Timeline for Is the lack of a narrow scope problematic for this site?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 11, 2015 at 1:28 | history | edited | Pobrecita | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited title
|
| Dec 12, 2014 at 22:37 | answer | added | J. Musser | timeline score: 7 | |
| Dec 12, 2014 at 14:51 | comment | added | RichardBernards | @ZachSaucier indeed... But before the scope is clear, discussing the narrowing of the scope is very inefficient... | |
| Dec 12, 2014 at 14:50 | comment | added | Zach Saucier | @RichardBernards That's what we're deciding in other meta questions, particularly What is a lifehack? | |
| Dec 12, 2014 at 14:48 | comment | added | RichardBernards | Do we know what the scope is? @JamesJenkins seems to think some posts fall out of scope... But I think we first need to know what the scope is, before we can set its boundaries... | |
| Dec 12, 2014 at 14:25 | comment | added | Zach Saucier | Our scope must be decided before we move out of beta. Deciding our scope doesn't assure getting moved out of beta though | |
| Dec 12, 2014 at 14:20 | history | edited | fredley | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited title
|
| Dec 12, 2014 at 14:20 | comment | added | fredley | I don't think it's to do with being too narrow/broad, I think it's about having the scope clearly defined. | |
| Dec 12, 2014 at 14:14 | history | asked | James Jenkins | CC BY-SA 3.0 |