14

Our scope is already broad enough, not to mention not really well defined. The lack of questions is probably just due to a low user count. So no, we don't want to broaden the scope. What we need to do is better define our scope, not increase it.


14

No. Not until many situations make this necessary. The solutions should be presented in text form. They may be accompanied by a video link but if we enable that feature we would invite answers that are just the video with no or too little information in the text. That makes the stuff hard to search through.


13

This evolution is very typical for a beta site — see What is the typical growth pattern of a new beta site in the first few weeks? on the main Stack Exchange meta. During the first couple of weeks, lots of people come with the questions they'd kept pent up for months. Then a bunch of them drift away, others stay around waiting for questions to answer. ...


8

Based on this Meta SE answer, all affiliate links should be flagged as spam. If you do see one, please flag it and the moderator team will take care of it.


6

Those aren't inline quotes; please don't use them as quotes! That's code formatting, and it should only be used for code and will likely be edited out of your posts if you (ab)use it in a different way. (By the way, that is indeed covered in the Help Center, albeit only in the "comment formatting" section. It's also covered in the small drop-down on the ...


6

I think this calls for a tag synonym: adhesive ← glue Many people will naturally type "glue" as a tag name. But adhesive is the broader term and should be the master tag, I think.


5

The tag has been removed from the post, and will disappear shortly.


5

I don't think this would be good. As you mentioned in the comment above, people might upvote just because an answer sounds good, and a lot of times that is the case. But if someone thinks that an answer sounds far fetched, but works, they can just comment. Also, if we did have a "validate" button people would probably use that the same as they would use an ...


5

Suppose you get the limit removed. What would you do? You'll upvote every good post (good in your opinion) and downvote every bad post (again, in your opinion). But what would you do if there is the limit. Before upvoting every good post, you'll think about the limit and choose the best posts of those good. And downvote the worst posts of all bad posts. That ...


4

I see the reasoning behind this question, but I do believe the answer is not to change Lifehacks SE into "Everyday Living" SE. As stated in some of the more recent discussion here on meta, I believe the response should rather be to focus on raising traffic and looking at how to get the quality questions we really want, which does require a lifehack. In ...


2

Short answer - No! The whole point of voting is that it is private and voters make up their own mind. This has been discussed at length, for example: Should we prevent some close votes without further explanation? Why do people just downvote without giving reason? To give just two. It is the process of voting and commenting that defines this and every ...


2

As Shog points out in this Meta SE answer (linked to in the comment on the question here): this has now been implemented, though not quite as-requested Basically, you'll be able to produce the effect you want by going to the review queue. I do encourage you to read through the post in full, though.


1

Criterion for voting The criterion for both voting down and closing question are a personal opinion related to how well posts relate to the scope of Lifehacks. If you personally feel it is doesn't match the scope, you either vote it down or vote to close it. As a courtesy to the OP you should include a comment when it isn't obvious why you downvote. The ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible