regular vote (since mod's votes are binding). I always prefer the community to self-moderate as much as possible rather than relying on moderators.
>
> 7. You (a moderator) and another community member both answer a question on the site. The other answer is well written but (objectively) incorrect, and has gathered a similar amount of upvotes to yours. What do you do?
>
>
>
I'll put my moderator's hat off here and just act as a regular user since this doesn't need any moderator's interventions.
Generally, I'll comment to point out some of the obvious mistakes, and also possibly downvote if it really warrants. Still, I'll disengage if the comment thread may become a long debate since I've already put my answer.
While seeing highly-upvoted wrong answers may be annoying, they are technically an attempt to answer and they aren't really eligible for deletion due to "not an answer". Let the community decide!
>
> 8. Where do you want to see the site and/or community go in the near future? Where don't you want to see it go? (Optional: provide the rationale behind your decisions.)
>
>
>
Honestly, it's hard for me to answer this question since I kind of understand the limitation of SE being a Q&A site. I think, for now, I'll just say that I want to at least *keep* the quality of the Q&A, being "more factual, and less opinion".
>
> 9. The community as a whole has many things that are can be seen as lack, underdeveloped, or could use further development, compared to other sites or communities (such as our sister sites within the some category). What do you see as the top three immediate things that you would like to tackle as moderator that you cannot do as a user? Why do you think these points are important and should be prioritized?
>
>
>
These are mostly just proposals since these still need to be coordinated with other mods. Also, all of them are related to each other:
1. Update and organize the site policy as mentioned in the [A&M Monthly Engagement Post #3](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4381/2516)
2. Update and revise [the guidance on close reason banner](https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/339700/241919) to help each user the best. One of the most used custom reason is "identification request", and the current notice still doesn't seem effective for the poster.
3. Revise [the introduction text of the help center](https://anime.stackexchange.com/help). There's actually a customizable introduction text between the search box and "Find out more about...". While meta has a problem of discoverability and navigation (even for established users, moreover for new users), mentioning some of the FAQs on there may ease the accessibility.
>
> 10. How much do you know about the following series: *Naruto*, *One Piece*, *My Hero Academia*, and *Attack on Titan*? These series are some of the [top tags as of 2020](https://data.stackexchange.com/anime/query/1310219/2020-anime-manga-top-questions) that are seen more of than others. To date, there are still many (mostly poorly written) questions regarding the *Naruto* series despite it officially coming to an end in 2017. *My Hero Academia* and *Attack on Titan* appear to be getting more popular as the days go by. Knowing about these series is by no means a requirement, of course. But if candidates A and B are identical except that A has an encyclopedic knowledge of *Naruto* while B has an encyclopedic knowledge of (say) *Doraemon*, it may make a difference for voters.
>
>
>
I have read a few volumes of *Naruto*, not following *One Piece* and *My Hero Academia* at all, and only watched the 1st season of *Attack on Titan*.
So, while I don't really have much knowledge with the series (or, well, as my profile says "*(Googling's) Jack of all trade, (anime/manga) master of none.*"), I can still try to relate to those Q&A by reading wiki/articles and watching videos, including Japanese resources.
On the other hand, since I'm not putting serious interest in them, *I'm okay with facing spoilers* (i.e. not afraid to open the Q&A and add spoiler formatting while being "spoiled").
Upvotes: 3 |
2020/11/03 | 439 | 1,550 | <issue_start>username_0: Anime & Manga's [fourth moderator election](https://anime.stackexchange.com/election/4) has come to a close, the votes have been tallied and the new moderator is:
[](https://anime.stackexchange.com/users/2516/aki-tanaka)
They'll be joining [the existing crew](https://anime.stackexchange.com/users?tab=moderators) shortly—please thank them for volunteering, and share your assistance and advice with them as they learn the ropes!
For details on how the voting played out, you can download the election results [here](https://anime.stackexchange.com/election/4), or [view a summary report online](https://www.opavote.com/results/6213498292928512/0).<issue_comment>username_1: Congratulations Aki! I wish you all the luck in your new position and may you serve the community well :)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: First of all, thank you to all who have participated in this election, as candidates and also as voters. :)
I'd like to thank [username_1](https://anime.stackexchange.com/users/20275) for stepping up as a strong candidate, hopefully you will get a chance in future elections!
Also, I'd like to thank [<NAME>](https://anime.stackexchange.com/users/48011) for caring about the election and stepping up as a candidate to ensure the election went through. It was my bad to gamble on extending the nomination period... :(
Finally, I hope for good teamwork with the community and guidance from the existing mod team!
Upvotes: 3 |
2021/01/02 | 852 | 3,047 | <issue_start>username_0: There is a question asking about this series: [What kind of demon is in "My Status as an Assassin Obviously Exceeds the Hero's"?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/61402/what-kind-of-demon-is-in-my-status-as-an-assassin-obviously-exceeds-the-heros)
Researching for possible titles from the internet:
* My Status as an Assassin Obviously Exceeds the Hero's (53 characters)
* Ansatsusha de Aru Ore no Status ga Yuusha yori mo Akiraka ni Tsuyoi no data (75 characters)
However, there is a limitation that a tag can only be up to 35 characters long, and I didn't find any short nickname for this, official or not.
How should this series be tagged?<issue_comment>username_1: Since we are an English language site. We should set up a precedence from now on about tagging.
I propose the following:
1. If the title has official English localized name, use that. Meaning take the official English name over the Japanese name were available. Both should be synonyms.
* If it does not, use the Japanese romanized name until such a time that there is. Then synonymize the English name onto it (i.e. replacing it as the main tag). Update the tag excerpt and wiki to reflect as needed.
2. If the full title exceeds the character limit, then either: Use the official or widely fan accepted abbreviated Japanese or English abbreviated name (if applicable), e.g. Oreimo.
* If there is no (official or otherwise) abbreviated name, use up to the first 5 words plus or minus two so the title doesn't feel cut off. In the case of the afforementioned series, it can be either. [ansatsu-de-aru](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ansatsu-de-aru "show questions tagged 'ansatsu-de-aru'") or [my-status-as-an-assassin](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/my-status-as-an-assassin "show questions tagged 'my-status-as-an-assassin'"). The ideal acceptance criteria would be that it is distinguishable by it as a partial title.
* Both would be synonyms of one another, with the English name taking precedence (i.e. is the main tag) where applicable.
* If there ever is an official abbreviated name or widely accepted (search results will be used as a benchmark) name within fan circles we can go with that.
* The tag wiki should be updated to reflect abbreviations as needed.
3. For very edge cases of very generic names, we can handle them on a case by case basic here on meta.
This should cover around 75% of cases involving series-related tagging.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: [status-completed](/questions/tagged/status-completed "show questions tagged 'status-completed'")
For this specific case, the series has been tagged as [my-status-as-an-assassin](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/my-status-as-an-assassin "show questions tagged 'my-status-as-an-assassin'") with a synonym of [ansatsusha-de-aru-no-ore-ga](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/ansatsusha-de-aru-no-ore-ga "show questions tagged 'ansatsusha-de-aru-no-ore-ga'").
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer] |
2021/06/04 | 1,330 | 4,891 | <issue_start>username_0: Regarding one of @[Pablo](https://anime.stackexchange.com/users/3028/pablo)'s recent Naruto question:
[Why did Naruto decide not to use Rasenshuriken due to the harm it did to his arm, if he could create it with clones?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/62888/why-did-naruto-decide-not-to-use-the-rasenshuriken-due-to-the-harm-it-did-to-his)
At first glance, this seemed on-topic to me (which is why I tried to answer it) but a discussion we had in comments is making me wonder if it still is. I answered that Naruto didn't do this one, because the jutsu was forbidden, and two, because he avoided the damage done to his arm by throwing it while in Sage Mode. **Many hours after I posted the answer,** he said it wasn't the answer he was looking for because the "timeline of the question" is set to when Naruto didn't know Sage Mode. I should note **that not in the question title nor question body does he say where the "timeline of the question" is set.**
I once read somewhere on this site that if you ask a vague question, you get a vague answer. Referring *[to this Anime & Manga meta page](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/150/why-did-they-write-it-that-way-questions-should-be-off-topic)*, I tried to figure out if this question was on-topic or not. But well.. *no luck.*
So the problems I feel with the question are:
* Not enough detail given in the title or body, so answers may be wrong or the answerer may be confused
* Question seems like a "*go ask Kishimoto yourself*" type of question (kishi is the naruto creator)
AFAIK, "Not a real question" used to be a flag reason, although I don't see it anywhere the times I've flagged a question.
So, is this type of question on-topic? Or should this be closed with some custom flag reason?
**NOTE:** A brief-ish discussion with @[Memor-X](https://anime.stackexchange.com/users/1587/memor-x) made me look at the question with a different perspective, but I still can't see how I should edit my answer, why I should edit my answer, and if this question is on-topic.<issue_comment>username_1: I would say that it's off-topic because it's missing a key detail:
**What was the *other* time that Rasenshuriken was used at close range?**
A cursory [memory refresher](https://naruto.fandom.com/wiki/Wind_Release:_Rasenshuriken#Development) suggests that the only battle that this was used before he learned Sage Mode was the first time that he learned the jutsu.
That basically plays to your question about "timeline of the question", in that it's really not clear what timeline other than before Naruto learned to throw it exists, or if there are other battles that it was used in after that.
So with that basis, I would say that **it is off-topic** because any answers to this would either be based on an incomplete premise (that the OP was only talking about the only known canonical fight), or that the OP is asking an unclear question (that there was more than one fight involving the Rasenshuriken in the time before Senjustu was learned).
Upvotes: 3 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: The question is indeed a duplicate of [When Tsunade told Naruto to not use the Rasenshuriken, couldn't he have just used a clone?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/37482/when-tsunade-told-naruto-to-not-use-the-rasenshuriken-couldnt-he-have-just-use)
as mentioned in the comment by Daniel. I didnt see that comment until now.
By the time I made the question, I've just watched those episodes. If you have just watched those episodes recently, you remember that by the time Tsunade asks him not to do it, he didnt learn Sage mode yet. So I don't know what Sage mode has to do with the question at all. I guess that if you havent watched the episodes in a long time, you can suppose that by the time the question is made (when Tsunade asks Naruto not to do it) he knew Sage Mode. But he didnt.
And the answer can't be "because Tsunade asks him not to do it" because the question acknowledges that. By mentioning that, the question implies why Naruto obeyed Tsunade, who asked him not to do it due to the harm it made to his arm, if he could tell Tsunade "it doesnt make harm to me if I thwrow it with clons". If the answer to the question I make would be "because Tsunade asked him not to do it", I wouldnt mention the answer to the question in the question, there would be no point in making a question you know the answer.
In the other question which is identical to mine and which it was made before mine, I can see user Arcane remembers clearly what happened in those episodes. The answer "it could kill the clone" is kind of the supposition one could make about why he didnt do it, but as the comments of Arcane states it was shown he can do it and the clones survives. Even though those comments are more in the line of an answer to the question I made.
Upvotes: -1 |
2021/06/04 | 1,109 | 4,518 | <issue_start>username_0: UPDATE: While the testing period has ended, this change has been well-received by the community so we have opted to not reset the votes needed to close/reopen to 5 while we look at data.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please let me know if you have any concerns about this change in the planned process or if you feel the number of votes should be changed back at least temporarily. I'll be back in a few weeks with the results of the project.
---
Part of understanding the impact of three-vote closure is to understand what impact it's having on y'all. I'd like to ask anyone who feels up to it to **write an answer to this question** and to tell us about your experience over the past few weeks.
The sorts of things I'm interested in knowing (feel free to address all or none or add your own) -
* Did this help?
* Did it hurt?
* Did it make you more interested in close/reopen reviewing? Less?
+ Are there things other than 3-vote close impacting your interest in reviewing?
* If you can't vote but do flag, did this make you more/less likely to flag?
* Would you prefer to go back to 5?
* Should it be permanent?
* What would you like me to look into when it comes to analyzing the data from the test?
* Were there any side-effects (good or bad) that you want me to be aware of?
These are merely prompts, so feel free to add anything I'm missing that you think is worth saying. This is focused on how you're feeling about it and what data you want me to look at, so don't feel like you need to analyze the data over the last 30 days - though you're welcome to if that's how you figure out what you feel.
If you have any outstanding questions, also feel welcome to ask them here.
The test will run until about Monday the 21st of June, at which point we'll be resetting the votes to close up to 5 while I review the responses here and dig into the data that we've been collecting.<issue_comment>username_1: In sequence:
* Did this help? Kind of. I still see the diamond moderators closing things quicker than the community which gets to your point about there being a bigger problem.
* Did it hurt? Doubt that it did.
* Did it make you more interested in close/reopen reviewing? Less? I don't participate in the queues but if nothing else I've been more interested in closing questions as of late.
* Would you prefer to go back to 5? No!
* Should it be permanent? Yes!
* What would you like me to look into when it comes to analyzing the data from the test?
+ How many closures were done by the community as opposed to mods?
+ How many close votes were cast per day?
* Were there any side-effects (good or bad) that you want me to be aware of? An active count of how many active curators there are is going to be needed.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: *This answer was written by a mod at the time of writing, so it might have some bias. That said...*
---
* **Did this help?**
Kind of. I noticed a few questions were closed successfully without mod's intervention, so it's certainly an improvement.
* **Did it hurt?**
I saw no questions were incorrectly closed ([1 (now-deleted) question](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/63997/civilization-type-anime-like-overlord-and-slime) was almost closed with a different reason than what I assume should be closed), so it didn't hurt (yet).
* **Did it make you more interested in close/reopen reviewing? Less?**
No effect. I see a red dot, I click.
+ **Are there things other than 3-vote close impacting your interest in reviewing?**
I guess we all know that we still have barely enough active users with close votes privilege.
* **If you can't vote but do flag, did this make you more/less likely to flag?**
Not applicable for mods.
* **Would you prefer to go back to 5?**
Nope!
* **Should it be permanent?**
Yes, please.
* **What would you like me to look into when it comes to analyzing the data from the test?**
+ In addition to the close votes, how many close *flags* were cast?
+ If those close flags were actually close votes, how many additional questions would be closed without mod's intervention?
* **Were there any side-effects (good or bad) that you want me to be aware of?**
As of now, not really. We still have not enough active users with close votes privilege to make this a problem, and most users generally flag/vote reasonably.
Upvotes: 3 |
2021/10/23 | 391 | 1,199 | <issue_start>username_0: The tag [rent-a-girlfriend](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rent-a-girlfriend "show questions tagged 'rent-a-girlfriend'") for the series "Rent-A-Girlfriend" currently has no synonym. So, can we add a synonym using the Japanese title "Kanojo, Okarishimasu", namely [kanojo-okarishimasu](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/kanojo-okarishimasu "show questions tagged 'kanojo-okarishimasu'")? I think this would be in line with the [current policy](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/q/4414) on tagging.<issue_comment>username_1: There's no use cases of [kanojo-okarishimasu](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/kanojo-okarishimasu "show questions tagged 'kanojo-okarishimasu'"), so why would we synthetically create it? I don't see that there's a need right now.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: **Done.** [kanojo-okarishimasu](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/kanojo-okarishimasu "show questions tagged 'kanojo-okarishimasu'") is now a synonym of [rent-a-girlfriend](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/rent-a-girlfriend "show questions tagged 'rent-a-girlfriend'").
Upvotes: 2 [selected_answer] |
2022/04/21 | 2,562 | 9,751 | <issue_start>username_0: *Note: I have nothing against any user. They are free to ask any question about any show as long as they are on-topic.*
---
Suppose X is an anime. Consider it a light hearted slice-of-life show meant for casual watch and occasionally throw jokes for giggles. Now, if I want to discuss something about the show, for e.g. "why is this phrase used in this joke?" or "why is this character holding this thing while delivering the joke?" or "why is this character wearing this costume at this time of the year?", this *could* ruin the show considering it is just a casual show not meant for analyzing any minute details.
I get some users will not understand something and they are free to here but then again if we were to discuss each and every bit of the show, that will lead to the site being an open ended discussion forum rather than a proper Q&A site (Do note that some shows are plot heavy and sometimes confusing like NGE, Naruto etc. and it is inevitable that somebody will ask questions on this type of show).
It seems like a rant but my genuine question is: **Is it ok to overanalyze an anime?**
Tangentially related: [Is it ever acceptable to ask about whether an anime event is realistic or plausible?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/668/is-it-ever-acceptable-to-ask-about-whether-an-anime-event-is-realistic-or-plausi)
Some users may not like this post and I welcome every form of downvote/criticism. But I would like to have a community view on this<issue_comment>username_1: Personally, I would say that *over*analyzing is not good, but analyzing is.
Especially in the more casual shows, jokes and comedy are often hidden in the minute details. These require the viewer to have a decent, if not good understanding of either Japanese, Japanese culture, and sometimes even both. Those kind of questions can either be a hit or miss, as the answer may just be "*there is no special meaning here*"
However the premise, phrasing, and scope of a question is really important.
For example: *"why is this phrase used in this joke?"*
The title implies that there is some context as to why it's strange, or out of place that a certain phrase is used within a joke. In the question body it's reasonable to expect the OP gives some context as to why they consider this out of place or strange.
If no such context is given, it's reasonable to ask for additional details. And if non such are given, or the reason given is strongly opinionated we have the close reason `Needs details or clarity`.
The other end of this being *"Why is this phrase used"* which would be too broad, and could also be closed as such.
Off course there will always be edge cases. In those scenario's feel free to reach out and see what others in the community think. You can do so via a meta post addressing the particular post, or drop by in the chat to discuss the post in question with other community members.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Actually you didn't (directly? explicitly?) answer my question
>
> Why do you have to bring genre into this? This kind of question for Death Note it's fine, but when it comes to Kaguya-sama, there's an issue? Perhaps your question should be like is it ok to overanalyse comedy anime or a joke in an anime.
>
>
>
But anyway...
My obviously biased answer to your question, which I find good and which I upvoted, is
1. I note your example is *comedy* anime.
2. What I understand of the term 'overanalyse' here is applying the way 1 would analyse a drama anime to a comedy anime.
3. And to say that if it's ok to 'overanalyse'/analyse a drama anime, then there shouldn't be an issue in 'overanalysing' a comedy anime...**unless there's something up specifically with comedy anime**, that I may have overlooked.
**Note**: For the case of dramedy anime...I guess it's about the specific question like if it's about a comedic or a dramatic part of the anime.
Happy Easter!
---
Edit 1: Ah, unexplained downvotes because of my arrogance when they actually agree with me. Interesting.....
FYI username_4 answered after I mentioned this meta post here: [Has Miko Ino's morality been corrupted?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/62274/has-miko-inos-morality-been-corrupted#comment79010_62275) (where username_4 self-answers a question about <NAME> from Kaguya-sama).
---
Edit 2: About Kaguya-sama and Death Note:
>
> Also at first, he wanted to do more intellectual battles like Death Note but the theme changed more to "clashing of romantic emotions".
>
>
>
* Edit 2.1: This is what OP says
>
> Yes, definitely both show started on the right note on having intellectual battles
>
>
>
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: Honestly I'm just happy that people are asking questions about anime on the site.
This is *way* too much hand wringing IMO; we're not getting into a situation where the questions are explicitly and blatantly off-topic, and there *can* be answers for them that do have some kind of benefit for those who are curious.
When it becomes a *problem*, I think we'll know about it. But for now, I'm content with letting sleeping dogs lie on this.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: There might be problems, but I think "overanalyze" might not be the term we're looking for. As far as I can tell, "overanalyze" just means to analyze in too much detail. I think this is a little too vague and subjective to be forming site policy on.
I actually think a lot of my questions and answers would fall under the category of overanalysis, such as this one: [Why did Hiruzen not meet with Fugaku?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/q/66551/19307) and this one: [Did Miki really never bully Shoko?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/50683). Or this: [Has Miko Ino's morality been corrupted?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/62274/). But I'm not sure this is what you're actually worried about or not. Based on what I'm reading, I think you might mean something different. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe you might want to know whether it's okay to ask questions that seem to be analysis questions on the surface, but are actually complaints about a series or it's characters.
I think this problem needs to be broken down into different parts, which might need additional Meta questions (or might already be answered).
"This Show is Ridiculous" Masquerading as Analysis Questions
============================================================
Sometimes users ask a question, but what they're really doing is complaining about a show.
From time to time, we get questions like this (this is one of mine): [Is there any explanation for how Akihiko Kayaba managed to trap everyone in SAO?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/27688)
Perhaps a better example of a bad question: [Why didn't Ash release Charizard?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/62421)
These questions can be annoying, but often they can be objectively answered with a little (or a lot) of overexplaining. Though sometimes the answer is so obvious that it's questionable whether anything of value to the site is generated. I'm not sure if we have any Meta questions about these types of questions. If not, perhaps someone should ask. This is probably the closest thing we have right now: [How should we deal with posts that complain about the plot/characters/author?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/387/how-should-we-deal-with-posts-that-complain-about-the-plot-characters-author)
Users Treating the Site Like a Forum
====================================
This can happen with the previous category, if one gives an objective answer and the user doesn't accept it, and ends up writing a lot of comments and being chatty. I would say this is actually a user behavior problem, so the solution isn't close votes, but rather to explain the rules to the user. Though if the user is inviting discussion in a question (for example, by asking whether Superman or Goku would win in a fight), that can usually be closed on the grounds of opinion-based.
Reality Check Questions
=======================
Such as this one: [How is Misaka's railgun so destructive?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/2235/how-is-misakas-railgun-so-destructive) or the previously mentioned [Why was the Otsusuki clan genetically compatible with humans to the point they could have children?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/64207/why-was-the-otsusuki-clan-genetically-compatible-with-humans-to-the-point-they-c). These would seem to already have a Meta post: [Is it ever acceptable to ask about whether an anime event is realistic or plausible?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/668/is-it-ever-acceptable-to-ask-about-whether-an-anime-event-is-realistic-or-plausi)
Personally, I kind of like questions like these, and I especially like seeing the clever answers we sometimes get. The problem is whether the users on here have the expertise and patience for answering them. I don't know whether or not they should be on topic.
Overanalyzing
=============
As far as overanalyzing and analyzing go, I don't think these questions should be closed as being out of the scope of the site unless they're obviously going to generate opinion-based answers. However, I can see overanalyzing questions being annoying, as they might require an excessive amount of work to anyone trying to answer. If someone is willing to do the work, then the question can be answered. If not, it just gets ignored and maybe downvoted.
And we can perhaps take a note from the Literature site, where they say literary analysis is on topic: <https://literature.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/42/is-literary-analysis-on-topic>
Upvotes: 3 |
2022/09/27 | 2,348 | 7,530 | <issue_start>username_0: It's been a long road, getting from though beta to here. It's been a long time, through the good and the bad. Our time is finally here. It's been 10 years.
Let's take a look back at all we've been through and share it with the rest of the SE community in celebration. In the month of November, Stack Exchange will be doing a blog celebrating communities that have made it this far, like they did in [the spring](https://stackoverflow.blog/2022/06/27/celebrating-the-stack-exchange-sites-that-turned-ten-years-old-in-spring-2022/).
We'd like to ask the community for things they'd like mentioned or shared. It can be anything from your favorite questions/answers, post/tags, personal stories or anecdotes (good or bad) related to the site and community. It's nothing much but we'd like to share a bit of the community in our celebration banner, as it's what we'd consider the best and most important part of our site.
The content will be like a blog blurb about the community. The banners for the celebration will be live for the month of November, feel free to leave your comments or stories as answers and we'll do what we can to weave it into a narrative to share as part of our celebration banner. Feel free to leave any bits you want here. We'll try to take as much as we can. The deadline for us submitting things is October 20th to the SE Community. We'd appreciate if you can get anything to by the 18th so we can come up with something.
The winds blowing through landscape of anime and manga and it's subculture has changed significantly through these years. Through effort and perseverance we've made it to where we are. There's not much that will hold us back anymore. I got faith in the community. Don't let anything hold us back.
Anyways, did you know there is a new Bunny Girl Senpai anime coming soon? [More details](https://twitter.com/aobuta_anime/status/1573643420689584129?s=20&t=6E9-DxpTGK2Cr6VQ0AjgrA) to be revealed soon.
Another fun fact, FSN Archer's VA is the [voice](https://twitter.com/MY_MURMUR/status/1573933154074652672?cxt=HHwWgMCjzar33dcrAAAA) of a certain cute puff ball in a quite enjoyable [summer anime](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikXv37oTjm0) this year that you may have missed.
Hope to hear from you all soon.<issue_comment>username_1: Alright, to get the ball rolling~
It's been a long time, I didn't even realize I have been a member for 9 years on this community! However, I only started contributing a few months later with this answer: [What is Abe's first name?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/9773/what-is-abes-first-name/10014#10014), so make it 8 years, I guess?
Even though anime & manga are usually viewed as "for children", this community has proven otherwise, that anime & manga are also a serious business™:
* Let's start the journey with [What is the first ever produced anime and manga?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/3408/what-is-the-first-ever-produced-anime-and-manga)
* Of course, we are also curious [Why do anime/manga characters have big eyes?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/4748/why-do-anime-manga-characters-have-big-eyes) and [Why do many characters tend to have crazy hair colors and styles?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/2872/why-do-many-characters-tend-to-have-crazy-hair-colors-and-styles)
* We even take physics problems: [How is Misaka's railgun so destructive?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/2235/how-is-misakas-railgun-so-destructive)
* And not to forget, we also appreciate *arts*: [About the artworks used in the Elfen Lied opening scenes (contains nudity)](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/15130/about-the-artworks-used-in-the-elfen-lied-opening-scenes-contains-nudity)
* For intermezzo, how about something light and fun, like [Has the "It's over 9000!" meme spread back to Japan?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/752/has-the-its-over-9000-meme-spread-back-to-japan) and [How much broadcast time did it take for Planet Namek to blow up?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/3701/how-much-broadcast-time-did-it-take-for-planet-namek-to-blow-up)
* Next, while we also care about parental guidance on [How can I identify child-appropriate manga?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/21936/how-can-i-identify-child-appropriate-manga) or [How to explain to my 10 year old niece that Puella Magi Madoka Magica is not a kids show?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/39633/how-to-explain-to-my-10-year-old-niece-that-puella-magi-madoka-magica-is-not-a-k)
* We also cater to older audiences, like [Why does anime usually air at night in Japan?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/4013/why-does-anime-usually-air-at-night-in-japan) or [What is the difference between yuri and shoujo-ai, yaoi and shounen-ai and ecchi and hentai anime genre?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/2681/what-is-the-difference-between-yuri-and-shoujo-ai-yaoi-and-shounen-ai-and-ecchi)
* Finally, take a look at [What databases and listing sites exist for anime, manga, etc?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/4696/what-databases-and-listing-sites-exist-for-anime-manga-etc) and [Are there any anime suggestion engines?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/7337/are-there-any-anime-suggestion-engines) if you're interested in exploring more!
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: [death-note](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/death-note "show questions tagged 'death-note'"), for those who don't know, is an anime with a Hard Magic System in the form of the titular item, a note book which causes people's deaths when their names are written in it, however it's not as simple as writing a name in as there is a series of rules which dictate who can die and how they will die.
Because of this people want to know the limits which you can take these rules and this spawned the the Anime and Manga SE meme [Death Note Puzzles](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/2608/1587)
We've had
* Extending life with the Death Note
+ [Can I increase my lifespan by killing myself using the Death Note?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/907/can-i-increase-my-lifespan-by-killing-myself-using-the-death-note)
+ [Old age as cause of death?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/11515/death-note-old-age-as-cause-of-death)
* The limit to it's ability to control people
+ [How far can you manipulate someone with a Death Note?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/21659/how-far-can-you-manipulate-someone-with-a-death-note)
+ [Can the Death Note manipulate people whose names aren't written in it?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/32437/can-the-death-note-manipulate-people-whose-names-arent-written-in-it)
* Possible immunity to the Death Note
+ [Is a person who wasn't named by his/her parents immune to the Death Note?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/21270/is-a-person-who-wasnt-named-by-his-her-parents-immune-to-the-death-note)
+ [Does writing an alias in the Death Note count as misspelling the name?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/27564/does-writing-an-alias-in-the-death-note-count-as-misspelling-the-name)
but not all the rules were about using the Death Note. some were rules on Shinigami Interaction, one such rule lead to asking the question on [how far you could take a sexual relationship with a Shinigami](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/42218/in-death-note-how-far-could-sexual-interaction-go-with-a-shinigami-before-it)
Upvotes: 3 |
2022/10/24 | 665 | 2,662 | <issue_start>username_0: Can we use YouTube videos as references, especially Anituber videos in the answers? YouTubers can sometimes be biased or [consider fandom](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/4558/48011), and I personally used YouTube videos in my answers (e.g. [here](https://anime.stackexchange.com/a/64085/48011)), so it is fair that I ask this and have a generalized opinion.<issue_comment>username_1: I don't see a problem so long as the YouTube video doesn't become the answer in itself, just as long as it's relevant and you try to summarize the relevant part(s) in your answer in the event the video is taken down.
>
> **Provide context for links**
>
>
> Links to external resources are encouraged, but please add context around the link so your fellow users will have some idea what it is and why it’s there. Always quote the most relevant part of an important link, in case the external resource is unreachable or goes permanently offline. Links to other websites should always be *helpful*, but avoid making it *necessary* to click on them as much as possible.
>
>
>
Source: [How do I write a good answer?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/help/how-to-answer)
But as you said, *"YouTubers can sometimes be biased"*, so it's always a good idea to look into the content creator and what their credentials are, e.g. a content creator who is actually a copyright attorney would be more of an authority on copyright law than someone who creates "reaction" streams of full anime episodes.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: I don't think its a problem, provided that you do mention the source and preferably even a link to the video itself as well.
Many questions related to anime/manga, can or have already been answered in many YouTube videos. For example, at one point, there was someone who asked if Super Saiyan Blue Vegito is significantly weaker than Mastered Ultra Instinct Goku, as it was implied in the Super Dragon Ball Heroes anime.
This question isn't easy to answer, at all. It first requires a long explanation not why Super Dragon Ball Heroes is a spinoff with wildly different power scaling and why it has nothing to do with canon DBS. The second part of the answer was **even** more difficult which required answering whether canon MUI Goku is stronger than canon Vegito SSB in his appearance against Fusion Zamasu. This is a pretty difficult question to answer. However, all of these answers, already exist in YouTube videos. Especially the latter part, there are many credible Dragon Ball power scalers that tackle these questions and provide multiple possibilities as a valid answer.
Upvotes: 0 |
2022/12/16 | 1,759 | 5,982 | <issue_start>username_0: Anime.SE has the [cosplay](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/cosplay "show questions tagged 'cosplay'") tag. So far, it has been used for:
1. Series identification ([Are questions regarding cosplay or anime-related items still on-topic?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4142/are-questions-regarding-cosplay-or-anime-related-items-still-on-topic))
2. Conventions
* [Why do cosplay competitions require prerecorded dialogue?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/33724/why-do-cosplay-competitions-require-prerecorded-dialogue)
3. Item identification
* [What kind of glove is being shown in the following pictures, and why is it nearly always a knife user who wear this style of gloves?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/52876/what-kind-of-glove-is-being-shown-in-the-following-pictures-and-why-is-it-nearl) (*tag removed from the question*)
4. Item specification
* [What are the dimensions of the State Alchemist pocket watch?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/44833/what-are-the-dimensions-of-the-state-alchemist-pocket-watch)
5. Fact checking
* [Is this ring merchandise with a red seal and gold "忍" emblem exist in Naruto?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/51129/is-this-ring-merchandise-with-a-red-seal-and-gold-%e5%bf%8d-emblem-exist-in-naruto) (*also tagged with [merchandise](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/merchandise "show questions tagged 'merchandise'")*)
* [Why is whatever side Todoroki's fire on always switch outside of the Anime](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/57635/why-is-whatever-side-todorokis-fire-on-always-switch-outside-of-the-anime) (*closed as unclear*)
6. Where to buy
* <https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/59450/gilgamesh-clothing-in-fate-stay-night-andzero> (*closed for shopping recommendation*)
* <https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/66522/where-can-i-get-a-real-obito-mask-not-a-plastic-one> (*self-deleted*)
* [Where can I find the outfits for an Ensemble Stars! group Cosplay I want to do?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/67548/where-can-i-find-the-outfits-for-an-ensemble-stars-group-cosplay-i-want-to-do)
7. Character recommendations
* <https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/48080/what-popular-anime-titular-characters-wear-a-large-backpack> (*closed*)
* <https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/67071/what-anime-character-wears-a-puffer-vest-gilet> (*closed*)
8. Making cosplay outfit
* <https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/53237/sewing-and-painting-clothing-pvc> (*closed*)
9. Video of dance cover
* [I’m hoping to do an Ensemble Stars! group cosplay and I wanna see if we can learn the full dance of at least one of the group’s songs](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/67549/i-m-hoping-to-do-an-ensemble-stars-group-cosplay-and-i-wanna-see-if-we-can-lear) (*closed as opinion-based due to another factor*)
Previously, there was already a discussion about this in 2012: [Are Cosplay-related questions on-topic?](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/231/are-cosplay-related-questions-on-topic), but the scope is not really clear. Can we clarify the scope of this tag more clearly?<issue_comment>username_1: Posting this a historical reference since we were discussing this on the site chat.
This indeed need some reasoning.
>
> 9. Video of dance cover
>
>
>
Seems something that would actually depend on the specific scope. Dance COVERS would probably never be really on-topic unless they manage to get enough fandom around them to get their own standing. For example, some Miku Miku Dance choreography have reached a meta-official status.
That said, if someone is searching for actual official choreography from an anime, especially the ones with a musical central theme (Love Live! etc) then the purpose probably does not matter. The only remaining question is if you want to accept questions about the official dance steps to an anime/manga song.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Honestly I feel like [this answer from SingerOfTheFall](https://anime.meta.stackexchange.com/a/232/102) is still relevant here.
If you consider it, these aren't questions about any background relevant to the shows, characters or anything like that - they're more about the projection of it into a different medium. Some of the more nitpicky circumstances around specifications around certain goods or certain items *might* be answerable by someone with extensive knowledge of Anime, but we haven't retained enough of those experts around to accept the hit.
But I can also read the room a bit and I see that the room is pretty ***empty*** right now, so now's a good time for a check-in. Do we *want* to try to answer questions like this?
If we do...
* We'd want to define parameters. We can answer only certain details, but not certain other details, for instance (we're not going to get answers to within a unit of measurement but would be willing to provide a rough estimate)
* We're OK with identification questions on cosplayers. Sometimes, a cosplayer could take a variant of a character and do a cosplay on that.
* We're OK with questions about choreography to a degree, but we acknowledge that we'd be asking the questions only in the context of the anime.
If we don't...
* We'd need to be explicit about why we're not allowing this. Is it due to lack of ease of answerability, lack of interest, or is it not just a good fit for the Q&A model?
* We'd need to figure out if there was somewhere else that someone could get their answer, even if that meant off-network.
* We accept, once more, that the moderation activity towards this topic comes at the cost of more activity on the site.
Personally speaking? I can't answer questions about cosplay, and while I have a passing interest in it, I'm no cosplay expert. It's almost like they could benefit from their own community. But hey, not much we can do unless we spun one up over in Area 51.
Upvotes: 2 |
2022/12/26 | 551 | 2,131 | <issue_start>username_0: (Not very) recently, an AI chatbot [ChatGPT](https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt/) was released to the public. It is really sophisticated that it can also answer many kinds of questions, regardless if it is *factually correct or wrong*.
It has been [banned on Stack Overflow](https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/421831/temporary-policy-chatgpt-is-banned) and made [official](https://stackoverflow.com/help/gpt-policy) due to the disruption it caused. [Another discussion on the main Meta](https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/384396/ban-chatgpt-network-wide) concluded with [a staff stating "*we hope that folks on network sites feel comfortable establishing per-site policies responsive to their communities' needs.*"](https://meta.stackexchange.com/a/385002/241919)
---
Recently, there was a user (ab)using ChatGPT by posting its responses as answers as-is without mentioning the source. Currently, these have been deleted as plagiarism (as per our help center, [How to reference material written by others](https://anime.stackexchange.com/help/referencing)).
Moving forward, how should these kinds of AI-generated posts, including answers *and questions*, be treated in this community?<issue_comment>username_1: Deal with them as we do for non-referenced material. We already have the tools, we do not need a more-specific policy. From the point of view of the readers, there's no loss if a bot can generate well sourced, correct answers to questions.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: I think Stack Overflow's model on both disallowing answers posted from it and then banning users for it unceremoniously is the right model to follow.
Think of it like this. It's already the case that the site is really, really quiet. We don't want to risk someone astroturfing answers (or questions) here that come from a chat bot, since that means the community would need to have a more discerning eye about what's going on. That could turn into witch hunts, which isn't constructive no matter the community.
We cannot allow bot-generated answers to survive in our curated knowledge base.
Upvotes: 3 |
2023/01/16 | 1,701 | 6,514 | <issue_start>username_0: I just noticed the two following question posts:
* [Why is there a curfew for students in Academy City?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/q/53977/70615) (2019-08-14)
>
> In A Certain Scientific Railgun, it's mentioned several times that there is a curfew for students in Academy City. Why is this so? Is this ever explained?
>
>
>
* [Curfew in Academy City](https://anime.stackexchange.com/q/56686/70615) (2020-01-31)
>
> In A Certain Scientific Railgun, it's mentioned several times that there is a curfew for students in Academy City. Why is this so? Can someone explain to me please.
>
>
>
The newer one has a worse title, the first sentence in the body is the **exact same** (which leads me to believe it is a copy-paste), and the second sentence is the same question with wrong grammar and punctuation.
But the newer one got an answer post and the original didn't.
If this wasn't such a blatant copy, I'd strongly consider voting the older as a dup of the newer on the basis that it would help future users find *the one with the answer*. But in this scenario, I don't like the idea of sign-posting to a post that shows poor etiquette: If I assume good faith, then either they just didn't know what to do when they see a question they have that doesn't have an answer yet (follow and upvote), or they failed to research. If I assume bad faith, then that's even worse and it would feel quite wrong to me to "enshrine" a bad-faith post as the more canonical Q&A.
How should I decide which to close as a duplicate of which?<issue_comment>username_1: I had heard of question merging before but didn't know much about it. I just did some reading and I think this ***might*** be an appropriate scenario for merging because it fits the guideline for the newer one being an "exact duplicate", and I don't think it's fair for the newer question post to be rewarded with more views and opportunity for upvotes because of how blatant it was and how it managed to be worse than the original.
Is that a good route forward? I've never mod flagged requesting a merge so I'm cautious as to whether it's a good action to take here.
From the MSE FAQ post [What is a "merged" question?](https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/158066/997587) :
>
> #### What is a merged question?
>
>
> A merged question is a question where a moderator has chosen to move its answers to another question, because it is an exact duplicate of another and has good answers that would be useful on the target. Merged questions are also locked to prevent edits.
>
>
> #### When should questions be merged?
>
>
> Questions should be merged if one question is an exact duplicate of another (i.e., when its answers would make perfect sense on the other question), and its answers are high-quality and valuable enough to be included on the other question itself, so that good answers aren't forked across multiple copies of the same question.
>
>
> In order to merge a question, the question to be merged must first be closed as a duplicate of the intended merge target.
>
>
> Note that the only significant benefit that merging offers over just closing a question as a duplicate is that it moves the answers from the merged question over to the main question. If there are no useful or valuable answers to be preserved, there is no point in merging the question, and requests to do so will likely be declined.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Before I go into the core of the issue, let's step back first on how a new 1-rep user experiencing this: A 1-rep user wants to ask a question. They found the same question they want to ask, but it doesn't have any answer. What can they do?
The discussion on the main meta [As a new user without much rep, what should I do if someone else has already asked a question I have, but it has no answers?](https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/306242/241919) explained some suggestions:
1. Put a bounty: nope, [needs 75 reps](https://anime.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/set-bounties) in the first place.
2. Mention it in chat: still nope, [needs 20 reps](https://anime.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/chat).
3. Edit to bump: ideally this, better if they can also add more details to the question, but not many new users know about this mechanism.
4. Post a new question: similar to 3, and ideally the community notices that it's a dupe so that it can be linked and/or closed as duped. Possibly also invite downvotes if it's an exact dupe.
5. Promote on other sites: I've rarely seen this working for new users. Nothing prevents them from *asking the same question on other sites* instead and forgetting this site. Also, needs [50 reps](https://anime.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment) if they want to post a comment for related links as a courtesy... or abuse a hidden feature to comment.
In addition to the above, some other possible approaches:
6. Post an "I have the same question" answer: the answer will be deleted and the poster may receive a comment on follow and upvote features, but the question will be bumped.
7. Follow the question: one of the canned comments from the review queue suggests following and upvoting the question instead, but both actions *don't really help in increasing the visibility* of the original question, and thus the original question may still not be noticed or answered at all (for a long time, until someone else with the answer stumble upon it).
You may have realized that there are very few options for them to get answers to the same unanswered question on Stack Exchange. In this case, I may also blame the system for failing the Related links: the original question is not even listed! This also reduced the chance for anyone else (except probably for the OP of the original question) to notice if it's actually a dupe.
>
> 
>
>
>
---
Now, back to the core issue. I honestly can't see this as bad faith; the new user just wanted to get an answer, and the community also failed to notice the original question. The user has even abandoned the site since then. So, *for this specific case, I'd be okay to merge the question with the older question.*
**But in general,** unless there's a clear pattern of abusive behavior, just flag/vote to close the unanswered question as a dupe to the answered question because that's the only possible action regular users can do. Whether a mod may also merge it or not is their prerogative.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2023/01/17 | 1,441 | 5,668 | <issue_start>username_0: The question: [How much heat damage can Misaka's shocks do to a regular human at max output?](https://anime.stackexchange.com/questions/67661/how-much-heat-damage-can-misakas-shocks-do-to-a-regular-human-at-max-output)
I realize physics questions are not a good fit for us, but considering the user posted their own answer, I don't see it as a problem. It was closed for being off topic, but looking through the help center, I don't see an actual reason this is off topic. Physics is actually a bit relevant when it comes to *A Certain Magical Index*, as it is a story where magic and science collide, so one could argue it falls under "Historical or societal context of an anime or manga".<issue_comment>username_1: I had heard of question merging before but didn't know much about it. I just did some reading and I think this ***might*** be an appropriate scenario for merging because it fits the guideline for the newer one being an "exact duplicate", and I don't think it's fair for the newer question post to be rewarded with more views and opportunity for upvotes because of how blatant it was and how it managed to be worse than the original.
Is that a good route forward? I've never mod flagged requesting a merge so I'm cautious as to whether it's a good action to take here.
From the MSE FAQ post [What is a "merged" question?](https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/158066/997587) :
>
> #### What is a merged question?
>
>
> A merged question is a question where a moderator has chosen to move its answers to another question, because it is an exact duplicate of another and has good answers that would be useful on the target. Merged questions are also locked to prevent edits.
>
>
> #### When should questions be merged?
>
>
> Questions should be merged if one question is an exact duplicate of another (i.e., when its answers would make perfect sense on the other question), and its answers are high-quality and valuable enough to be included on the other question itself, so that good answers aren't forked across multiple copies of the same question.
>
>
> In order to merge a question, the question to be merged must first be closed as a duplicate of the intended merge target.
>
>
> Note that the only significant benefit that merging offers over just closing a question as a duplicate is that it moves the answers from the merged question over to the main question. If there are no useful or valuable answers to be preserved, there is no point in merging the question, and requests to do so will likely be declined.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_2: Before I go into the core of the issue, let's step back first on how a new 1-rep user experiencing this: A 1-rep user wants to ask a question. They found the same question they want to ask, but it doesn't have any answer. What can they do?
The discussion on the main meta [As a new user without much rep, what should I do if someone else has already asked a question I have, but it has no answers?](https://meta.stackexchange.com/q/306242/241919) explained some suggestions:
1. Put a bounty: nope, [needs 75 reps](https://anime.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/set-bounties) in the first place.
2. Mention it in chat: still nope, [needs 20 reps](https://anime.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/chat).
3. Edit to bump: ideally this, better if they can also add more details to the question, but not many new users know about this mechanism.
4. Post a new question: similar to 3, and ideally the community notices that it's a dupe so that it can be linked and/or closed as duped. Possibly also invite downvotes if it's an exact dupe.
5. Promote on other sites: I've rarely seen this working for new users. Nothing prevents them from *asking the same question on other sites* instead and forgetting this site. Also, needs [50 reps](https://anime.stackexchange.com/help/privileges/comment) if they want to post a comment for related links as a courtesy... or abuse a hidden feature to comment.
In addition to the above, some other possible approaches:
6. Post an "I have the same question" answer: the answer will be deleted and the poster may receive a comment on follow and upvote features, but the question will be bumped.
7. Follow the question: one of the canned comments from the review queue suggests following and upvoting the question instead, but both actions *don't really help in increasing the visibility* of the original question, and thus the original question may still not be noticed or answered at all (for a long time, until someone else with the answer stumble upon it).
You may have realized that there are very few options for them to get answers to the same unanswered question on Stack Exchange. In this case, I may also blame the system for failing the Related links: the original question is not even listed! This also reduced the chance for anyone else (except probably for the OP of the original question) to notice if it's actually a dupe.
>
> 
>
>
>
---
Now, back to the core issue. I honestly can't see this as bad faith; the new user just wanted to get an answer, and the community also failed to notice the original question. The user has even abandoned the site since then. So, *for this specific case, I'd be okay to merge the question with the older question.*
**But in general,** unless there's a clear pattern of abusive behavior, just flag/vote to close the unanswered question as a dupe to the answered question because that's the only possible action regular users can do. Whether a mod may also merge it or not is their prerogative.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer] |
2012/12/11 | 1,353 | 4,914 | <issue_start>username_0: Assuming the world in the One Piece universe is round, then there is not really a beginning or an end of the Grand Line.
The Straw Hats started out from the first half and are now sailing across the second half.
Wouldn't it have been quicker to set sail in the opposite direction from where they started?<issue_comment>username_1: I think that the One Piece, being at the end of the Grand Line, simply refers to the fact that to get to the "One Piece", the legendary treasure talked about by the last Pirate King, you will need to travel to the "end" of the seas. In this case, that means traveling through the most remote/dangerous places so that only the worthy can get to it.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: No, there is a reason why they can't.
Basically the [New World](http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/New_World) is beyond the [Red Line](http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/Red_Line), but you cannot "walk" on it, or cross it. It's a huge continent, very tall that you cannot go through. You can't cross the [Calm Belt](http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/Calm_Belt) either, unless you have some form of locomotion such as the Navy or [Boa Hancock](http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/Boa_Hancock).
So the only way is to start from one of the Four Seas, then to go the [Reverse Mountain](http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/Reverse_Mountain) and follow the Grand Line until you reach *[Raftel](http://onepiece.wikia.com/wiki/Raftel)*, which supposedly is where One Piece is located.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Luffy's dream is to be the Pirate King. By definition in One Piece itself, the Pirate King is someone who most freely wanders in the Grand Line. Surely, finding One Piece is a necessity to become the Pirate King, but is not an enough condition.
Luffy loves adventure by nature. He doesn't want to find One Piece so easily. If he wanted so, he could have asked Rayleigh its location in Sabaody Archipelago arc. When Usopp asked it, he shouted him and asked Usopp to stop asking for it. And he said, if he were to learn its location, or even learns if it existed or not, he would quit being a pirate at that moment.
Luffy simply wants to follow steps of the former Pirate King <NAME>. He want to experience a good adventure. He wants to fight strong opponents. He always chooses the hardest path.
If finding One Piece was his only goal, he could have of course spent his time learning cliff climbing skills instead of wasting his time in the sea. Then he could finally climb that huge wall of Red Line and search for Raftel there.
One more thing to note is that the Location of Raftel is unknown. Even Shirohige didn't know it. Remember that, in a flash-back during the war in Marine Headquarters, <NAME> asks Shirohine if he wants him to tell the location of Raftel.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_4: Well, if Luffy chose the the easy way, he'd die, because much stronger opponents are trying to get One Piece. Plus, <NAME> said to go get One Piece, so he must have left a guardian or something. It wouldn't be that easy to become pirate king.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: In addition to [username_2](https://anime.stackexchange.com/users/15/alenanno)'s answer, it should be pointed out that the location of the One Piece isn't what is important, but **the journey is what is important**.
If there were such an item as the *One Piece* located at Raftel, the Marines would have been able to get it already. In episode 315, it was pointed out by Coby that the Marines' ships can cross the *Calm Belt*, and coming from North or West Blue, they would be able to just go to Raftel without doing the complete journey around the world.
There are also lots of other ways for the World Government or the Marines to reach Raftel (e.g. Kizaru could use his mirrors, Kuzan could build an ice stairs, Fujitora could literally fly over there, ...). So if it were as simple as going to Raftel to get the *One Piece*, the World Government would have done so already, displaying whatever treasure it would be and trying to end this *Great Age of Pirates*.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_6: The One Piece is indeed at the end of the grand line but even Big Mom has had trouble finding it. The reason for this is that one cannot find Raftel without being able to read the Poneglyphs, specifically the four red Road Poneglyphs. Each of these leads to an island and the midpoint between those four islands is the location of Raftel. One Road Poneglyph is held by Big Mom, one by Kaido, one is on the moving island of Zao, and one is missing. Thus you can see that someone would have just as much trouble finding One Piece if they crossed the Calm Belt or the Red Line as they would doing things the adventurous way.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/12/11 | 305 | 1,236 | <issue_start>username_0: In Sora no Otoshimono, Ikaros carries around a watermelon like a pet and likes watermelons and pretty much anything else round. At one point she even has a watermelon garden and attacks all the bugs that get near the melons.
What's the significance of the watermelon and why does she carry one around?<issue_comment>username_1: I believe there is no significance.
It is just a character trait that she really likes watermelons. Probably for their smooth and round shape.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: From what I understand of the anime, she likes being patted on her head by her master. Since patting something round reminds her of the times her master pats her, she may simply be reliving that memory.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: I think Ikaros likes watermelon not just because it is round and reminds her of herself when she is being pet, but she also is in a situation where she might be under a lot of stress without even knowing it (she is trying to get taken back to her original master), and this is her way to cope with it.
But this is a more realistic theory, so this probably isn't even close to the idea the producers had when making this decision.
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/12/11 | 1,512 | 5,499 | <issue_start>username_0: In several episodes of DB:Z and DB:GT, using SSJ3 form is shown to be *very* tiring for the user and burns up energy very quickly, compared to SSJ1/2/enhanced/mystic/etc.
However, when DB:GT rolls around, SSJ4 form, while as tiring as all other enhanced forms, doesn't seem to put as much strain on the user, nor does it have a time limit, as with SSJ3.
Is there a distinct reason for this in terms of power drain, or how the body handles the transformation, or is this perhaps something overlooked when GT was created?<issue_comment>username_1: Don't forget that GT is a filler, it wasn't created by the original creator, **[<NAME>](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akira_Toriyama)**.
There is a very high probability that is was overlooked. Also if I remember correctly, SSJ3 wasn't shown as tiresome in Dragon Ball GT.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: In SSJ3 form, the energy output is huge, in contrast to the SSJ4 form. The proof is written in this article from [the Dragon Ball Wiki](http://dragonball.wikia.com/wiki/Super_Saiyan_3). The reason behind that is not known, as far as I know.
>
> In Dragon Ball GT, Goku's child form caused him to have trouble using
> Super Saiyan 3. His small body could not handle the energy output of
> the transformation, and he could only hold it for one minute. [...] It
> was after this fight that Goku discontinued the usage of Super Saiyan
> 3, as it was heavily outclassed by the raw power and minimal setbacks
> of Super Saiyan 4.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: This is how I remember it:
Goku leveled up to SSJ3 on the other dimension and never really planned to reveal it because he didn't want to show it on front of username_3. At this point he would have made up his mind if it comes to fighting username_3 on the tournament he would resort to Mystic saiyan mode to deal with him.
Turns out username_3 ends up dead and Goku in desperation to buy time for Trunks decides to show case SSJ3 to Buu and I believe it's the difference between the dimensions; I mean, the time it takes to generate the same power in this dimension could be entirely different I presume and also on the aspect that Goku didn't spend time on that mode, because he could have been practicing extensively on the Mystic mode for the tournament and so it took quite a toll on his energy levels when he uses it first time.
When he uses it on the second time with Kid Buu. He seems to have a grasp on the energy levels and fights for a longer time until the point he uses a Kamehameha way in desperation to finish off Kid Buu and also holding out so username_3 can fight him causes him to suffer towards the end as well. Also the fight happens on the Kai's planet which becomes another different dimension compared to earth also I think that might have aided him a lot because thats where Gohan reaches ascension trained by Supreme Kai.
I believe it's the changes in the environment primarily taking a toll on Goku's body. As for SSJ4 I haven't seen Dragonball GT (primarily for the lack of Bruce Faulconer's theme :P) but as from the images I think the tail helps the body to handle the power levels differently because I somehow synonymize that to a controlled transformed Mode.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: The reason for this is because Super Saiyan 3 form was to fully maximize the ki of the user.
The Dragonball Wikia states :
>
> Where the third stage of Super Saiyan's purpose was 100% utilization
> of physical stamina, the purpose of the Super Saiyan 3 transformation
> is to increase the utilization of ki, and as a result, the
> transformation rapidly consumes the energy of the user. This notably
> leads to extended levels of fatigue, even long after powering down.
>
>
> However, with the enormous power, there are some very serious setbacks
> stemming from the rapid use of ki energy. When the then-deceased Goku
> showed Babidi and <NAME> the form, he cut his remaining temporal
> revival energy in half, and in the anime when he shows his power to
> the excited Trunks and Goten, his energy was completely dissipated,
> forcing him to return to Other World.
>
>
>
As far as Super Saiyan 4 the wikia states :
>
> Unlike the Super Saiyan 3's strain due to the utilization in ki, this
> form does not require as much energy consumption as Super Saiyan 3's,
> allowing the user to stay in the state at a much longer duration. It
> also appears that the form makes the individual larger in height and
> muscularity.
>
>
>
Essentially Super Saiyan 3 maximizes the ki output while Super Saiyan 4 is a more powerful transformation which does not drain the user as much as the 3rd form does.
Also Super Saiyan 4 is not actually a canon form because it was not developed by Akira Toriyama.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_5: Well, the Oozaru (Great Ape) form is portrayed to require no particular threshold of energy, as even the low class warrior infants are capable. Heck, even Gohan did it when username_3 made the fake moon.
And SSJ4 is definitely something that draws power from that hidden ability: from the tail and the hair draws in the power of the great ape Oozaru.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: It's because in gt goku was a kid & his body couldn't take the strain like his grown body did... So whenever he turned to ssj4 & & went back to his grown body form he was now accustomed and didn't burn energy as fast
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/12/11 | 907 | 3,305 | <issue_start>username_0: Edo Tensei is a technique to revive the dead, and bind their souls into living bodies. However, after releasing the technique, all of the dead should get back into being dead.
How can Madara still stick around even after the Edo Tensei had been ended? I am not sure if it was something that we needed to think about and figure out by ourselves or is it yet to be revealed?<issue_comment>username_1: From what I understood, if you know the Edo Tensei technique yourself, and you're resurrected, you can *use it on yourself, after the technique was dismissed by the original caster*.
>
> So actually, what Madara Uchiha did was use Edo Tensei again, using the original sacrifice Kabuto gave him, so that he is now the new caster, and he revived himself.
> Like Madara said on **Chpater 591 page 17**, there is one risk to the technique.
>
> *If you know the seal, you can release the summoning contract itself.*
> Basically, freeing you from the caster's control. Madara's soul wasn't bound by Kabuto anymore, but by himself.
>
>
>
Tell them not to use forbidden jutsu so lightly next time.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: When Edo Tensei ends, the summoned soul is freed from the Edo Tensei's control, and then the soul ascends to the pure world (afterlife). However, there is a small "grace period" between the two. During this grace period, the soul can act freely.
>
> During that grace period, Dan used the Reika no Jutsu to go meet his girlfriend. Itachi shared his memories and feeling with Sasuke (though granted he had been freed from the Edo Tensei's control long back). Most other shinobi stood around doing nothing significant.
>
> However, during that grace period, Madara released the Edo Tensei's summoning contract itself. As such, his soul is no longer bound to "ascend to the pure world" and can continue to stay in the impure world.
>
>
>
He could have done the same thing even before the Edo Tensei was released, if Kabuto had let him, and the effect would be the same. Also, if others knew the seals and chose to use them, they would be able to stick around too.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: Firstly, the most important thing to know is that anyone, who knows the Edo Tensei seals, can free themselves from the contract, if given the opportunity. Now, there are multiple ways that one can be unrestricted in Edo Tensei form. These are their opportunities:
1. The grace period when one's soul is released
(Example: Dan meeting Tsunade)
2. The revived person is strong enough to withstand the Edo Tensei
(Example: Hashirama not under Orochimaru's control)
3. The controller allows the revived person free movement
(Example: Madara being revived by Kabuto)
4. Some other force is able to place a stronger control over the revived person
(Example: Kotoamatsukami being used on Itachi)
In Madara's case, Kabuto had claimed to revive him in a form stronger than his prime. Madara questions Kabuto's ignorance of his prime state and then Kabuto gives Madara full control of his own body in order to demonstrate his abilities.
**After Kabuto gave control to Madara, Madara was able to use the Edo Tensei seals to free himself.**
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2012/12/11 | 860 | 2,642 | <issue_start>username_0: I originally thought that the only surviving members after the Uchiha massacre were Sasuke and Itachi, but more and more seem to be revealed. Is there a canonical list of surviving members of the Uchiha clan after the massacre?<issue_comment>username_1: The following:
* **<NAME>** - Who performed the massacre. Was killed later by Sasuke (according to his plan), then reanimated, eventually to die again (permanently, this time).
* **<NAME>** - Who was spared by Itachi in hopes of making him strong. Still alive.
That's about it from the traditional ones.
* **<NAME>** - Who was dead during the massacre, was also later reanimated.
* Uchiha Obito also survived the massacre, in fact, he helped Itachi execute it (as Tobi).
### And also
>
> [<NAME>](http://naruto.wikia.com/wiki/Sarada_Uchiha), Sasuke's and Sakura's daughter, also counts for the purposes of this list.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: <NAME>
<NAME>
Spoiler:
>
> <NAME> - he was alive during the obito flashback but not sure if he was still alive after the clan massacre.
> <NAME> - Tobi turned out to really be Obito.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: **Disclaimer**: most of the Uchihas mentioned below are alive currently. In the Naruto series, only Sasuke, Itachi, and Obito were still alive. In the Boruto, Sasuke and Shin, another introduced Uchiha. The other ones are Uchihas that were introduced (as alive, duh) in the Naruto and Boruto series.
Yes, all of the above answers are correct:
1. <NAME>
2. Itachi Uchiha (dies in the fight against Sasuke)
and (**SPOILER**):
>
> 3. Madara Uchiha (saved Obito who was under the tree in the 3rd Shinobi World War, probably died soon afterwards)
>
> 4. Obito Uchiha (unintentionally fakes his death, dies in 4th Shinobi World War)
>
>
>
But there are still a few more that weren't introduced properly:
5. Shisui Uchiha (Danzo took one of his eyes, Shisui entrusted his other eye to Itachi, then suicided)
6. Fugaku Uchiha (Sasuke and Itachi's father)
7. Mikoto Uchiha (Sasuke and Itachi's mother)
8. <NAME> (not really an Uchiha, but the ancestor of all Uchihas)
9. Izuna Uchiha (Madara's brother, Madara took both of Izuna's eyes out)
10. Shin Uchiha (unknown until Boruto, experimented on by Orochimaru)
11. Other people like Baru, Naka, Naori, Rai, etc. Uchiha (important characters in the Uchiha Clan's war history).
Look, there are many Uchihas but most are irrelevant or not important to how the history of Naruto and others were affected.
Upvotes: 1 |
2012/12/11 | 618 | 2,100 | <issue_start>username_0: At the end of the last episode of Cowboy Bebop, Spike collapses. It's not clear, but it looks as though he may be dead. Is there a way to know whether he is alive or dead (something in the background, comments from the director, a continuation in the story in the manga, etc.)<issue_comment>username_1: According to Wikipedia:
>
> However, in an interview, Watanabe stated, “I’ve never officially said that he died. At this point, I can tell you that I’m not sure if he’s alive or dead.”
>
>
>
The link to the source is [here](http://mrsspooky.net/bebop/TheDailyTexan.pdf). Though it's very hard to look at it, unfortunately.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: <NAME> has stated:
>
> I've never officially said that he died. At this point, I can tell you that I’m not sure if he’s alive or dead
>
>
>
He decided to leave it open-ended, so, even with the many hypothesis on the internet, I guess the real answer is to ask yourself.
Source is the same as in username_1's answer: <http://mrsspooky.net/bebop/TheDailyTexan.pdf> at the top of page 5.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: In [this more recent interview](http://youtu.be/Y4Z1uvexzrQ?t=7m15s) to <NAME> by Red Carpet News TV on MCM London Comic Con 2013, around minute 8 he says:
>
> I've never actually said whether he is alive or dead in that final scene. That's up to the person watching to decide. I think that people who watch that and think that Spike is asleep are probably right. Just sleeping.
>
>
>
Although he still leaves the matter up to the viewer's interpretation, he seems to suggest that he is more likely to be alive.
Later on on the interview he also states that Spike is his favourite character, but then again, that does not mean he can't die at the end.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: I feel it was made pretty clear when the star winked out at the end. Spike died. Based on the quotations posted above, however, it seems the creator is giving you permission to believe that Spike is alive if you want to.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/12/11 | 1,852 | 7,769 | <issue_start>username_0: It seems as though a lot of anime go through a production cycle where they put out a series that seems fairly popular, but ends long before the manga's storyline does. Obviously, a big reason for making anime is to get people to buy the original manga, but if the anime series itself were turning a profit it's tough to imagine (from my American viewpoint, anyway) that the producers would abandon it, when it could easily continue (given its proven popularity, voice actors lined up, storyline set, etc.)
Is there an overarching reason? Do many anime not turn a profit?<issue_comment>username_1: Anime is much bigger in Japan. There are lots of mangas that were given a shot at anime adaptation, but they didn't get a following and eventually got pulled. In my opinion, the manga has to be popular in Japan first before the network heads start to export the anime officially.
There are other reasons aside from profit. Take Gintama for example; I can't be sure if they were pulled off air because of profit (which I doubt) or because the network wasn't happy with the show's direction.
So, yes, the big reason why they get pulled off air is because the anime didn't make enough profit. It's a competitive market.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: You have to remember that **it's far cheaper and easier to produce a manga** than it is to produce an anime -- it takes fewer people to produce a manga, which means less money is needed to pay for production, even if you pay everyone involved a huge salary (and you usually don't).
More investment means more risk, so if an anime doesn't turn a big enough profit fast enough, it may not warrant further investment.
You can keep a crap manga going a lot longer than a crap anime, if only because the bar for financial security is that much lower.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Note it doesn't need to produce losses: it just needs to produce less than alternative.
Studios have limited resources: they often can produce maybe two series in parallel, sometimes not even that. Expanding on that is costly, and may well bring serious losses if all "pipelines" aren't filled with profit-generating products.
So, if the managers notice a new, promising series - obtained a sure-fire scenario, and a different one is nearing end of season 2, with dwindling audience, they must decide what to produce: season 3 of the old thing, which will almost certainly produce less cash than season 2, following the dwindling trend, or maybe the new and revolutionary thing for which TV networks have already lined up, and earn much more. Or, potentially, hope that hiring a bunch of animators and getting them a new studio with equipment will cost less than combined profits of the two shows. Which it rather won't.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: On their own, Yes.
Obviously this is a fairly blanket statement and is hard to qualify because of secrecies in company financials, but I think it's reasonable to assert.
I also realise I'm not directly answering your question about dropped manga adaptions, but addressing the question broadly. I think most points probably apply to that situation also, but these are some of the reasons in general why anime fail/return losses:
Anime as a loss-leader
======================
Anime is often used by companies as a promotional tool for their other merchandise. This is often the case with children's mecha shows - They will watch the show on TV and then potentially buy the DVDs, toys, albums, etc. As an interesting side note, since about 1990 children are more likely to buy hero toys than villain toys - hence several combining mecha shows.
Another example as to how shows act as advertisements is low cost harem anime. Whilst not immediately as obviously merchantable as a show like Gundam or Power Rangers, The large female cast that the protaganist has to choose from has the potential to have their own figurines, body pillows, etc.
These mean that anime doesn't have to turn a massive profit (or indeed a profit at all) - that's up to the sales that it inspires.
The evolution of anime itself is deeply associated with advertisement, even since its inception when it was used solely for advertisement rather than as a standalone medium. In Hayao Miyakazi's biography "Starting Point" he mentions that one company in particular was known to contribute a third of their target anime's total cost (Note that this was at an earlier point in history). This amount would typically be around 90% of a successful toy company's advertising budget.
There's a stereotype of otaku in Japan that they buy 3 copies of any one DVD/Book - "one to read, one to collect, one to lend". The consumers of anime in Japan, whether children (A good market worldwide) or otaku are very keen on merchandise and spending on a franchise. It is the combined revenue streams that the anime creates, combined with the show itself which usually lifts the show into profit.
***This is the main reason why an anime would be turning a loss.***
Relying too heavily on emulating success stories
================================================
This is a big one too. Once a very successful show hits the market (for example Evangellion, Akira, K-On!!, Pokémon) many clones will follow.
The same phenomenom can be see in bookstores - The amount of romance vampire books in stores went from 0 -> many after Twilight's success. Similarly 50 Shades of Grey did the same for erotic romance for women.
There is only so much capacity in the market for cloned shows, and more than likely none of them will be as successful as the original. This often leads to a situation with a few big winners and many losers.
Too many blockbusters
=====================
The ideal time to release your amazing anime series is to pick the season that has the highest viewing rate of your target audience. Hence, shows that target the same audience may be heatedly vying for the same audiences attention. Usually one show will win, and the others will lose by a sizeable margin.
There have been several media studies that have shown that usually only one film/series occupies a viewers fanaticism at one time period. This is what has lead to the yearly *blockbuster* summer and Christmas successes in Hollywood.
Things go wrong, often
======================
When you are still animating episodes whilst the first ones are airing, any delays can set the whole show back. What usually happens is that recap episodes are shown, animation quality drops in the latter episodes and potential postponements of episodes in the worst of cases. These things transfer to the quality of the production and hence affect the impressions on viewers, which then affect sales, and so forth.
Tight budgets
=============
This kind of fits into the previous item, but when budgets are tight (which they usually are for anime) studios cannot afford to replace sick animators, redo scenes that don't fit well, etc. Another problem with tight budgets is that studios often have to outsource animation to cheaper countries like China - which in itself has problems of communication issues.
Subsequent seasons
==================
Anime that are received well in their first season often announce another, or several new seasons. The problem with this is that each season the audience dwindles - Viewers become less and less likely to stick with a show as the time investment increases. It's a difficult call to make for the directors to stop the broadcasts before the series starts to become loss-making.
---
And just as a final note, I don't believe there is one over-arching reason. Each studio is different, has different priorities, objectives, revenue streams, etc.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2012/12/11 | 1,326 | 4,975 | <issue_start>username_0: There are a few places in *Mobile Suit Gundam Seed* where <NAME> faces certain death, is presumed dead by all the other characters, then miraculously reappears in a later episode. I'm curious about one particular incident, for now: His duel with Athrun and the Aegis.
Athrun sets the Aegis to self destruct, attaches it to Kira's suit, and bails out to avoid the explosion. Kira is apparently trapped in the deadly blast, though. Assuming he's not cloned or something like that (which the humans & Coordinators of Seed almost certainly have the technology to do), he somehow managed to survive and escape from that situation.
How did Kira survive when the Aegis self-destructed at point-blank range to his own mobile suit?<issue_comment>username_1: This incident is analogous to a similar situation in ZZ Gundam. An important character dies in a situation where their later reappearance seems impossible, everyone angsts, they return and Tomino doesn't bother explaining anything.
First, a short review of the battle. Spoilered, because it is not vital to understanding the answer:
>
> At dawn, as it passes by an island cluster, the Archangel is attacked by the three surviving Gundam frames. Soon, the flight system is damaged, and a hard landing is made on one of the islands. Meanwhile, Kira has destroyed Duel's leg, forcing Yzak into the water and out of the fight. La Fraga shoots down Buster, and the frame crashes near the Archangel, immobilized and pinned down by one of the ship's turrets; Dearka surrenders. Kira, fighting Athrun away from the ship, receives backup from Tolle, who is promptly shot down. Witnessing his friend's death, Kira enters SEED mode; and so does Athrun. Finally, a severely damaged Aegis clings to the Strike; as the machine powers down, unable to deliver the finishing blow with its cannon, Athrun starts a self destruct sequence, and jetpacks away. The Archangel, detecting a second attacking squad, is forced off the island without the time to start a rescue operation; they send Orb a request to perform the search, and leave as soon as their engines are repaired.
>
>
>
Timeframes have all been taken from the show, side materials may provide more accuracy. Anyway, a review of the facts: This battle takes place around a day after the Archangel leaves Orb (the first attack is right after they leave the neutral territory; the second, on dawn of the next day). The Reverend is shown to live nearby, most likely on the same island. The Aegis' self destruct timer is ten seconds. The Strike's cockpit is open due to damage from the battle:
My theory? Kira escaped as well. He likely acted quickly: from his seat, he could not only see Athrun flying away; he could also see his cockpit opening beforehand. This is the last scene we see where Kira is present, and at this point, he has had two to four seconds to figure things out - he probably fled immediately after (we see him with a look of realization shortly before; he is also in SEED mode, presumably more aware than normal).
The power of the explosion is significant - Athrun, found by Orb either later on the same day, was flung by the blast, incapacitated before landing or due to it, and lightly wounded - and that was even though he employed the best way to escape, starting at the earliest possible moment and with a jetpack.
Kira's wounds are more severe - the next time he is shown, he is lying in bed in one of the colonies. I have no idea how long it would take to transport him there; but unless the Reverend used his priestly powers, it probably took at least a week. His awakening in Lacus' presence is implied to be his first one since he was found - yeah, in comparison to that, Athrun walked away with just a few scratches.
But where did he escape? If he had a jetpack, the answer is clear. Even if he didn't, there's yet one place he could have fled - behind the Strike. You see, when the Aegis latches on Kira's machine, we are shown a shot of both; the Strike is standing. Later, during the rescue operation, the Strike is shown mostly intact - the outside layer of armor is partially melted, as well as the exposed cockpit, but the machine itself is fine. The blast has toppled it over - it is only a question of whether Kira was lucky to be hiding in a place where he would be crushed or not. In any case, the torso and the power pack of the Strike form a neat bomb shelter.
Did he have a jetpack then? Probably - Federation pilot suits seem to come equipped with a retractable unit, just like ZAFT-issued ones.
Upvotes: 4 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: When Aegis exploded Athrun was pushed instead of absorbed into the blast and killed, Kira may have gotten out of the Strike but was then pushed by the blast, but more severely than Athrun as he was closer.
Upvotes: -1 |
2012/12/11 | 613 | 2,141 | <issue_start>username_0: In episode 25 of Valkyria Chronicles, Maximilian shoots (and it is strongly implied that he kills) Jaeger:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/qyj0L.jpg)
Yet during the credits of the final episode (26), Jaeger is clearly seen walking in the background at the train station:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/pVEsm.jpg)
What's the deal here? Did Jaeger not get shot? Or did he get shot but survived? And if so, how in the world did he escape from the rest of the crumbling fortress?<issue_comment>username_1: I guess it's kind of a cameo. It really looks like Jaegar was killed and no source can be found that he survived. Because of that, all we can do is speculate - And I think, that it was just a cameo like "Hey, it's over, let us show him again!".
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I haven't seen the anime, but in the game (which the anime is based off from), Jaeger was defeated by Squad 7 during Chapter 17 where Squad 7 attempts to get back to Randgriz. But on the way, they find's Jaeger unit has barricaded the Great Vasel Bridge while Jaeger now commands the improved Lupus Regnum.
After his defeat, he doesn't return to Maximilian and his whereabouts are unknown. I read that there is a mention of him in *Valkyria Chronicles 3* but I haven't played it to confirm. He doesn't fight for the Empire but for the future independence of Fhirald (under Empire control), so having seen the Gallian Militia continuously get the upper hand against the superior might Empire and even not using their new Valkyria as the Empire did, he probably saw that the Empire was not the way for him to gain independence for Fhirald and that it was possible for Fhirald to get its independence on its own.
As for the scene at the end of the anime, it could be the writers forgot about Jaeger's fate in the game, remember it and made a cameo for him at the end. I haven't seen him getting shot in the anime so I'm not sure how much of a possibility there is that Maximilian was mistaken that he was dead.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/12/11 | 1,005 | 3,798 | <issue_start>username_0: To explain, I want to know whether it is more efficient to produce anime or manga, and why.
Anime:
* Needs to be made frame by frame
* need people to record voice.
Manga:
* Needs lots of paper
* has to be printed.
By more efficient, I mean which one has more profit and takes less time to make.<issue_comment>username_1: In term of human resources as well as production costs, manga is thousands of times more efficient than anime.
The personnel involved in a manga production (the chain is very little):
* Mangaka
* 4 or 5 assistants at best
* Graphic design staff (logos, covers, general branding of a series is often externalized)
* Series editor
* Chief editor
* Printing staff
* Distribution staff
And the materials needed is minimal, since the drawing stuff, while not cheap, is lots of times cheaper than all the needs to make an anime.
In the anime production the staff needed is lots of times that amount, since the editors (here named "producers") and distribution staff are part of large committees, and the production staff (director, animation staff) is very large, too. So, only in staff and time the costs are way bigger, and the distribution and marketing expenses are significative.
So, in the end, I think that manga is way more efficient than anime.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: A production is only as productive as the people that make it up.
Manga production happens at a much smaller scale compared to [anime production](http://washiblog.wordpress.com/2011/01/18/anime-production-detailed-guide-to-how-anime-is-made-and-the-talent-behind-it/).
For anime production, on top of publisher front costs, you have to get your staff, sponsors, script, character/set designers, broadcasting rights, and advertising ready before the production even starts.
Typically only half the budget allocated to an anime is used by the studio in charge.
Manga production can vary greatly. Some authors are interested in creative input from their assistants, while others only ask them to assist. Some artists like do to as much of the work themselves as possible, others have their assistants fill in most of the page while the artist only draws the "name" (a kind of storyboard for manga) and main characters.
Anime are usually created and broadcast at a loss while profits are made from DVD/Blu-ray and merchandising sales. Most mangas are produced at a loss, their viability access by their rank in their parent magazine's reader survey polls and takubon (volume) sales.
Generally, it takes around [8,000,000 to 10,000,000 yen](http://d.hatena.ne.jp/makaronisan/20060719/1153219520) to make a "30 minute" episode anime, while it takes only about 2,000,000 yen to produce a weekly serialization, because it typically takes 2 months for a tankoubon can be compiled, at a 100-page monthly production rate.
On top of that you have to factor in rent for the studio, and payroll (pay + pensions) for that staff which typically is composed of 1 chief-assistant + 2 or 3 assistants + 1 background artist, typically a group of 4 to 5 people. Different authors/artist get different rates depending on the publisher and the experience/fame of the author/artist.
Most animators are [contract employees to a production studio](http://motoz5.cocolog-nifty.com/animator/2006/12/post_41df.html). Therefore they do not get benefits, pensions, or vacations. Because many productions employ so many animators for their tween animations it can be hard to keeps track of who's who and doing what.
A well managed small anime production can sometimes be more efficient than a large high budget manga serialization, but the opposite can be true as well. It usually comes down to who is an change and how the work trickles down.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer] |
2012/12/11 | 862 | 3,379 | <issue_start>username_0: As anyone who has seen Lucky Star will remember, most of the references to other anime and manga are censored. The most obvious examples of this are references to Gundam or Sgt. Frog (both of which are notably Sunrise shows). Presumably this is done to avoid KyoAni getting sued. This also explains why references to Haruhi and Full Metal Panic weren't censored (as far as I remember). Interestingly these instances of censorship probably could have been removed in the English release since it was licensed by Bandai, but I don't know if they actually were, so this question might only apply to the Japanese version.
However, there are still a few cases of references which weren't censored despite no obvious connection between the Lucky Star team and the source. The one that immediately comes to mind is To Heart, which is referenced several times. To Heart is associated with VN studio Leaf as well as animation studios Oriental Light and Magic and AIC, neither of which have anything to do with Lucky Star (KyoAni and Kadokawa). I can't find any connections between them, but of course that could be oversight on my part, and I didn't check all of the individual staff members.
Is there some connection that I missed? Barring that, what sort of policy would a studio typically use for references like this? Would they try to obtain permission for all of the references, or just bleep the ones that seem risky to them?<issue_comment>username_1: A major concern might be whether they has consent from the references' company.
An example would be **Ore no Imouto ga Konna ni Kawaii Wake ga Nai**, they show some vender's H-GAME cover in Kirino's H-Game pill, which have offended those companies and the production studio later apologized. (If I remember correctly)
Updated: 2013/12/26
-------------------
I found something interested when investigating a recent news, I'm not sure it's relevant or not though)
<http://www.itmedia.co.jp/news/articles/1312/20/news095.html> (Japanese):
A recent episode of **Yuri Danshi** in Japan was said to infringe the copyright of some manga. (Hidamari Sketch, A Channel, Golden Mosaic)
I thought this should be in the range of fair use (just like quoting sentences from another book), after checking "Fair use" the Japanese Wikipedia, it turns out "Fair use" doesn't exists in Japan's copyright laws. You must have consent from the author.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Not sure if this is just a random connection or actually the reason, but here's the connection between Lucky Star and ToHeart:
Lucky Star's manga and anime are published by different branches of Kadokawa. The ToHeart manga was published by MediaWorks which was owned by, you guessed it, Kadokawa.
I don't know if every single branch of Kadokawa is allowed to mention a work in every other branch, but there is at least this connection. If someone bought Lucky Star DVDs and saw ToHeart mentioned and then decided to go buy the ToHeart manga, that's a double win for Kadokawa.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Mainly due to copyright reasons and the animes not belonging to the animation studio.
If they decided to un-blur them they would have to give copyright claim for all of them or get permission from other companies.
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/12/11 | 458 | 1,709 | <issue_start>username_0: Doujinshi seem to represent usually works of amateurs, but that is a subjective measure. What is the objective difference between both works?<issue_comment>username_1: Well, if it's self published, it is called doujinshi. If it's by a manga publisher, it's manga. Note that this distinction makes no mention of relative quality...simply who is doing the publishing (and presumably paying for) the work.
Wikipedia highlights this in the first paragraph:
>
> Dōjinshi (同人誌?, often transliterated as doujinshi) is the Japanese
> term for self-published works, usually magazines, manga or novels.
> Dōjinshi are often the work of amateurs, though some professional
> artists participate as a way to publish material outside the regular
> industry.
>
>
>
Note, professional artists can produce doujinshi if they're self-publishing that particular product.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: Doujinshi just means you published it yourself, so the difference is that non-doujinshi manga is published by a company, while doujinshi manga is a self-published manga
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Doujinshi is closer to what we think of as "indie/self-published" comics compared to manga. **Professionals can produce doujinshi as well as amateurs,** and many mangaka will produce doujinshi on the side when they're otherwise unable to produce a certain work for legal reasons.
Doujinshi are often, but not limited to:
* Fanart of pre-existing intellectual properties
* Ecchi material
* One-shots
The quality of any given doujinshi can vary as a result, since literally anyone can produce a doujinshi without any sort of editorial oversight.
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer] |
2012/12/11 | 1,998 | 6,983 | <issue_start>username_0: If you've seen much anime, you're familiar with the male character getting a bloody nose when he gets sexually excited. For example:
<NAME> (Dragon Ball) and Umino Iruka (Naruto)
However, when I mentioned this to a Japanese person (someone who was not a big anime viewer), she was confused, and adamant that a bloody nose would normally just mean that the person was excited in general, and it would not necessarily have anything to do with sexual excitement.
This could (and seems likely to be) true for Japanese day to day real life, but very different in anime, where the connection to libido seems very clear.
Is there someone that can explain this difference? Is the "bloody nose" in anime just used to signify excitement, and it just happens to often (always) be sexual excitement because of the plot? Or is it supposed to be just understood how a bloody nose is interpreted in anime is different from normal life?<issue_comment>username_1: According to [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anime#Facial_expressions):
>
> Male characters will develop a bloody nose around their female love interests (typically to indicate arousal, which is a play on an old wives' tale).
>
>
>
It has a reference in the end of this sentence that leads [here](http://www.umich.edu/~anime/info_emotions.html).
I am not sure if these are reliable source, though...
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: The bloody nose gag exaggerates the rise in blood pressure when people are aroused, to such a degree that blood shoots out of the aroused character's nose.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_3: As far as I know, it comes from embarrassment more than arousal. Note that it tends to not be perverts who get bloody noses (at least not when they're dealing with someone other than their primary love interest). Instead, it is the semi innocent/honorable hero/supporting character, the one who is not actively trying to look at a female's chest.
When presented with this kind of situation, all of a sudden, they tend to become quite embarrassed. This embarrassment normally leads to the face being filled with blood (blushing). BUT, to show an extreme case of this embarrassment, their nose bleeds instead from the excessive blood pressure buildup.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: <NAME>, author of [The Anime Companion](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/1880656329), wondered the same thing:
>
> "So I asked a few Japanese and got a variety of pseudoscientific, and occasionally embarassed, explanations about humidity and blood pressure. But the best response I got was from one fellow who simply recounted that when he was a child he was told by his mother that if he stared at a pretty woman he would get a bloody nose."
>
>
>
It's basically superstition, like if you sneeze once someone is saying something good about you. If you sneeze twice they are saying something bad. If you sneeze three times, you have a cold.
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: No actual proof here, but...
I would suspect that the anime writers just use bloody noses when they think it is funny, not taking actual Japanese beliefs or day-to-day customs into account.
It is way more funny when heroes get bloody noses when they get an accidental look than when perverts get a look (all the time).
On the other hand it is also funny when a pervert gets a bloody nose all the time (in extremes). As already mentioned, Jiraiya is an example of this. Sanji is even a better example as his bloody nose becomes *life threatening* at a certain point!
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: According [here](http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Nosebleed), in anime, nosebleed mostly happens to a character being sexually aroused. It is an exaggeration of having high blood pressure when a real person is sexually aroused.
>
> In Japanese media, healthy young men that have no other sexual outlet
> will often suffer nosebleeds upon seeing the naked female body, or
> even just a pair of well-filled panties. It's probably a side effect
> of High Pressure Blood in a body that's Overdrawn at the Blood Bank.
>
>
>
And it is somehow a metaphor to this:
>
> The nosebleed is, of course, a visual shorthand/euphemism for sexual
> arousal. It is commonly interpreted that way for males and females,
> with little trickles of blood indicating mild arousal, and gushing
> fountains of blood indicating erection/extreme arousal in both sexes.
> It can also be interpreted as shorthand strictly for erections in
> males. In that case, when blood shoots from the nose explosively, and
> in ridiculous quantity, the implication would be an ejaculation.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_7: As explained on [MedlinePlus Medical Encyclopedia](http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/003106.htm):
>
> Nosebleed can be caused by:
>
>
> * Irritation due to allergies, colds, sneezing or sinus problems
> * Very cold or dry air
> * Blowing the nose very hard, or picking the nose
> * Injury to nose, including a broken nose, or an object stuck in the nose
> * Deviated septum
> * Chemical irritants
> * Overuse of decongestant nasal sprays
>
>
> Repeated nosebleeds may be a symptom of another disease such as high blood pressure, a bleeding disorder, or a tumor of the nose or sinuses. Blood thinners, such as warfarin (Coumadin), clopidogrel (Plavix), or aspirin, may cause or worsen nosebleeds.
>
>
>
To answer your question, your Japanese acquaintance is right that in real life, a bloody nose would normally just mean that the person was excited in general, and it would not necessarily have anything to do with sexual excitement. In my experience, though, it's usually due to the causes listed in the bullet points, not due to high blood pressure. I would go with @ʞɹɐzǝɹ 's answer that it is a superstition/myth that is perpetuated in anime and manga, which this [potentially NSFW video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUS74d4pC2c) debunks (rather unscientifically) in a light-hearted manner.
Screenshots from the video. The big captions read "Verification method: the woman in front will get naked without warning" and "Will the nosebleed come out?"
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_8: It's possible that the response of the 'Japanese person' in one of the above comments, that it's a sign of excitement in general, is probably correct. In 'Black Clover,' the character <NAME> exhibits the characteristic anime nosebleed over a little girl, Marie - but she is merely his sister, whom he worships, and nothing more.
In anime, not all nosebleeds are a sign of sexual arousal - but perhaps all instances of sexual arousal are signified by nosebleeds.
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/12/11 | 1,370 | 5,211 | <issue_start>username_0: I understand that one of them is actually the other. At first we are led to believe that Vincent is Ergo. But toward the end of the series, we discover something but I am not sure what it means: Ergo created Vincent to run away from himself. Also, in the beginning, when Vincent turns into Ergo, he loses control and doesn't remember any of it. Later on he starts to control Ergo, but at the same time he can talk with him.
So, basically, I don't understand which 'came first':
Is Vincent Law Ergo Proxy? Or is it the other way around? Or are they actually two different 'selves' that 'reside in the same body'?<issue_comment>username_1: According to wikipedia under [Other Characters - Proxies](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ergo_Proxy_characters#Proxies):
>
> Ergo Proxy is a "clone" of Proxy One, Romdo's creator and guardian, who was created to help bring about the destruction of the human race because of Proxy One's anger at humanity's treatment of and plans for the Proxies, specifically Monad Proxy. Ergo Proxy often wears a white mask with elements of both The Phantom of the Opera and a harlequin jester to differentiate from Proxy One. Vincent initially has no control over his transformations, changing into Ergo Proxy whenever another Proxy reveals itself, but is implied to be in control of his abilities by the end of the series.
>
>
>
Regarding Proxy One:
>
> The main antagonist of the series, he is Ergo Proxy's original and true self, and calls Vincent his shadow. He was first alluded to in episode 15 and is the one behind the events of the entire series, having created Vincent and then sent him back to Romdo from Mosk to start his revenge plan. Near the end of the series, Proxy One is revealed to be the one who fired the thermonuclear missile Rapture, destroyed Amnesia to hide Vincent's memories, and killed <NAME>.
>
>
>
To summarize, Vincent Law transforms into Ergo Proxy. Ergo Proxy is the proxy form of Vincent Law. He appoints Romdeau, his domed city, with a human regent and then gives himself amnesia, leaving himself in his human form (as Vincent). Ergo Proxy comes first, though he is a clone of Proxy One.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: From what I understand, Proxy 1 and Ergo Proxy are two separate entities. A miss conception, thanks to the English translation, is proxy 1 created Romdeau; this is not the case as Romdeau is described a flawed Dome in the same way as its creator, Ergo Proxy, is a clone on Proxy 1 and hence a flawed proxy (also shown by the fact he can survive UV rays).
This is further backed up by the relationship between Ergo and Monad. Monad we are told loved Ergo proxy due to their opposing natures of life and death, thus she comes to Vincent AKA Ergos aid at the end of the series rather than to help forefill Proxy 1's ambitions for Ergo to destroy humanities chance for a future on earth.
Vincent is therefore the human name of the being Ergo proxy while he has amnesia due to the removal of his own memories to prevent him from becoming the literal grim reaper on earth. Ergo Proxy was created a long time prior to the series by Proxy 1 as a means of revenge on humanity.
Of coarse I could be completely wrong but it doesn't really matter as the main focus of the anime isn't the plot but the moral and theological questions which arise from the setting and premise of the series. In short its a fantastic anime whether the ending is ambiguous or not :)
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: Vincent Law is Ergo Proxy, who is Proxy 1. Proxy one divided himself into two. That which is divided must become one. So Proxy 1 splits into 2, and one half leaves the dome, the other half remains. The half that leaves gets rid of their memory... who are they now? They are no longer the true Proxy Project creation. They are now gaining self-awareness and forging a new identity.
It is perhaps because they rejected their imperfect origin that they decided to dump their memory, and become Vincent Law. Victory over Law. He has claimed victory over the rules. He is no longer just a proxy. The amnesia effect allows us to follow him on his journey against the strongest enemy he'll ever face... himself. A journey we all must take if we strike out against what we were planned to be and instead seek out our own destiny.
So Proxy 1 is Ergo Proxy... He is both one and the same, and he must embrace every aspect of himself if he is to truly choose his own future. It's not an easy thing to do, but he has Re-l, or reality. He also has pino, and "in vino, veritas", or "in wine there is truth".
So moving forward with reality and truth, the lab project known as Proxy One will eventually embrace that he is Ergo Proxy, and yet overcome his origins and finally reach happiness by redefining himself as Vincent Law, victorious over the laws his very cells were programmed to follow. He felt the pulse of the awakening, and instead of dying, he awoke. He is the agent of death... or was... not anymore... He is Vincent Law, and Vince is in full control as he sails off with truth and reality, and a new autorave who perhaps represents the discipline he has finally achieved.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/12/11 | 880 | 3,126 | <issue_start>username_0: It was said that when a Shinigami saves a human with his Death Note, that Shinigami dies, and his remaining life-span is transferred to the human he saved.
But imagine the following situation, a Shinigami has accumulated 500 years of lifespan by killing a lot of humans. That Shinigami then kills someone for a human, to save his life, and dies.
Does that mean the human would gain 500 years to his lifespan?<issue_comment>username_1: Essentially yes, they will become semi-immortal. They will have a long, long natural lives but they'll still be vulnerable to death.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_2: The human would indeed gain 500 years to his lifespan.
>
> Shinigami who die are reduced to dust, and their remaining lifespan is given to the human they saved. [wiki](http://deathnote.wikia.com/wiki/Shinigami)
>
>
>
It is very unlikely to see that human live those 500 years though. Shinigami are lazy and don't want to be bothered with the human world too much, so the human would become an eagerly desired target for the other Shinigami. If they would kill that specific human they would be able to gamble for 500 more years without having to be bothered with writing some new names.
So basically he would gain a lot of extra lifespan, but it wouldn't make him immune to the power of the Death Note. [An example of this was seen with <NAME>](https://anime.stackexchange.com/a/11424/6166). Despite having gained the lifespan of two Shinigami, she still only lived a couple of years after their deaths, because the Death Note had recalculated her lifespan over several occasions during the story.
---
As mentioned by [Madara Uchiha](https://anime.stackexchange.com/users/27/madara-uchiha), humans with a lifespan of 124 years or higher can indeed not be killed directly.
>
> You cannot kill humans at the age of 124 or over with the Death Note.
> [XXIX](http://deathnote.wikia.com/wiki/Rules_of_the_Death_Note#How_to_Use:_XXIX)
>
>
>
They could be killed indirectly by killing people that would result in his lifespan being recalculated, but as I mentioned Shinigami are lazy, so they wouldn't bother to do so intentionally, making him indeed semi-immortal :)
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: I always wondered that.
My main thought is whether they continue to age normally or if their aging slows to match their remaining life span. I cant imagine a human who gains 500 years from the death of a shinigami could live for so long if aging naturally.
With some deductions, I have come to the conclusion that one who gains 500 years of life from a Shinigami would have to experience aging at a slower rate because their entire being has been extended in life by that 500 years. That means disease, accident oh, the shutting down of organs, could not lead to the cause of death until they used up those 500 years. So everything about that person would either be slowed or halted in time until they can naturally die after using the extra time. Aside from external factors such as usage of the death note before they hit the age of 124.
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/12/11 | 3,672 | 12,495 | <issue_start>username_0: I haven't watched Anime in many years, but recently I've had time to get back into it. I've seen that one of my favorite series, Fullmetal Alchemist, has done a series reboot. What I'm wondering is:
**Does it present a lot of deep variations** (plot-wise, character-wise or otherwise)**, or is it just the same series with updated art?**<issue_comment>username_1: Brotherhood is actually more faithful to the Manga. The first *'version'* follows the Manga to some extent (about half the show) although it adds some details that do not follow the Manga.
>
> The whole thing regarding the creation of Homunculus is completely different in the first series.
>
>
> The whole Ishbal incident is also different.
>
>
> The role Hohenheim plays in the first series is rather ridiculous comparing to his *'real'* role.
>
>
> And there is also no Father in the first series...
>
>
>
Most of these different aspects I really don't understand.
As for the number of episodes: the *'reboot'* actually catches up to the first version rather fast (in about the first 4th) and then has *'new material'* (comparing to the first one, but actually it is just going according to the manga) until the end of it. Brotherhood also has more episodes (64, compared to 51) .
Also, the animation in itself is rather different in Brotherhood (much better IMO).
Basically, the first series is, in my opinion, rather poor when compared to Brotherhood.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: As you've said, two animes were done:
* *Full Metal Alchemist*
* *Full Metal Alchemist: Brotherhood*.
While they both start the same way, the first one starts to develop following a whole different path than the Manga. This is because when it was being aired, the Manga was not done yet, so the plot as well as the end of the anime are invented.
The second was done after the Manga ended, so it respects the original Manga much more. I watched both because I didn't know of this distinction. But I can tell you quite objectively, that even if the first one is not so faithful, it was of very good quality, speaking of plot twists, unexpected changes in history and other similar devices.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: The new Fullmetal Alchemist series is completely worth it since it adapts the original manga from beginning to end. The previous series, while being really good (in my opinion), diverges from the manga in the whole second half and ends in a way that was not supposed to be. The new series follows everything, retells in just a few chapters what we previously watched and then tells a completely new story with a completely new end.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: There are a large number of differences between the two Fullmetal Alchemist anime, with far too many to list; therefore, I'll only cover the major ones.
To improve the flow of this answer, the following abbreviations will be used:
FMAM = Fullmetal Alchemist (Manga)
FMA03 = Fullmetal Alchemist 2003 (Anime)
FMAB = Fullmetal Alchemist Brotherhood (Anime)
The reason for the difference is because FMA03 was created when FMAM was still in the early stages of its development. When an anime series is based on a manga that is still in development, the anime is eventually going to reach a point where it outpaces the manga, because anime episodes tend to be developed quicker than manga volumes. When this happens, either filler for the anime is created or changes to the anime's storyline and characters are made so that the anime can continue to be developed. The latter is what happened to FMA03. FMA03's storyline started to diverge from FMAM's storyline after around 10 episodes because, at that point, the anime was starting to outpace the manga.
On the other hand, FMAB was created when FMAM was nearing the end of its development. This allowed FMAB's storyline to be more faithful to FMAM's storyline because FMAB had a mostly-complete storyline to draw from FMAM.
The major differences between FMA03 and FMAB & FMAM are:
Storyline
=========
>
> Although both stories follow Edward and Alphonse, the overarching story is considerably different between FMA03 and FMAB & FMAM. In FMAB & FMAM the main antagonist was a character referred to as **Father**, a being of incredible power who is capable of performing transmutation at will, and without regard for equivalent exchange. His ultimate goal in FMAB & FMAM is to steal the power of what he refers to as "God" and become a being of infinite power and knowledge.
>
>
> The main antagonist in FMA03 is Dante. Unlike Father, she is just a normal human being who created a Philosopher's Stone and has managed to live a long time by transferring her consciousness into the body of other human beings whenever she was nearing death. Dante's only motivation is to become immortal and live forever.
>
>
>
The Homunculi
=============
>
> In FMA03, the **Homunculi** were the result of attempting to perform human transmutation and failing. They could only be killed by destroying their original body.
>
>
> In FMAB & FMAM, the Homunculi were created by Father, with each one representing a different aspect of his personality (**Lust**, **Gluttony**, **Envy**, **Greed**, **Wrath**, **Sloth**, and **Pride**; the seven deadly sins). Each Homunculus is also powered by a Philosopher's Stone. Unlike FMA03's Homunculi, FMAB & FMAM's Homunculi do not have an "original" body that needs to be destroyed. Instead, either the Philosopher's Stone powering them needs to be destroyed or its power drained (normally through forcing them to regenerate multiple times).
>
>
> Another difference is the identify of the Homunculi themselves, with some Homunculi from FMAB & FMAM not appearing in FMA03 at all and others having their name changed.
>
>
> **Gluttony**, **Envy**, **Lust**, and **Greed** have the same name and appearance in FMAB, FMAM, and FMA03.
>
> FMAB & FMAM's **Wrath** (King Bradley) is called **Pride** in FMA03.
>
> FMAB & FMAM's **Pride** (Selim Bradley) is not present in FMA03.
>
> FMA03's **Wrath** is unique to the series. He was the result of <NAME>'s attempt to revive her son.
>
> FMAB & FMAM's **Sloth** is not present in FMA03.
>
> FMA03's **Sloth** is unique to the series. She was the result of Ed and Al's attempt to bring back their mother.
>
>
>
Hohenheim
=========
>
> In FMA03, **Hohenheim** is just a normal human being who was originally Dante's lover; however, he eventually left her due to no longer sharing her desire to have immortality at any cost. Like Dante, he created a Philosopher's Stone and gained a long life by transferring his consciousness into another person's body. His role in the anime is very minor, and he becomes trapped on the other side of the Gate after a confrontation with Dante that ended in failure.
>
>
> In FMAB & FMAM, Hohenheim was a human Philosopher's Stone with a seemingly infinite supply of power. Although he was originally a slave, he was granted his near-immortality by Father well before the events of the series took place. Hohenheim is more significant in FMAB & FMAM, facing off against Father at the end of the series. Unlike FMA03's Hohenheim, he dies at the end of FMAB & FMAM after finally exhausting the power of his Philosopher's Stone.
>
>
>
The Gate
========
>
> The **Gate** is the largest major change in the series. In FMAB & FMAM, the Gate is the source of all alchemy and also seems to be a source of infinite knowledge. The Gate is also guarded by a being commonly referred to as **Truth**, and who is responsible for taking the required tolls from alchemists who perform human transmutation. Those who are capable of performing alchemy have their own gate, and if that gate should be removed (by sacrificing it to Truth), they will no longer be able to perform alchemy.
>
>
> In FMA03, the Gate is still the source of alchemy, but it also serves as a portal between the world of *Fullmetal Alchemist* and **Earth**. Furthermore, the Gate derives its powers from the souls of those who have died on Earth and is what powers the transmutations performed by alchemists.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 8 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_5: There are quite a few differences, actually. The "original", or the "first one" is an entirely different storyline from the manga. The manga was the original thing, so most people hate the first FMA series.
A few differences between the two anime series are:
* **The Storyline**
>
> In the first FMA, it ends with Ed in London around the time of World War 2. Al gets his body back and stays in "their world", while Ed is stuck in "our world" with his fake right arm and left leg. Al is 10 (the age he was when this chaos happened) again and has no memories of the last four years. But, in Conqueror of Shamballa, he gains his memories when he goes back to "our world" with Ed, after Ed brutally abandons him. Although, in Brotherhood, it sticks to the storyline of the manga.
>
>
>
* **The idea behind the Homunculi**
>
> In the first FMA, the Homunculi were created from failed human transmutations (explaining Sloth's appearance), while, in Brotherhood, the Homunculi were Father's humane "flaws" that he extracted from his personality and put into the "artificial beings". Ironically enough, his wanting to become a god was awfully greedy, even after he'd rid of that "flaw"
>
>
>
* **The Homunculi's appearance**
Lust has a black dress in the first series, but in Brotherhood, she has a reddish-brown dress.
Gluttony, Envy, and <NAME> look the same. Sloth looks like Ed and Al's mother, while in Brotherhood, Sloth is a big (much bigger than Armstrong xD) buff male with long black hair.
In the first series, <NAME> is Pride, instead of Wrath (in Brotherhood, he's Wrath). In FMA, Wrath is a little boy (Izumi's son) with long black hair and he has Ed's real right arm and left leg. While in Brotherhood, Wrath is King Bradley. In Brotherhood, Pride is King Bradley's son, <NAME>. While in the first series, Pride is King Bradley.
In the first series, Greed looks normal, but
>
> since Greed takes over Ling Yao's (the twelfth crown prince of Xing) body, Greed looks like Ling
>
>
>
**FMA**:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/qmEq7.jpg)
**Brotherhood**:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/PZItdm.jpg)
(The blonde guy in the middle is Father)
* **Who the Homunculi are** (... meh. It's pretty much explained in the aforementioned point, so I don't think I have to re-explain).
* **Hohenheim's appearance**
In the first series, Hohenheim has a more round, smooth face. His glasses are bigger and more round. His hair and beard is a dirty-ish blonde color, and his ponytail is lower. In Brotherhood, Hohenheim has a rectangle-shaped head. His face has more ...umm... say "chiseled" features. His glasses are smaller and not as round. His hair and beard are light blonde, and his ponytail is higher)
**FMA**:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/I1G1a.jpg) [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/IuhtF.jpg)
**Brotherhood**:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/DCWLbm.jpg) [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/DTuhom.jpg)
* **The art**
* **Al's voice**
* **Rose's appearance**
In the first series, Rose's skin is brown. Her hair is dark brown with pink bangs. In Brotherhood, Rose's skin is very white. She has black hair with maroon-ish colored bangs
**FMA**:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/azNqzm.png)
**Brotherhood**:
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/misT5.jpg)
* **Rose later on**
>
> In the first series, she has a baby (an ugly one, at that. xD ), while, in Brotherhood, she doesn't.
>
>
>
* **There are a few new characters in Brotherhood**
I had more in mind, but in the midst of typing, I forgot what the rest was. I apologize.
Even with the absence of the other differences I had planned to provide, I hope this helped.
Upvotes: 4 |
2012/12/11 | 1,795 | 6,575 | <issue_start>username_0: As the series develops, it seems that Ergo Proxy has a growing number of philosophical references:
* The concept of Anamnesis in episode 11.
* The Council/Collective figures.
* All the events in episode 20.
* Every discussion Vincent has with Ergo about the 'self' (especially episode 11)
* And numerous others that I don't recall at the moment...
Which philosophical concepts/authors are referenced or portrayed in the series?<issue_comment>username_1: Actually funny enough some of the robots in the anime are named after philosophers...
The Ergo Proxy Wiki states in the Production section
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ergo_Proxy>
>
> It is set in the future. A group of robots become infected with
> something called the Kojiro [sic] virus, and become aware of their own
> existence. So these robots, which had been tools of humans, decide to
> go on an adventure to search for themselves. They have to decide
> whether the virus that infected them created their identity, or
> whether they gained their identity through their travels. This
> question is meant to represent our own debate over whether we become
> who we are because of our environment, or because of things that are
> inherent in us. The robots are all named after philosophers: Derrida
> and Lacan and Husserl.
>
>
>
So pretty much the whole anime is about self discovery and coming to terms with their existence. One such philosophical / socialogical debate we take from the above mentioned quote is that of Nature vs Nurture. Are we who we are because of "what" we are, or is our "self" formed by our actions or the things around us. There's quite a few different philosophical undertones, the most prominent I think is the one I quoted above.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: big spoilers. go away.
>
> Cogito refers to - Cogito Ergo Sum - I think, therefore I am.
>
> also the word is similar to 'Cognito' or 'Cognition', which all derive from the root for 'know'.
>
> there's the whole daedalus/ikaros thing... oh i can't remember any more ;p
>
> the whole series itself seems sort of highlander/the one-like.
>
> asura/ashura is commonly used in anime, based on indian beliefs. let's not forget 'The Rapture' lol ;p
>
>
>
more? decided to move stuff from other thread lol
>
> pino = piano, the playing card soldiers of karos (karos = diamonds), the russian miniatures. how everything works like 'clockwork'? - the wombs, vincent's plan - gods trying to kill humans, while humans are trying to kill the gods (at least raul).
>
>
>
Upvotes: -1 <issue_comment>username_3: It's been a long time since I have watched the anime, but here's a quick rundown of some of the concepts I think the anime portrayed:
**Absurdism**
The resulting conflict, called the "Absurd," to find meaning and not being able to find any, at least, not in a humanely possible way. In other words, meaning can be logically found, but not be achieved. This concept is shown in Raul's mental breakdown as he slowly loses any possible source of meaning in his life. His adopted child, for example, could have been a source of meaning, but as he loses that and Pino, he began to create the Absurd and the way he resolves this is through suicide. The are other examples of the Absurd, more noticeable when they're talking about their Raison d'Etre. Others can handle the Absurd in a different way, particularly the Proxies because they're not (normal) humans, although those like Re-L was able to handle it as well in the end. The way Ergo Proxy portrayed Vincent's journey can also classify this work as an Absurdist Fiction.
For more: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absurdism>
**Mind-Body Problem**
This is more broad and can be divided into two subcategories: dualism and monism or physicalism (also called Identity Theory). Dualism is where the mind is separate from the body and the latter is when the mind is the body. This issue is addressed when the robots begins to acquire sentience on their own. The Cogito virus, which seems to be immaterial, is what gives the robots in the series their free will, their "mind," similar to how dualism says that the mind is immaterial and separate from the body. Yet, the experiences each robot has is what makes them act different, which also depends on the body. The state of mind of an intimidating military robot is going to be different than that of Pino, where people are more likely to treat her like a child. This issue is also more notable between Ergo and Vincent.
For more: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind%E2%80%93body_problem>
**Social Contract**
The anime briefly touched on this, but it's there. The legitimacy of Romedau's government is questioned. Cities can be created and destroyed easily by the Proxies, so it seems that the council is very powerless. More than that, no one voluntarily enters these cities. Rather, people are forced to exist inside them, either through artificial birth or through emigration (they were either to die in the harsh outside environment or live inside). In contrast, the commune outside of Romedeau works the opposite, in a way. Thus the problem: would you be willing to give up some of your freedom for comfort or would you rather have complete freedom?
For more: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract>
**Existentialism**
Very similar to absurdism. This problem is the question of where meaning comes from, if there is at all. It also deals with the issue of where existence came from, whether we existed without our bodies and how does it relate to our meaning. Existentialism on its own is too broad, however, but it seems to me that the anime touched on this as well.
For more: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existentialism>
There's a lot of references on the other hand, so I'll only list a few:
*Utilitarianism* - Society should be guided so that everyone is equally happy. Thus everyone in Romedau is given meaning.
*Transhumanism* - There was a scene where a city is run completely by robots. This seems to be more of a jab on transhumanism rather than a support for it, as it shows there's no need for humans if everything is mechanized.
*Divine Command Theory* - Whatever the council says, it has to be good. Why? Because they said so.
*Übermensch* - Nietzsche's idea of a perfect human and how human propagation gives meaning. The proxies aren't perfect, but it somewhat alludes to it considering how obscenely powerful they seem to be and that their mission is to perpetuate human society, if I recall correctly.
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/12/11 | 4,426 | 15,740 | <issue_start>username_0: In my region, people don't know the difference between anime and regular cartoons. When they see me watching anime, or they hear about it somehow, they say that I'm watching a regular cartoon and hence I'm being childish. Sometimes, they even display sarcastic attitudes, so that giving a serious long explanation wouldn't be possible.
What effectively explains how an anime is different from a regular cartoon?<issue_comment>username_1: My personal argument:
Cartoons are *mainly* produced for *kids*, with topics about friendship, fun, exploration and similar things.
Anime / manga and related media *mainly* are produced for targets of *all ages* (except for Hentai and Ecchi series, of course). They can of course contain the "kids content", but there are much more serious ones out there, e.g. ones about love, death, conflicts, and wars. They're simply much deeper. The drawing and character art of cartoons is often vastly deformed / otherworldly to emphasize the disconnect from reality and the fun part of it.
Another difference is the way characters evolve. In most comics I've read, you have episodic experiences which are, at most, loosely connected, and so characters don't really evolve / grow up. I'm sure there are counter-examples out there, but I think we can agree that the characters are not the focus.
For most anime and related media, the characters are *much* deeper. Of course you also have the occasional counter-example here, but the characters get a much bigger focus.
You can think of anime / manga / visual novels / light novels as (Western) books / series / movies with regards to the content, except they're drawn (or have illustrative content) instead of being filmed / purely in written form.
---
Note that there are examples of anime that look and feel just like Western cartoons (Panty & Stocking with Garterbelt, for the "look" aspect, at least) and the other way around (Avatar - The Last Airbender, Korra).
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: Anime and cartoon are both used to identified an animated production, the first made in Japan, the other ones in the rest of the world...
If we have to show more detailed difference I'd say:
**Visual characteristics**
Anime: Distinct facial expressions. Wide variation in physical characteristics.
Physical features of characters are, on the whole, closer to reality than cartoons.
Cartoon: Characters usually have features that are not relative to the rest of the body and therefore further from reality than anime.
**Topics/Themes**
Anime: concentrates mostly on life issues or things tied closer to human emotion.
Cartoons: are generally made to make people laugh and so is more comical.
**Definition and Term:**
Anime: English dictionaries define the word as ‘Japanese style of motion picture animation’.
Cartoon: was used as a model or study for a painting but is now associated with caricatures for humor and satire.
[Reference](http://www.diffen.com/difference/Anime_vs_Cartoon)
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: We all know Anime is "Japanese-style cartoons", and this often makes people say they are both cartoons. Yes they are, but this doesn't mean *there aren't differences*. Substantial differences.
First of all, the **audience**. The main *objective* difference is that Anime are not cartoons for kids, usually.
Some Anime get censored when dubbed in foreign countries and they are rendered as quite childish (and this is sometimes really annoying), while the original holds some adult references, scenes containing violence and so on. While this is not true for all Anime, as some are really aimed to children, some of them need a mature audience.
Also, the **characters** are treated quite differently. There is more growth in Anime characters as it develops for a whole series. For example, *Zabuza* in Naruto ends up being quite a likeable character because you go beyond him simply being an antagonist.
Both Anime and cartoons treat **themes** like *life, death, religion, love, betrayal, ethics, etc*. But cartoons really treat such matters quite differently. Just think about Disney-style cartoons: do they share anything with Anime in terms of *how* they treat these topics?
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_4: This is a pretty difficult question, but I may have some tips.
While *cartoons* are meant to be watched by *kids*, anime is meant to be watched by *all ages*: there is a series for everyone, for every theme, for every age. From little kids, like Doraemon, for young kids like Pokemon, to teenagers like shonen series or teen-shojos, to more adult like seinens or even hentai. Everyone can enjoy something.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_5: No matter how you look at it, an anime is a cartoon. The main difference is that an anime is considered a Japanese style of cartoons in the West.
Many English-language dictionaries [define](http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/anime) anime as "a Japanese style of motion-picture animation" or as "a style of animation developed in Japan."
However, in Japan, the term "anime" does not specify an animation's nation of origin or style. Instead, it serves as a blanket term to refer to all forms of animation from around the world (both foreign and domestic). The word "anime" is loan word referring to "animation" or "cartoons," adapted from the English word "animation."
Taking this from another perspective, in Japan, Disney movies are referred to as "Disney Anime", This refers to a certain style, not the genre as a whole.
The Japanese Wikipedia on "anime" [specifically notes](http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%82%A2%E3%83%8B%E3%83%A1#anime) that:
>
> アニメーションをアニメと略せる言語は日本語に限られるため、日本国外で「anime」という場合は日本製の表現様式のアニメに対して用いられる。日本国内では、製作国や作風に関わりなくアニメが使用される。
>
>
>
While in Japanese, "animation" was abbreviated to "anime," Outside of Japan, the word has been used only to refer to media considered "Japanese animation." However in Japan, the country of origin and literary style (of the media) are not taken into account when applying "anime" to it.
Western cartoons and anime can both vary in drawing styles, based on the staff, budget, and character/set designs. Anime series are typically more detailed than your average western show as there is more of an abundance of technically skilled artists overseas than there are available in the West.
Both can reach different age regardless of their initial target audience (*Avatar: The Last Airbender*, *My Little Pony*, and *Adventure Time* are notable examples).
Typically western cartoons are more lighthearted when compared to Japanese anime. However, both can deal with more mature themes, in both a serious (like *Cyber 6*, *Mighty Max*, and *Dungeons and Dragons*) and humorous light (like *Futurama*, *South Park*, *The Simpsons*, and *Family Guy*). There are western cartoons for mature adults just like there are 18+ anime in Japan.
If you ask the average person in your country and one in Japan, both will consider them to be childish. The difference between anime and cartoons is very subjective. It typically comes down to what you like and how you like it.
Upvotes: 7 <issue_comment>username_6: The difference is only subjective, depending on yours and your peers' perceptions. Keep in mind that MOST of the anime that is exported from Japan is actually aimed at children. (defining 'children' as extending through the teenage years)
>
> When they see me watching anime, or they hear about it somehow, they say that I'm watching a cartoon and hence I'm being childish.
>
>
>
Walt Disney didn't think [Fantasia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fantasia_%28film%29) was for children either. Having watched the film several times, I'm inclined to agree. The point is that although they have tended in that direction (with a few notable exceptions) in the western world, there is no particular reason to limit cartoon themes to kids.
>
> **Sometimes, they even display sarcastic attitudes, so that giving a serious long explanation wouldn't be possible.** What are the effective ways to explain that anime is different from cartoons in these kind of situations? Are there any clever sentences that will make an impact on people who don't know about anime?
>
>
>
I realize you only included this for context... but if someone is being sarcastic, it's not as if any real answer is applicable. This section of the question is also probably offtopic.
---
The easiest method of convincing someone would probably be making them sit through a showing of Grave of the Fireflies... although that's not particularly quick or clever.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_7: This question is really usual, especially when you are an anime fan. In my situation, I don't want 'anime' to be called 'cartoons' because they are so different for me. The following are the differences I think they have:
* Anime targets a vast audience, from kids to adults, while cartoons
mainly targets kids, with the exception of course of adults who
likes to watch cartoons.
* Anime tackles themes for kids, teens and adults and have stories that
have depth, while cartoons tackles more themes that are for
kids.
* Anime came from Japanese productions, and cartoons came from US
productions (or anywhere except Japan).
* You can really tell if what you are watching is an anime or a
cartoons by it's visual graphics (if you're an anime fan then, you'll
know what I mean). You can notice that the characters from one
cartoon show is very different from how cartoon characters in another
cartoon show looks like. However in anime, you can notice some
similarities on how they look like.
I think the best way for you to explain is to let them watch a very good anime and have them watch some cartoons, then tell them, "Saw the difference?". Or just let them think what they want. I experienced what you experience a lot from my parents but I just let them say what they want or think what they think. Respectfully ignore them. Just make sure that you don't disrespect them as you try to defend anime and that watching anime doesn't affect your attitude negatively.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_8: I don't want to get too subjective here, but there are some key aspects that I discuss with others:
* Art style; there is a distinct difference in how characters in an Anime series are drawn as opposed to Western style series. (Occasionally, you'll get a shout-out to the Anime style, too.)
* Target audience; there are a wide variety of audiences and an even more diverse demographic of consumers of anime than there are of traditional Western cartoons.
* Theming; as much of a culture shock as it may be (which I'll get to in a moment), many Anime have themes that wouldn't make much sense in the Western world, such as 108 for the Buddist number of temptations man will case, 4 for death, white for death, etc.
* Culture differences; there are *quite a few series* that are tolerated, if not acceptable, in Japan, whereas in the Western world, they'd be censored in some way or not permitted at all, or merit whomever is a fan of it some very dirty looks.
Some of the things that would cause controversy or be seen as "unacceptable" in Western animation would be homosexual relationships (yaoi/yuri), large age gap relationships, lolicon/shotacon (which is strangely *legal* but heavily frowned upon), and incest.
**Western animation wouldn't touch *that* with a one-hundred foot pole.**
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_9: Firstly, anime in English tends to refer to Japanese content. However, as noted in [this answer](https://anime.stackexchange.com/a/81/2604), "anime" in Japanese just refers to *any* animated content. That said, it's fine to have this discrepancy — similar things have cropped up in other English loanwords. (For instance "Lied" or its plural "Lieder" refer to 19th to 20th century styled German language art songs when the words are used *in English*, but in German, ["Lieder"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lied#History) seems to sometimes take on a more general sense.) **So in this sense, at the very least, *in English*, not all cartoons are anime, because not all cartoons are Japanese.** (Certainly it would be ridiculous for me to go around claiming that *Spongebob Squarepants* is anime to an English speaker.)
It is still unclear whether "anime" is simply a subset of "cartoons". The main problem, which other answers have touched on, appears to be that in English, "cartoon" often suggests something intended for young children, which does not cover the content of a lot of anime. Certainly things like *Serial Experiments Lain* or the *Fate* series are, by this connotation, not really "cartoons".
However, even shows animated outside of Japan are sometimes denoted as "cartoons", even when their content or art style doesn't really fall into the areas of the average person's idea of a "cartoon". For instance, a [search](https://www.google.com/search?q=waltz%20with%20bashir%20cartoon&oq=waltz%20with%20bashir%20cartoon&aqs=chrome..69i57.3027j0j7&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=93&ie=UTF-8#q=waltz%20with%20bashir%20%22cartoon%22) for `waltz with bashir "cartoon"` suggests that at least a few writers in large newspapers ([1](http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/26/movies/26bash.html), [2](http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/war-death-and-animation-cartoon-film-stirs-israels-conscience-1021732.html)) described the animated film [*Waltz with Bashir*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waltz_with_Bashir) as a cartoon, and both its subject matter (the 1982 Lebanon War) and [its style](https://www.google.com/search?site=&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1366&bih=663&q=waltz%20with%20bashir&oq=waltz%20with&gs_l=img.3.0.0l10.112.1774.0.2505.10.8.0.2.2.0.116.635.7j1.8.0....0...1ac.1.64.img..0.10.654.qmuUDfV8Fy8) hardly resemble the likes of the average cartoon, both in content and style. (Compare to [*Arthur*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_(TV_series)) or [*South Park*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Park).)
The same goes for [*Archer*](https://www.google.com/search?q=archer&oq=archer&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i60.839j0j4&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=93&ie=UTF-8#q=archer%20%22cartoon%22), which is, at least in the English-speaking world, markedly more famous than *Waltz with Bashir*. I have not seen *Archer*, but [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archer_(TV_series)) suggests that it is hardly more appropriate for children than *Waltz with Bashir*.
**So insofar as usage *in English* goes, either:**
* **Anime *is* different from "regular cartoons", but *only insofar as "regular cartoons" consists of children's shows* and also fail to cover other animated content like *Waltz with Bashir*.** Anything outside of regular cartoon-appropriate content is best either described with a different classification if this gives more information about the content (e.g. "anime") or a broader one (e.g. "animated content").
* **Anime *is not* different from "regular cartoons", because "cartoon" covers anything at all animated.**
In either sense, "anime" is really only about the fact that something was animated (and marketed towards the Japanese).
I am inclined to prefer the first view in terms of how I *personally* use the word "cartoon" (so describe *Doraemon* and [*Chibi Maruko-chan*](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chibi_Maruko-chan) but not *Fate/zero* as "cartoons") because of the connotations of "cartoon". However, I would consider the second to still be acceptable (in the sense that I won't get upset about that view being taken) because it's obvious that people also use "cartoon" similarly "inappropriately" on other more adult-oriented shows that *are not* from Japan.
Upvotes: 3 |
2012/12/11 | 1,269 | 4,066 | <issue_start>username_0: At his current state, how could Madara possibly be defeated?
Any physical attack/Taijutsu would be easily deflected by either:
* The Susano'o
* The Gunbai (war fan, which proved to easily negate a Bijuudama)
* Shinra Tensei (which wasn't seen yet, but we have to assume he's capable of it).
>
> And I'm not even starting to talk about the Rikudo mode.
>
>
>
Any non-physical attack would be easily absorbed by the Preta Rinnegan path. There aren't ~~m~~any ultra-powerful genjutsu ninja who can hope to trap him in a genjutsu for more than 2 seconds. And in the offshoot that something does hurt him, he'd just regenerate. He's a zombie.
---
What weakness does Madara have that could be exploited to harm him? They'd have to damage him badly to hope for a seal.<issue_comment>username_1: They mentioned in the latest chapter that Madara is vulnerable to Taijutsu. Also, as grasshopper said, his overconfidence causes him to drop your guard when dealing with those he thinks are not able to harm him.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: >
> Currently the only combatants I could see do lasting damage to Madara would be the recently resurrected Hokages. Currently Madara has the following: full control of Hashirama´s cells, Rinnegan, an invulnerable body and an infinite supply of chakra (courtesy of the Edo Tensei), the Eternal Mangekyo Sharingan and the most powerful Katon of all time. Kishimoto has outright said that he has no real weakness. The closest thing to a weakness he may have is Taijutsu, but since it does no lasting damage it´s frankly as useless as everything else one could use against him. Only an intervention from the 1st-4th Hokage could possibly defeat him right now, as he is a cocktail of the 3rd strongest person of all time and all the overpowered abilities in the series.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_3: It does not seem like any of Madara's new abilities have a counter to sound genjutsu, especially when boosted by Senjutsu / Sage mode. While sound genjutsu and Senjutsu are both very rare, the manga has shown two examples of different techniques of that type being effective against techniques that Madara has recently gained.
The two Sage Toads' sound genjutsu is effective against the Rinnegan. When Jiraiya had them use it in his battle with Pain, it was able to easily overcome 3 paths of Pain.
>
> When Kabuto in Snake Sage mode used Tayuya's flute sound genjutsu, he was able to immobilize both Sasuke and more notably, a Susanoo-wielding Edo Tensei Itachi. The pair were only able to escape by using Sharingan genjutsu on each other.
>
>
>
Upvotes: 6 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_4: Chapters 622 and 623 hint at a possible weakness of Madara Uchiha.
In Chapter 622, it has been shown that Madara has issues with [being too aware of his surroundings, and being easily distracted or have an inability to focus properly](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Wjgyn.png). He also has [issues with pride](https://i.stack.imgur.com/fwcJz.png), that he carried on until his adulthood.
>
> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/qbIuP.png)
> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/fwcJz.png)
>
>
>
In Chapter 623, the same possible weaknesses has been shown. [He even claimed that he didn't have any weaknesses](https://i.stack.imgur.com/GuxX0.png). [[1]](https://i.stack.imgur.com/GuxX0.png) [[2]](https://i.stack.imgur.com/6hhrB.png).
>
> [](https://i.stack.imgur.com/qQCsy.png)
>
>
>
Credits: All images are from [Mangastream](http://mangastream.com/)'s scanlations.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_5: I know this is not an answer (but couldn't stop writing this), but seeing the question and recent chapter I believe Madara's weakness is:
>
> Talk No Jutsu .... [**For your reference**](http://konohalibrary.wikia.com/wiki/Talk_No_Jutsu)
>
>
>
Upvotes: 2 |
2012/12/11 | 1,239 | 4,822 | <issue_start>username_0: *Detective Conan* is a notoriously long-running series -- it's been running for like fifteen years, and hundreds of cases have been solved. Conan has made friends, received upgraded technology over time (cell phones!), and has generally "kept up" with its audience.
Yet, logically, time in-universe *must* have passed, and Shinichi's continued absence should be more notable than it is if he's been gone for more than a year.
How much time has passed, currently, in the *Meitantei Conan* universe?<issue_comment>username_1: Technically the story plays out in real time, but realistically it is at the whim of the author.
Assuming the cases appear in chronological order. You'll notice that none of the characters ever age or even graduate. There are many discrepancies the Eisuke/Kir Arc alone has some serious and problematic time discrepancies. It starts with the Nail and Snake Arc which took place a week or so after New Years and then continues to some cases later in the Clash of Red and Black arc which climaxing in a *certain* person's death. Eisuke vanished around 18th to 19th of December... so chronologically speaking a year should have passed... but did it? Ask Gosho Aoyama.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: I don't believe a whole year has passed, there have been several plot holes in the midst of it though. A good example would be using Holidays as a way to track time. The "first" actual Valentine episode was actually TV-only (Episode 6), yet there is another Valentine case (Episode 266-268, Volume 33 files 3-6). The Holiday that comes after it is White Day, which takes place March 14th, one month after Valentine's Day, and they make references to the past Valentine's Day as an excuse to give back gifts to the women of the show. However, the episode/volume that takes place during White Day is episode 608-609 and volume 69 files 7-9. That's over 500 episodes and 36 volumes for one month to pass in their time.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_3: My first theory is, in order to make sense of the Detective Conan universe, the stories must overlap! So the only thing that's in order is the first episode. From there, we have probably 5 cases going on at a time, and when he solves one he goes on to another. Every day he has a case to solve, whether it's one from weeks before or not.
My second theory is that even if we say each episode represented a day, which it doesn't, at least a year would have passed based on the number of episodes, and Ayumi and the rest shouldn't be in grade 1 anymore. As a result, the only logical explanation is time overlaps!
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Although time has passed in the sense that the technology and other aspects of the setting that are not directly related to the story have progressed, very little time has passed in the main story. Occasionally, they will make references to it having been months since a previous case or other reference point, but these do not seem to line up much, if at all, and generally they are intended to indicate a time period for the individual case or arc, so that elements such as Ran's waiting for Shinichi seems to have actually been over a period of time. These indications, for obvious reasons, cannot always coincide, and so it would seem that the author decided long ago to make the story timeless. If you want a clear answer of the main plotline, so far it has been only for a few months, while the numerous side cases do not fit into this framework.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: I would say that you have to look only at cases that are canon.
And by that I don't mean the ones that are in the manga.
I mean canon as in something in the story line moves along and it's not just a 'guess who did it'-case.
There are only in about maybe 300 canon eps where the storyline is moved along in 750-ish anime eps. And stuff like 'The Clash of Red and Black', 'Homles Revalation' and 'Jet Black Mystery Train' are many eps long but they are only over the span of 1-3 days each time.
Plus many cases are 2-4 eps but happen in a day or just overnight.
There are times where the characters will say it's been this long or that long but they are few and far in bewteen.
I would say that only about 6-ish months have passed since the start of Detective Conan.
The fact that tech in the show changes and the seasons change is simply because Aoyama-sensei the anime staff have been writing the show in real life for many years.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_6: In episode 521, one of the canon episodes, the gang goes to some town to investigate a report that Shinichi solved a case wrong. That case happened "a year ago" while Shinichi was still teen-sized. Hundreds of episodes have passed since then, but that gives you a floor for the time.
Upvotes: 1 |
2012/12/11 | 753 | 2,807 | <issue_start>username_0: If the various "superpower" ninja traits are considered "blood traits," how is it someone like Kakashi, who is in no way related to the Uchiha clan, can use the Sharingan Eye technique?
More fully: would transplanting work on *any* bloodline trait power? If someone had a bloodline trait that worked on arms, could they just transplant their arm onto another person and then there would be two people with that technique?<issue_comment>username_1: I'm not sure about other bloodline jutsu, but the Sharingan's power lies within the eye. So whoever controls a Sharingan eye gains its powers.
It may be possible to gain other bloodine jutsu, but to determine where the actual jutsu is located within their body or even the chakra system is still speculation. For now, we know that those jutsu that comes from eyes, Sharingan and Rinnegan are up for grabs, not sure about others though.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: Let's disregard the fact that eyes in Naruto are considered less difficult to work with than PnP displays. (Rin did it in a cave, without any medical supplies, in a couple of seconds, and it just *worked*)
Your eyes contain your DNA, so our (the Uchiha) eyes contain the already awakened Sharingan, it's written into the DNA.
It also has the genetic information allowing you to activate the techniques the eye holds (including Mangekyo).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: The Sharingan being transplanted will work, as you've noticed with Kakashi. However it won't be as effective.
Sharingan original users, the Uchiha clan, can use the techniques with ease, but Kakashi needs to rest more often. This is due to the fact that since he's not an Uchiha member, these techniques will use up his chakra much faster.
Kakashi has it all covered, except in battles, because he cannot deactivate it and it would, like I said above, consume his chakra in vain.
He's not the only one that does a transplant. Also,
>
> Danzo, Tobi transplants the Rinnegan and steals it and Sasuke receives new eyes.
>
>
>
I suspect the same would happen for other transplants but I have no examples off the top of my head.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: A non-Uchiha cannot advance their Sharingan. As seen with Danzo and Kakashi. The only reason Kakashi had a Mangekyo Sharingan is because Obito saw Rin die.
This is explained by Tobirama when he tells about the Uchiha's brain, how their pain and hate change their brain physiology and functioning, allowing them to turn that pain into the Sharingan. As their pain and hate grow, so does their power.
If a brain isn't an Uchiha brain, and thus does not have this special area of the brain, then they will not:
A.) Naturally gain a Sharingan
B.) Awaken the different stages of the Sharingan.
Upvotes: 1 |
2012/12/11 | 1,519 | 5,112 | <issue_start>username_0: Most ninjas probably don't live very long by the nature of their work. They die on missions, in wars, in raids, while being ambushed by other ninjas, during testing, etc.
However, the handful of ninjas we have seen (e.g. The Third Hokage, as well as Tsunade and Jiraiya) who've lived past the usual lifespan seem to be of very advanced age.
Do ninjas have a longer natural lifespan that is simply cut short by the nature of their work?<issue_comment>username_1: As far as I know they all had lifespans that you'd judge as normal.
* The Third Hokage, Sarutobi, was let's say around 30 when he was training Orochimaru, Tsunade and Jiraiya. He died at 68-69 years old, that's a reasonable lifespan.
* Tsunade uses a special Jutsu that preserves her in a younger state, but she is as old as Jiraya.
>
> Jiraya died younger than Sarutobi, around 54. His hair is not a proof of his age, since it was white even when he was a kid.
>
>
>
On Tobi/Madara I won't say anything, since it's a yet-to-be-fully-revealed character and wrong information might be given at this point.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Not really, no.
The oldest (probably) Shinobi alive was Madara Uchiha, and even that because he awakened the Rinnegan, summoned the Gedo Mazo, and leeched on it for life-force.
Without it, he would probably have died at 80-90, which is a reasonable lifespan.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: >
> The Third Hokage, as well as Tsunade and Jiraiya
>
>
>
<NAME> was 69 old. When he died (following *NARUTO Hiden: Tō no Sho*), Tsunade has a special jutsu (as already mentioned).
>
> Jiraiya died at age ~53, being 50 at his first appearance (plus the training-time with Naruto (1.5 years, if I'm not mistaken, plus some story, I think 53 would be right)).
>
>
>
The only one who had a very long life was...
>
> ...Uchiha Madara who had the Rinnegan and attached himself to the Gedō Mazō, with which he had a longer lifetime.
>
>
>
Also, Kakuzu had a long life, but just because he had the ability to swap hearts.
All in all, you could say, that with special jutsus, ninjas live longer, but other than that, they're normal people.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: Some ninja families do have extended lifespans like the Senju and their sub branches like Uzumaki and Hyuuga.
Most ninjas have average lifespans which seems long as it is rather commendable for any of them to be able to survive that long. Also, this is complimented by the point that in surviving for this long, they manage to gather many accomplishments.
Generally, a old seeming ninja has just matured from all they have been through.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_5: The anime and manga make it quite clear that normally ninja live only for the same lifespan as all normal people do. There are exceptions though to this.
* Having extremely high/dense chakra. The most notable here are the uzumakis who are renowned for this. Although the Senju are related to them I don't remember reading about Senju who grew older or had a dense chakra. The Uzumaki are the only clan mentioned that had this ability and a longer lifespan.
* Cheating. The best example here is Orochimaru. He cheated death by taking on new bodies time and time and time again. Another one being the Akatsuki guy who stole hearts of his oponents.
* One additional possibility is the faith of Jashin. The followers of that cult can gain immortality. Although it is not stated if this merely means undying by force or also undying by old age. Thus I count this only as a possibility.
Aside from these examples (and a quite old Madara Uchiha where it is never noted if that was still a normal lifespan or an extended one) there are no ninja who life beyond the natural lifespan.
As a note to add to the first point: Of note are here the sage of the 6 pathes who lived VERY long, the tailed beasts themselves (effectively immortal) and the mother of the sage of 6 pathes (his two sons I don't count as they were more or less ghostlike from the descriptions and it is not known if they would have lived longer than natural normally).
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_6: Most ninjas don not live very long.
Even the handful of ninjas we have seen (The Third Hokage, as well as Tsunade and Jiraiya) who've lived past the usual lifespan do not seem that old. Between 50 and 70.
Do ninjas have a longer natural lifespan that is simply cut short by the nature of their work?
No, (For anyone born in 2017, average life expectancy is 72.2 years and highest theoretical life is 104 years{one woman reached 122 years a man 116 years})
Instead, shinobi seem to age faster than normal people and die younger as well.
this is most likely due to healing chakra speeding up cell division to heal wounds.
The more they use healing chakra the faster they age the sooner they die.
The answer is a simple "No" except for special cases like Uzumaki with amazing yang and chakra or natural energies like the animal sages who have lives thousands of years ninjas do not have an extended lifespan.
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/12/11 | 3,542 | 13,804 | <issue_start>username_0: In Full Metal Alchemist, who is the character (or the concept really) of **Truth**? What does he symbolize? What is his purpose?
From what I guess, he's some sort of your inner God, because he seems to know you better than you do yourself. He knows the best way to punish you, the way that would hurt you the most. He must be tied with alchemy and alchemical knowledge, but *what* is he?<issue_comment>username_1: It is you and it is the Universe. It is everything.
When the Elric brothers train in the island, they realize the connection between the 'one' and the 'all'. They understand that everything is connected. I think that what they understand is **Truth** itself. They understand something that is in them and around them.
So basically, I don't think that **Truth** is a God (at least in the usual sense), but rather a sort of *law* that runs everything. It is in you and everywhere around you. However, it materializes itself as a humanoid form in your subconscious or whatever place that is where the gates are.
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_2: Truth himself (itself?) states,
>
> Who am I? One name you might have for me is the world, or you might call me the universe, or perhaps God, or perhaps the Truth. I am All, and I am One. So, of course, this also means that I am you. I am the truth of your despair, the inescapable price of your boastfulness.
>
>
>
Truth is a being that has no physical form, and a being that regulates all alchemical exchanges that take place. He essentially exists in order to prevent humans from "playing God" with alchemy; when human transmutation is performed, for example, Truth intervenes as it is seen as an unfair (inequivalent) exchange.
In these ways, Truth is somewhat symbolic of God. It has also been compared to gods in other mythos, such as Hera, a Greek goddess who was known to vengefully challenge heroes.
>
> Hera was known for her jealous and vengeful nature, most notably against Zeus's lovers and offspring, but also against mortals who crossed her, such as Pelias.
>
>
> — [Hera, Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hera)
>
>
>
However, it is important to realize that **[Truth](http://fma.wikia.com/wiki/Truth) is *not* [God](http://fma.wikia.com/wiki/Eye_of_God)**. While it is certain that they are linked in some way, God is the entity that lies within the domain of the Gate (the eye and mass of black hands that restrain his "victims").
(*The Gate, Truth sitting in front, and God within it. Source: [Wikia](http://fma.wikia.com/wiki/File:Gate.png)*)
When an alchemist pays the toll and is forced through the Gate by Truth (and by God), they are shown all knowledge about alchemy. Their minds can only absorb so much, but enough is clear that they are able to perform their alchemy without requiring a transmutation circle.
So, what *exactly* is Truth? He is a vengeful, godlike being, who is linked to God, and governs all alchemical exchanges performed by alchemists. He has no physical form and exists only metaphysically within the mind of each alchemist.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: It doesn't make a whole lot of sense because it is, in essence, a deus ex machina. It borrows from the concept of Dao, but by giving the thing the ability to communicate it elevates it into godhood, but then it is very useless at being a god, so all that remains is a deus ex machina there to tie up the loose ends without bothering to explain anything.
Leaving people wondering what the hell this character is supposed to be is by design. And there is no answer, since it's just a plot device to finish the story.
Upvotes: 0 <issue_comment>username_4: I think to understand this we have to grasp the concept of the world of Fullmetal Alchemist itself. Here's my take:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If we look inside ourselves and ask who we truly are, we'll soon realize that we can't answer that question. If our answer is "all interdependent parts of my body", we're still left with the question of who "you" in "your body" is.
We might argue it's our consciousness, but the same question still applies. The answer is, it's not found only within us. We're not cut off from the outside world we move in, we're a part of it. Just like our organs are part of us. We need air around us to breathe, we eat other living organisms to sustain ourselves and eventually sustain other organisms with ours after we die.
[That's what the Elric Brothers discover on the island.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1PShCL4cjQ) Everything we think we are is an effect of evolution in form of a single organism inside a much greater, bigger organism. This organism, in turn, is also part of a bigger organism and so on. Our body, our society, the food chain, our planet, our galaxy... On the highest level, there is only one, which is all.
>
> **"All is the world, one is me. One is all and all is one."**
>
>
>
We perceive ourselves as individuals but are ultimately made of a single, great everything, sometimes called the world or the universe, or god, or one, or all, or truth.
---
Now, if we break down this single everything back into its first components we are left with 2 forces, orientations, flows of the world, ways of behavior, or whatever you want to call them. This was also the research of Scar's brother. There are infinite words to describe these two fundamental opposites:
1. the good, the active, the living, the positive, the evolving, the creating, the growing, the forward-moving, the known, truth, order, god, humans...
2. the bad, the passive, the dead, the negative, the regressing, the destroying, the killing, the backward moving, the unknown, deception, chaos, humans, god...
---
Good is not "good", bad is not "bad". They just are, as a part of everything and are opposites that need and birth each other.
The default state of things is that they fall apart. It's also the default state that they're being put together by the living though, that's us. There has to be both for either to occur. Because there is a set amount of energy. You cannot create something out of nothing, you have to pay an equal price.
To influence this flow of fundamental substances is what the anime calls Alchemy. There's Amestrian (inorganically oriented) and Xingese (organically oriented) Alchemy. That which allows Alchemists to perform the transmutation is the Gate of Truth. Its existence is the fantasy element about Fullmetal-Alchemist. It allows individuals to transmute matter by studying its behavior and creating a formula for it, a transmutation circle.
---
What's inside the gate?
-----------------------
My guess is that inside the gate there's the incarnation of the second opposite: death, chaos, the opposite of what the living experience, the souls of the dead. The original Fullmetal Alchemist confirms this by stating that [the energy used for transmutation is taken from the tragedies of this world](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11nXBQ8CuxU) (likely referring to souls that left their bodies after death).
* Firstly this would explain why witnessing it gives you the ability to transmute without a transmutation circle that contains the matter's energy cycle. You have witnessed, integrated, and become a part of the cycle itself. As Edward says, he became something like a transmutation circle himself post-truth.
As a side note, Rose mentions, clapping your hands together is similar to praying to god. The concept of praying is to ask god (the world) for something, just like Alchemists "ask" the world to provide the energy for and execute transmutation. Praying and Alchemy follow the same concept, Alchemy/Science is just more empirical.
* Secondly, this would underline the great overarching story writing in
Fullmetal Alchemist.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/uPoet.jpg)
We know that [the dwarf in the flask came from the other side of the gate](https://youtu.be/9wLJAYBY4tU?t=105). That would mean he's an incarnation of chaos within order, of literal evil. He's the ultimate antagonist. All characters get the opportunity to unite and fight one ultimate evil and grow along the way without it getting forced or with the need for a new antagonist after each chapter. It's one concluded story that conveys its ideas clearly.
[The moral of Fullmetal Alchemist is that we don't need the gate. There's no need to be supernaturally gifted or perform alchemy. There's no need to become perfect or play god's duties. We should experience life and learn what it's about instead of trying to go beyond it. Because that's the insurmountably scarce gift that was bestowed upon us. We're human. No more, no less.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iiDqtDUxahc)
---
Why is human transmutation forbidden?
-------------------------------------
In the first place, human transmutation fails. That is because there's more to a human than their physical substance. There's their soul. Their consciousness. The experiences that shaped them. Consciousness and who a person is is something shaped during life experiences. You cannot transmute a soul or a person's experiences. The world just doesn't work that way. It only moves forward.
**Transmuting a human is the biggest taboo because it goes against the very logic of the world and the natural flow of everything.**
In the space of truth, after attempting the transmutation of his mother, Edward says his calculations for human transmutation weren't wrong, they just didn't go far enough. What he might have realized is that you'd have to pull the extinguished soul from the other side as well.
That is what the dwarf in the flask is. It is unknown how he has been extracted apart from the use of Slave #23's blood and Alchemy. We do know though that he needed a body to walk in the world. The dots of Hohenheim's master transmuting life into death in the form of blood for an extinguished soul could connect here. If this would be the case, the life -> death transmutation direction of the cycle isn't forbidden because it follows the natural flow of things.
---
The lie of balance
------------------
At the conclusion of the story, the Homunculus gets punished by the truth. He asks the truth
>
> "what's wrong with seeking perfection?!"
>
>
>
What he didn't understand in trying to become the perfect human by cutting off his sins is that perfection doesn't exist. Perfect balance equals nothingness. ..If you try to reach the truth on your own accord, you get irony. Trying to balance for yourself unbalances another part of you. It's just not your job. Perfection is moving forward as your imperfect self and letting the world balance you.
<NAME> says during the trial with his master ["if all is not included in the one then one is nothing"](https://youtu.be/xuaQNnuEDcA?t=222). Everything must always exist. The meaning of life isn't to achieve balance. Neither is it to push an extreme.
It's the process of balancing and unbalancing ourselves within the one just as much as it can handle so it gets thrown back at us with the same intensity.
Life balances itself out, always. Extremes breed opposite extremes. Balance breeds nothingness. The one that balances is the inescapable truth, the felt reality.
A real-life example would be:
>
> Relationships likely become boring without some unbalancing playfulness or complementary traits. They also fall apart if the partners are too different.
>
>
>
This concept of "not too much, not too little" works in all areas:
>
> How to learn. How to work. How to do sport. How we dress. How we raise our pets. How we have a conversation. How we treat our friends. How we treat our enemies. How we treat strangers. How we treat our planet. How we live.
>
>
>
We're all one part of the same energy and should treat others like they're us. Because they are. The dwarf in the flask, Homunculus, wanted to split himself from the unity that is everything but simultaneously become everything too. He put himself before everyone, not realizing that he is one complement with them. For this hypocrisy, he was forced to return to his origin.
---
A note on religion
------------------
Orienting ourselves towards the good, towards life, is what we, as living beings, are made for and what brings us happiness and keeps unnecessary suffering away. Everyone already subconsciously believes that. It's what our parents and experiences taught us. If we didn't learn to orient ourselves towards life, we'd not be reading this. Because there are too many things in life to consider though, religion, in theory, provides a simplified frame of reference to stay oriented towards the good, towards living.
This also explains the conflict between certain teachings of religion and science.
As science is able to more precisely explain the world, the unknown or god, the need for a deity fades. Both religion and empirical science are ultimately an attempt to explain and simplify the same world to guide its believers towards the good, towards life. If religious (or even scientific leaders) become corrupted, they cling to and exist for power and control, driving unity towards the bad. This is illustrated with <NAME>.
---
So, who is Truth?
-----------------
With all these presuppositions in place, we can finally say who the truth is. It is the watcher, judge, and incarnation of everything. One name you might have for it is the World, or you might call it the Universe, or perhaps God, or perhaps the Truth. It is all and it is one, so of course, this also means that it is you.
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/12/11 | 698 | 2,632 | <issue_start>username_0: In *Hikaru no Go*, the main character (Hikaru) has a ghostly companion who tutors and trains him in the game of Go, a sort of Othello/chess hybrid game. However, about halfway through the series....
>
> Sai ends up disappearing and, from then on, Hikaru must train and succeed on his own.
>
>
>
What happens to Sai? Why is he no longer present for the rest of the series?<issue_comment>username_1: From what I understood, Sai had fulfilled his role in the world. He had trained someone with passion to continue his work alone, without his guidance. The path to the "Divine Move" is now cleared, and he's no longer needed.
His job was done.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: According to the plot of the serie, Sai realized his role was not to achieve the Divine move (also called "hand of god") but that he was just there to transmit all his knowledge of the game to Hikaru. Having no more regrets, he can leave the world. So Madara Uchiha's answer is correct.
Also, in a public interview Yumi Hotta (scenarist of the "Hikaru No Go") gave during European Go Congress 2011 (in Bordeaux, France), someone asked her "Why did Sai disappear?". She answered that Sai had a role similar to a father to Hikaru, and that you cannot live your whole life with your parents following you. At some point, you have to grow up and become an adult. So, the fact that Sai disappeared is a symbolic way of saying that Hikaru is (on his way to) becoming an adult.
Hikaru "finds" Sai later when playing go. This has the same meaning as saying that even if you leave your parents, you will always have in you what they told you, what they taught you, and the values they transmitted to you.
And, in fact, by the end of the series Hikaru looks a lot more mature than when he was with Sai.
According to Yumi Hotta, "Sai had to disappear", otherwise he would be blocking Hikaru from becoming an adult, in the same way a mother or a father would if he or she was always protective about his/her child.
Upvotes: 4 <issue_comment>username_3: I think that Sai's original goal and purpose was to play the divine move and be part of the game, but as he realized Hikaru's potential he decided by himself that his goal was to put Hikaru on the path to the divine move.
Kind of like if your a parent that played a certain sport and your child decides to play as well. There might be one thing in that sport you were never able to do before you retired. Would you continue to push past your limits as you got older? No you would help your child achieve that goal themselves and leave behind your legacy with them.
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/12/11 | 870 | 3,166 | <issue_start>username_0: The *henshin* (or, transformation) sequences in *Bishoujo Senshi Sailor Moon* are legendary for being *awesome*, but do we ever see them change back into their civilian identities?
I'm requesting either video links, screencaptures, or panels from the manga for this one, because I'd like to see the scenes myself! Examples from *both* the anime and the manga would be appreciated.<issue_comment>username_1: In the anime, there was a scene or two where the senshi were forced to transform back by draining power or similar.
Actual detransformation was done by "ripping" the transformation off (though not as visible as in some other series), which'd suggest normal transformation would be something different, which I remember not be shown at any time.
Looks like there was (at least one) back-transformation in anime too.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_2: In episode 45 of the dub, Sailor Moon is forcibly de-transformed at ~11:44. When it does, she "ribbons" back to her civilian clothes.
In episode 108 of the dub, we see Sailor Uranus de-transforms (at ~21:12), willingly, by going nude briefly before she appears in her civilian clothes.
In the manga. it looks like they use the transformation pen to [de-transform](https://i.stack.imgur.com/Sl0Zj.jpg) a la ribbons.
So it seems they typically get surrounded by ribbons again and revert back to their civilian clothes.
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: What I've found:
* *Sailor Moon R the Movie: Promise of the Rose* - Sailor Moon is forcibly detransformed by Fiore, twice. Both times are during the later half on the movie, on the asteroid. The first one is the asteroid-flower scene with Sailor Moon tied-up in vines.
* *Sailor Moon SuperS* - I believe it's also in the later half on the movie, on the ship. The Inner and Outer senshi/soldiers have their power drained, having them detransformed. However, they only appear as their colored-barbie forms, likely because it showed them frontally "nude" for around 12 seconds. - [YouTube reference](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_s74tAFSKQ).
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_4: In episode 8 of Sailor Moon Crystal, Sailor Venus is shown intentionally de-transforming in front of the other senshi.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_5: In episode 8 of the third season of Sailor Moon Crystal (episode 34 of the entire adaptation), we see Sailor Chibi Moon revert back to her civilian costume after her brooch is stolen (along with her "copy" of the Legendary Silver Crystal and her soul) by a transformed Hotaru. (We learn in the next episode that Hotaru has transformed into Mistress 9.)
We can assume then that one of these objects—presumably the brooch and/or the soul, as the other Sailor Guardians do not have the Legendary Silver Crystal—is necessary for "maintaining" the transformed state. (It is of course obvious that the brooch is needed for the transformation, but it does not seem clear to me whether or not the Sailor Guardians could drop their brooches while transformed and stay transformed. Perhaps the distance from a Sailor Guardian and her brooch could also matter.)
Upvotes: 1 |
2012/12/11 | 910 | 3,119 | <issue_start>username_0: At the start of the *Bleach* manga, Rukia stabs Ichigo in the heart with her *zanpakuto* in order to give him her shinigami powers, which allows him to protect his family from the Hollows.
After that, Ichigo obtains a sealed zanpakuto that he uses (alongside Rukia in a *gigai*) to fight Hollows around Karakura.
Later, Rukia returns to Seireitei and regains her shinigami powers, which robs Ichigo of his.
This implies that Ichigo had *borrowed* his powers from Rukia for the run of the Karakura Arc. This is further supported when Ichigo gains his own zanpakuto, Zangetsu, and his sword is unsealed rather than remaining in its more benign state.
Because Ichigo is borrowing Rukia's spirit powers, and because Zangetsu's form appears to be more volatile and less prone to remaining sealed, **is the first zanpakuto that Ichigo carries Rukia's zanpakuto *Sode no Shiraiyuki***?<issue_comment>username_1: No.
When Ichigo was stabbed again (Again, by Rukia) to give him his Shinigami powers after he lost them against Ginjo, he regained his own sword.
That makes it rather hard to believe that he originally had her Zanpakuto.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_2: Ichigo doesn't have Sode no Shiraiyuki originally. He loses his powers originally because Byakuya severs his soul chain, which detaches him from being able to touch his powers. He regains the powers because of training with Urahara that also causes him to become
>
> part Hollow.
>
>
>
As quoted from bleach.wiki.com:
>
> [Urahara] explains that Byakuya destroyed the source of his power, leaving him without any Shinigami powers and that he must restore these in order to fight the Shinigami. He explains about Reiryoku, saying that the more one's reiryoku rises, the sharper the movements of their spiritual body becomes. He says that if Ichigo can manage to move even better with his spiritual body than he can with his mortal body, then we will have made a complete recovery of his reiryoku.
>
>
>
More importantly, however, his unsealed zanpakuto is the same both before and after his fight with Renji/Byakuya. To have had Sode no Shiraiyuki previously, he would have needed to have an entirely different sword, which he didn't.
These aren't exactly manga scans, but here are pictures of the sword before and after Ichigo regains his powers:
**Before:**
**After:**
Upvotes: 3 <issue_comment>username_3: No. When Ichigo was stabbed, the only thing transferred over was Rukia's Spirit Energy. She lost the ability to call forth her sword and to use Kido effectively, both of which have some bearing on Spirit Energy. However, Ichigo didn't pick up any of her abilities.
Upvotes: 2 <issue_comment>username_4: The blade of the zanpaku-to just channels the spirit of the users zanpuku-to. It was an incomplete manifestation of Zangetsu. So even if he had called Sode no Shiraiyuki, nothing would have happened.
Its like trying to call someone else's spirit (zanpaku-to), when you don't even own it.
Upvotes: 0 |
2012/12/11 | 608 | 2,441 | <issue_start>username_0: Alchemy, in Full Metal Alchemist, is based on the concept of 'one needs to provide materials of equal value compared to the thing one want to create' (equivalent exchange).
But, how does it exactly work.
Can this amount of required materials be calculated by the alchemist? If so, how? Are there some sort of lookup-tables?
Or does one need to guess and provides something of more value to be on the safe side? If so, can one become a more skilled alchemist by experience of successful guesses?
Also, different alchemists might have different specialized skills. How does that work? For the guessing part, I can imagine that one have a preference for certain kinds of alchemy and thus gain experience with a specialized skill.
**Edit**: [<NAME>](https://anime.stackexchange.com/a/106/51)'s answer suggests that there are always materials required. I was also wondering about the situation where this is not the case and the alchemist was successful none the less.
For example:
>
> In the end Edward trades his alchemy skill in exchange for returning Alphonse's body to him.
>
>
><issue_comment>username_1: Alchemy has three stages: *Understanding*, *Break down*, *Rebuild*.
Different alchemists have different specializations because of the *Understanding* part, learning chemistry in general isn't easy, and digging into a specific subject (For instance, the study of the atmosphere and oxygen in Roy Mustang's case), is even harder, hence specialization.
Matter of "equal value" means of equal "type" (Mineral to mineral, organism to organism, you can't turn stone into a flower), and of equal **Mass**.
This works well in accordance to the physical laws of matter and energy conservation. You cannot make matter *disappear*, nor you can make it *appear out of nothing*. You can't input more matter to be on the safe side, that matter won't be used for the alchemic transmutation (at best), or result in a rebound (at worse).
Upvotes: 5 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_2: That's why alchemists study so long, and National Alchemist even more. There are lots of books explaining how to do It properly, how to calculate the amounts, the type of materials, the decomjposition of things and so on.
They aim to use exactly what they need, not more, not less, so they work to fine-tune, to *understand* how things are made, how things work, and then replicate them as they wish.
Upvotes: 1 |
2012/12/12 | 8,381 | 30,298 | <issue_start>username_0: At the ending of Code Geass R2, the last scene showed someone whose face wasn't showed riding a horse-pulling-cart with CC. I believe that it is indeed Lelouch (who was previously stabbed by Suzaku wearing Zero's uniform as part of their Code Zero plan to free Elevens), and that he had gained immortality because of his frequent usage of his Geass.
Lelouch's Geass first leveled-up the episode when he accidentally ordered his sister Euphemia to kill all Elevens. Then, his father King Charles was beaten by him and I'm thinking that King Charles' immortality was transferred to him.
If that person was really Lelouch, then, has he already gained immortality by that time?<issue_comment>username_1: Lelouch is really the cart driver at the end of Code Geass R2.
Quoting from [this blog post](http://animeotaku.animeblogger.net/2008/09/code-geass-r2-25-so-is-lelouch-dead-or-not/):
>
> The most obvious reason would be CC calling to Lelouch in the closing scene of the episode. As we can assume CC to be still sane, she must be talking to someone, and that someone would most probably be the driver of the cart: Lelouch would have to be alive.
>
>
> Second, however, and this is where the others have thought things through, Lelouch is alive because he got his dad's code. He beckoned the World of C to lend him its powers, and he took Charles's code before Charles passed on. The reason why Lelouch still has his Geass is because he didn't take the Code from the same person who gave him his Geass: he took his Geass from CC, and he took his Code from Charles. Thus, he now possesses both immortality and a Geass. This is also a reason that the title is ***Code Geass: Lelouch** of the Rebellion*.
>
>
> To further corroborate this, however, remember that when Nunnally held Lelouch's hand he transferred his memories to her. CC also did it when Lelouch touched her accidentally back then, so it could be assumed that people with Codes are indeliberate telepaths. This leaves us with both immortals traversing the world for the rest of eternity.
>
>
> [...]
>
>
> Additional evidences:
>
>
> 1. Charles grabbed Lelouch with his right hand, which had the Geass sigil.
> 2. Lelouch needed the fully evolved Geass to transfer a code.
> 3. The code doesn't appear to activate until someone dies. Hence, why C.C. was wounded when she first inherited her code. Same happened with Charles in the World of C.
> 4. When Lelouch touched Nunnally, Nunnally got a flash of his memories. This ONLY happens when a high potential Geass user touches someone with the fully evolved Geass.
> 5. The title of the series is "R2″, which is similar to how "C.C" is pronounced. So Lelouch would be "R.R." which is Engrish (I presume) for L.L., Lelouch Lamprouge.
> 6. When C.C. is talking on the wagon, she says "the power of Geass brings loneliness…that's not quite right is it, Lelouch?" and nods her head in the direction of the wagon driver.
>
>
> [Furthermore,] Orange knew of Lelouch's and Suzaku's plan and helped them out by ordering his men not to fire on Zero, he even smiled when Zero (Suzaku) jumped on his shoulder.
>
>
> Now would Orange, a man who devoted himself entirely to Lelouche and threw away everything without a second thought be OK with a plan where the sole person he wants to protect in life is actually killed? The answer to that is NO, not even if Lelouch ordered him to accept the plan: he would not go along with it and would protect him with his life. There is only one way that Orange would be OK with a plan like that and that's if he knew about Lelouch's immortality, which I assume he did as he worked with V.V. in the Geass research base. Orange was OK with this plan as he knew Lelouch would come to no harm and would be able to start a new peaceful life with the woman he loves in a world which he himself had made peaceful.
>
>
> Even at the end, we see Orange on his orange plantation, completely content with the way things have panned out, he definitely could not be that happy had Lelouch actually died.
>
>
>
So Lelouch and CC lived happily ever after, literally.
Upvotes: 5 <issue_comment>username_2: This seems to be a religious issue, judging by the amount of arguing I found while I was searching for the information contained in this answer. At the very least, username_1's answer is not universally accepted, and there are a lot of people who flat out reject that theory. In my opinion the evidence against the other theory is more compelling. I'm going to try to present said evidence as impartially as I can.
---
First, no official source has ever claimed that Lelouch survives at the end of R2. That alone doesn't answer the question, because it could be deliberately ambiguous. Of course, Lelouch would need to be alive to be driving the cart.
Second, several official sources list Lelouch as dead at the end of R2. [Here](http://forums.animesuki.com/group.php?do=discuss&gmid=38473) is an interview with writer <NAME>, taken from the Japanese magazine Continue (vol 42, Oct 2008, translated into English (I have not yet found the original so I can not confirm the accuracy of the translation). I've copied the relevant part below:
>
> " -----Still, isn't it possible that defeating the wise ruler Schneizel, the person who was supposed to have brought order to the world, might lead to some [viewers] interpreting it as a Bad End?
>
>
> **Okouchi**: That's true. There are probably a lot of people who think of it as a Bad End, a tragedy, considering the protagonist's, Lelouch's end as well. However, Lelouch says in the first episode: "Only those prepared to be shot are allowed to pull the trigger themselves." If you were to think of that as his pride, then I think his getting shot (killed) in the end was a logical end. Of course, I understand that not all of the viewers will accept this ending. There were people who wanted a happier ending, after all.
>
>
> -----Was there a dispute among the staff members regarding the ending?
>
>
> **Okouchi**: No. It was decided fairly naturally. During the "Code Geass" script meetings, there are many cases in which there were a number of disputes, but there were barely any when it came to the scripts for (the previous series's) episode 25 and the final episode. I think everyone felt the same when it came to the end of the character that is Lelouch.
>
>
> -----Why were you so bold as to choose this ending when the viewers might see it as a Bad End?
>
>
> **Okouchi**: Bold... yes, we were so bold as to chose this ending. Perhaps the show that is "Code Geass" ending up this way was decided the moment Director Taniguchi and I teamed up. I suppose you can call it our sense of aesthetics, or perhaps a part of our psychological makeup.
>
>
> ...
>
>
> ------I see. So Lelouch's decision was also your, Mr. Okouchi's, and Director Taniguchi's decision.
>
>
> **Okouchi**: Which is why I think of both our and Lelouch's decision as Happy Ends. I believe that there will be better things in the tomorrow awaiting Nunnally, Kallen and the rest who have been left behind. And surely Lelouch, who was able to make this into a reality, can only be happy [about this].
>
>
> ...
>
>
> -----Some unresolved mysteries still remain.
>
>
> **Okouchi**: From the very beginning, [I/we] never planned on explaining everything. In fact, if you ask me, I think we might have overdone the explanations. While it's undeniable that Lelouch's story has ended with a full stop, the other characters' stories are still on-going, and it's not like the world [of Code Geass] itself has come to an end either. [I/we] didn't want to end it by closing it up for good."
>
>
>
That seems to pretty strongly confirm that at least Okouchi believes Lelouch dies in the end. Of course, Okouchi, being a writer, doesn't have the final say. The director is the one whose word we should ultimately be looking for, but director <NAME> has not said anything definitive either way. He did say something ambiguous, to the effect that he "prefers to see the end as a happy one," but Okouchi also claims it's a happy ending despite Lelouch dying. Okouchi also didn't seem to have any difficulty speaking for the whole team, and no one came out to correct him, so this seems reasonable.
The link above has a couple other relevant quotes which I will not repeat here. I believe that this establishes that there's a pretty strong opinion that Lelouch is, in some form or another, dead.
Here's a further confirmation of this. This image lists people who died in R2. I've boxed the relevant entry for Lelouch.
The above was taken from the same issue of the magazine. This is an official image. I don't think this really adds anything to the above except removing some ambiguity.
There's some further evidence [here](http://animeotaku.animeblogger.net/2008/10/code-geass-r2-another-nail-in-lelouchs-coffin/) (I haven't really checked this translation but by a cursory skim it seems to be accurate).
>
> C.C.’s profile has also been updated, and the final part of it now says: “Knowing that Lelouch does not hate her for giving him the Geass, she is now able to show her true feelings. With the realization of “Zero Requiem”, her time with Lelouch, who was able to forgive and accept her, came to an end, but the memories created with him has, without doubt, saved her from eternal loneliness.”
>
>
>
Given that the "Lelouch = Cart Driver" theory requires that Lelouch and C.C. aren't separated at the end, this piece of information just doesn't make sense unless we reject that theory.
So we've confirmed that Lelouch is pretty dead at the end of R2, and that the fan theory that he is the cart driver really isn't supported by the official statements. There are a couple of ways to get around all of these facts. I don't really regard them as anything but conspiracy theories and other ways fans are trying to deal with the ending that isn't quite as happy as they were hoping for.
* Lelouch has at least two identities. Perhaps username_4 died, but <NAME> lived on? Or maybe Lelouch abandoned his name, but he's still alive, and the sources list him as dead because his identity as username_4 is dead? I can't really argue against the *possibility* of this, but there is no evidence supporting it at all. It doesn't really make sense in light of the C.C. bio either.
* While several people have confirmed that they believe Lelouch dies, director Taniguchi has been notably silent. Perhaps there was some disagreement among those in charge, and Taniguchi actually thinks Lelouch is alive? We can't ever know for certain what happened when they were writing the ending, but it seems reasonable to expect that if there were disagreements, Okouchi wouldn't have claimed that there were none, and if the disagreements were major someone else probably would have spoken up.
Again, I regard those as little more than conspiracy theories by disgruntled fans who think the ending is somehow "unfair". There is no evidence supporting either of them.
While the theories proposed in the other answer are good speculation, they just don't fit with facts released later. The consensus of the production team is that Lelouch is dead and not driving a cart at the end of Code Geass R2. The cart driver is probably just some random guy. If this seems unfair to you, then it's worth remembering that many other characters with far fewer crimes died in the series, so in some sense it's poetic justice for Lelouch to also die. And the interviews with everyone including the director do confirm that in dying, he was successful at his goal of starting the world down a better path.
Again, this seems to be something people view religiously. I'm not claiming that the speculations that Lelouch survives are bad in-universe, but there's simply no evidence for them either from the producers and a lot of evidence to the contrary, so the better answer in this case is that **Lelouch is dead.**
Upvotes: 7 [selected_answer]<issue_comment>username_3: Well, actually, if you're going to offer that the official records pronounced him dead. I'd like to counter by saying during the show, after freya was launched by suzaku, the official records pronounced both nunnally and sayoko dead, and we know what happened there.
I know it was to prevent spoilers for the show, but still. Unless there's another season that adds on to it, we really can't definitively prove whether Lelouch is either dead or alive. There's just too much circumstantial evidence that he is alive, yet more solid evidence plus motive to say that he is dead.
It's inconclusive, really, but as a placeholder I think seeing him as passed on would be appropriate for now.
Upvotes: 1 <issue_comment>username_4: Lelouch is officially confirmed dead
------------------------------------
Over the past 10 years the creators of the show have repeatedly explained that Lelouch is truly dead. This was done in interviews, articles, tweets, live commentary, the official guide book, the remade epilogue (from 2009) where they dropped the misunderstood hay cart scene and replaced it with C.C. explicitly narrating to the audience that Lelouch is dead, etc. There's a [Reddit post](https://www.reddit.com/user/GeassedbyLelouch/comments/8hklfr/evaluating_code_theory_main_body_index/) where all these official statements can be found. This post also scrutinizes the fan theory which assumes that Lelouch has the code and shows where and how the anime itself contradicts the theory's points.
I will give a few examples from that linked post, for a full overview follow the link above.
The interviews from Animage 10 ([October](https://matome.naver.jp/odai/2143969576830905201/2143972453355434003), Okouchi) and 11 ([November](https://matome.naver.jp/odai/2143969576830905201/2143972453355433703), Fukuyama) from 2008.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In these interviews they explain that the death of Lelouch was a matter of principle for them (their aesthetics, their psychology, etc.), it was a matter of redemption and salvation in the eyes of Lelouch and Lelouch found peace dying for the gentler world his sister wanted.
>
> **Okouchi**: *"(...) That end is to Lelouch and to Suzaku both the punishment and the salvation at the same time. It's also connected to the words Lelouch said at the beginning: "Utte ii no wa utareru kakugo no aru yatsu dake da." The person who gave the punishment was punished themselves and if you want to get the salvation, give the salvation first. Of course it's also the same with Lelouch's decision to accepts the geass (wish), because he geassed many people, as he himself has said in the show. [He refers to the last episode when Lelouch says what the people of the world wish for]"*
>
>
> **Animage**: *"So this was the end, but was Lelouch happy?"*
>
> **Okouchi**: *"I think that the show had a happy ending, not a bad ending. Lelouch and C.C. talks about it in season 1 episode 7 - just living a life is meaningless. Lelouch saved his beloved sister and managed to create a kind world in his own way. His life wasn't meaningless. That's why in the end he is smiling."*
>
>
> **Animage**: *"So you accept the end of the show?"*
>
> **Fukuyama**: *"I think that before he reached that final scene, Lelouch had many possibilities to choose from. But he understood very well what he had done and had to pay the price for that. Suzaku choose to live as Zero and was awarded the opportunity to pay for his sins by this choice. And Lelouch got his salvation by choosing not the happiness of living on but to sacrifice his own life to create the situation for the world to move forward. If you think about his character, I don't think he would still be himself, if he chose other end."*
>
>
>
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/pUAvd.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/gRnIb.jpg)
(Additional pictures of these interviews can be found [here](https://i.stack.imgur.com/EN8sj.jpg) and in the [compilation post](https://www.reddit.com/user/GeassedbyLelouch/comments/8hklfr/evaluating_code_theory_main_body_index/) of all official statements)
The interviews from Continue ([Vol.42](https://www.retromags.com/galleryimgs/monthly_2017_10/small.59f05755697f9_ContinueVol.42(October2008).jpg.f9ec262ce76541c515b3ea32e65060c8.jpg)).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this interview they confirm that the decision to kill Lelouch was a unanimous one, the entire show staff agreed:
>
> **Continue**: *Was there a dispute among the staff members regarding the ending?*
>
> **Okouchi**: *No. It was decided fairly naturally. During the "Code Geass" script meetings, there are many cases in which there were a number of disputes, but there were barely any when it came to the scripts for (the previous series's) episode 25 and the final episode. I think everyone felt the same when it came to the end of the character that is Lelouch.*
>
>
>
They confirm that Lelouch's death was one of the first things they decided for the show and that his death was a matter of principle to them ("their sense of aesthetics"). This statement was confirmed yet again 10 years later in the tweets (see below).
>
> **Continue**: *Why were you so bold as to choose this ending when the viewers might see it as a Bad End?*
>
> **Okouchi**: *Bold... yes, we were so bold as to chose this ending. Perhaps the show that is "Code Geass" ending up this way was decided the moment Director Taniguchi and I teamed up. I suppose you can call it our sense of aesthetics, or perhaps a part of our psychological makeup.*
>
>
>
The following statements explain how they foreshadowed Lelouch's death from the very first episode with his famous line "The only ones allowed to kill are those who are willing to be killed" (exact phrazing will depend on the subs you used, of course):
>
> **Continue**: *Still, isn't it possible that defeating the wise ruler Schneizel, the person who was supposed to have brought order to the world, might lead to some [viewers] interpreting it as a Bad End?*
>
> **Okouchi**: *That's true. There are probably a lot of people who think of it as a Bad End, a tragedy, considering the protagonist's, Lelouch's end as well. However, Lelouch says in the first episode: "Only those prepared to be shot are allowed to pull the trigger themselves." If you were to think of that as his pride, then I think his getting shot (killed) in the end was a logical end. Of course, I understand that not all of the viewers will accept this ending. There were people who wanted a happier ending, after all.*
>
>
>
It is important to note that part of this last statement was often misinterpreted by code theorists as him saying that people could see it as open ended. It is clear from his words that this is NOT what he is saying. He said that he understands that some people will see Lelouch's death as a bad ending and that some people wanted a happy ending. Basically, what he is saying is that people are free to interpret Lelouch's death as happy or sad, but Lelouch's death itself was never open for interpretation, it was set in stone as the rest of the article clearly demonstrates. The ending was never meant to be ambiguous.
It is also important to note the Lelouch's death can only be interpreted as a true, final death and not something temporary until the code revives him, especially the foreshadowing of his death doesn't make sense if we see it as temporary death or faked death, but the later tweets will make this even clearer, so I will go in further depth there. (see tweets below)
The tweets
----------
As part of the 10 year Code Geass anniversary, the creators of the show started a series of tweets titled "Geass Memories" in which they reminiscence about the days when they made the show, shedding light on the production process, the way certain decisions were made, etc. Of particular relevance here are the Geass Memories 77-83:
>
> "Before I started writing the story of a person called Lelouch, I confirmed with Taniguchi-director something. That thing was that **the end of Lelouch will be death**."
>
> "At least he is aware of his sins and pays for them with **his death**."
>
> "This man called Lelouch will pay for his sins by **his death**. The story follows him till he finally make this decision."
>
> "Probably this Lelouch we see in the first episode of the series wouldn't **choose death**. He would try something to avoid it. He couldn't **die**, for Nunnally as well. But we see him changed in the last episode."
>
>
>
[Link to the tweets on his twitter account.](https://twitter.com/ichirou_o/status/998739675895365633)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/FklXz.png)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/H503o.png)
It is important to note that "death" here can only be interpreted as a "true, final death" and not some temporary death until the code revives him, just as was the case earlier with the explained foreshadowing. This is easily made obvious by replacing the word "death" by "death for 2 minutes" or "faked death". "Lelouch pays for his sins by being dead for 2 minutes". "Only those who are willing to fake their deaths are allowed to kill". "Lelouch being dead for 2 minutes was part of our aesthetics".
It is immediately obvious that their words simply make no sense if we assume Lelouch had the code and was immortal. The old argument "they said he's dead but not that he stayed dead" with which code theorists try to dismiss the Word of God simply does not hold water at all. (Also, who ever says something as unnatural as "he died and after that he stayed dead"?)
The Official Guide Book
-----------------------
The official guide book explicitly states several times that Lelouch is dead. To avoid too much repetition I will only copy the explanation of the Zero Requiem:
>
> "For those two who bear the heavy sin known as killing their fathers, they share the belief that they can forgive each other by imposing the greatest punishments on themselves. **Death for Lelouch** who wishes for a tomorrow with his sister, **life for Suzaku** who wishes to atone for his sins through death."
>
>
>
This explains that Zero Requiem was not only about creating a better world, but also simultaneously redemption for both Lelouch and Suzaku for their sins (as explained above in the tweets). Lelouch eternally boinking C.C. is NOT redemption, as much as some fans might want that. It is undeniably clear here that Lelouch is truly dead.
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/yrgj1.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/E8EFf.jpg)
The New Epilogue (2009)
-----------------------
Unlike the fake fan made epilogue which is going around on the internet (and which I will not give more attention by linking it!) where there's a fan edit which zooms in on the face of the driver and reveals it to be Lelouch, there is actually a real, new epilogue which can be found on the official release of the Zero Requiem Blu-ray.
While the fake ending was nowhere to be found except on shady YouTube channels from people who were pushing their code theory narrative (If it were real how did THEY get it? And why ONLY they?), the real new epilogue can be found all over the web where you watch anime (look for Zero Requiem movie).
Unlike the fake one where the image quality massively dropped during the edited zoom, the TV logo suddenly disappears, and there is no music during the edit, the real new epilogue has brand new, high quality art, music and **narration by C.C.'s voice actress**.
In this new epilogue, the often misunderstood hay cart scene is dropped and replaced by a new scene where C.C. talks to the audience and explicitly explains that Lelouch is dead, that she mourns his death, but that she finds comfort in the thought that he died achieving his goals.
>
> *"A young man dies. He had the power to change the world, to create a new order. The world feared him, hated him. But, I know he died with a smile on his face. Only those who have realized their dream will truly understand that feeling of utter contentment. So, this is not a tragedy. And whenever I feel sad or cry at night, I sing a song. A song of man's making. Zero Requiem!"*
>
>
>
You can watch the new epilogue [here](https://streamable.com/d8dji).
Nunnally Did NOT See Memories
-----------------------------
As if all the official statements about his death aren't enough, the creators even explicitly denied some of the core points of code theory, such as Nunnally seeing memories/code visions.
In [Mook Animedia](http://www.cdjapan.co.jp/product/NEOBK-65848) (28 January 2009, p.89-90) there was an interview (see 2 pictures below) which explicitly denied that Nunnally was seeing visions or that those images had anything to do with codes or geasses.
>
> Q: *"How did Nunnally managed to realize Lelouch true intention, when she touched his hand at the end?"*
>
>
> Staff member K: *"The way Nunnally can tell that someone is lying, just like she was able to tell that Lohmeyer was lying to her, is that she can feel the hand of the person she is talking to is sweating or lightly trembling. It's nothing like Geass or some special ability like that."*
>
>
> Staff member Y: *"Yes. So, she simply came to conclusion [Lelouch was lying] by herself, because of this ability."*
>
>
> Staff member K: *"She is Marianne's daughter and Lelouch's little sister. Two months have passed since that defeat of Schneizel and for this two months she's been wondering constantly about what had happened, like "why it happened?" and so on. So when she touched Lelouch's hand at the end she felt that he is calm, she put the two and two together and realized the truth. Of course, we know that in anime, it's hard to explain things like that, but yeah, please accept it like this kind of romantic idea we had."*
>
>
>
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/mJmrU.jpg)
[](https://i.stack.imgur.com/HNmru.jpg)
Codes Do NOT Need To Be Activated
---------------------------------
The release of the Code Geass movies was accompanied by various Code Geass related events, some of these were, obviously, live interviews and live commentary. The following are excerpts from commentaries given by Okouchi, Taniguchi-producer and two other producers when they talked about the scene where Lelouch attempted to geass his father. This was documented by people who were present at these events. To protect the privacy of these people, I have removed all information which would allow them to be identified.
This [tweet](https://i.stack.imgur.com/wIQYa.jpg) reads パパんにギアス掛けるシーンも、「これギアス掛かってないのに死んだふりするんだよ」「息子を驚かせようと」「ルルーシュくんかわいそう」「これ一番ショックなタイミング計ってるよね」「絶対笑いこらえてるよ」って色々言われてて笑った。
Translation: About that scene Lelouch geass his dad I laughed because they said like "He isn't geassed, just pretends he dies!" " He tries to surprise his son!" "Poor Lelouch" "He tries to choose the most shocking timing, doesn't he" "I'm sure he tries hard not to laugh"
This [blog post](https://i.stack.imgur.com/uqtjW.jpg) talks about various Code Geass things, the relevant part is highlighted in red and reads コウジロウさん「この人、ギアスかかってない じゃないですか。よく我慢してますよね。こことか 絶対笑い堪えてますよ」
Translation: "He isn't under an influence form Geass, is he? He's good with pretending, sure. I'm sure he tries his hardest not to laugh right now."
The creators are saying Charles is immune to geass already, that means Charles already had an "active" code, which means that codes are never not active and thus don't need activating.
Conclusion
----------
There's is a mountain of official statements which all repeat the same thing **Lelouch is truly dead**.
When you put all these things next to each other, you see this conclusion is inescapable, consistent and waterproof.
Some people will argue that the fact that a sequel is coming with Lelouch as the officially confirmed protagonist is proof that he's alive/immortal, but it is, in fact, the exact opposite. The official name of this sequel is "Lelouch of the **Resurrection"**. when you combine all the official statement about him being truly dead, him returning for the sequel and the sequel's name, it is obvious that Lelouch will start as dead in the sequel and will somehow be resurrected, he'll return from the grave somehow.
Some people will argue that the sequel is an AU (alternate universe) which somehow must mean Lelouch is immortal. It is indeed true that the sequel will follow the movies and not the original series, and these movies have 1 BIG difference with the original series which makes it an AU. However, this change does not directly involve Lelouch, Zero Requiem still happens, Lelouch still dies, so as far as the movies show, all of the statements about R2 also apply to the sequel.
This answer was based on a [compilation post](https://www.reddit.com/user/GeassedbyLelouch/comments/8hklfr/evaluating_code_theory_main_body_index/) from reddit. The compilation post consists of 2 parts, part 1 gathers all the official statements, part 2 shows how the anime itself contradicts code theory because code theory violates the rules established by the anime's canon.
That post is very long (even linger than this answer), but it is thorough and complete, and an absolute MUST READ for all Code Geass fans.
Upvotes: 3 |