-7

Questions:

How may I eliminate a gap appearing in a surface drawn with ParametricPlot3D?

How may I avoid ParametricPlot3D clipping?

Both have been characterised as off-topic on the grounds of having a "simple mistake such as a trivial syntax error, incorrect capitalization, spelling mistake, or other typographical error". Not only is this characterisation false (no simple mistake has been made), but a simple mistake does not make the question off-topic.

Is this just a case of people carelessly applying boiler-plate objection text without checking? Or what?

| |
  • 4
    The message is "This question arises due to a simple mistake such as a trivial syntax error, incorrect capitalization, spelling mistake, or other typographical error and is unlikely to help any future visitors, or else it is easily found in the documentation." Questions are off-topic that can be answered by simple reference to the documentation. The fact that these reasons are combined into one is simply because we are limited in the number of close reasons we can have, but the end result is the same: the question is trivial or too localized and will not be useful for anyone else. – Oleksandr R. Jul 29 '15 at 14:52
  • 5
    It is also worth noting that the characterization of the closed question as specifically "off-topic" is due to the StackExchange implementation of closing, which it is not in our power to change. In the past such questions would have been listed as having been closed due to their "too localized" nature, rather than being called "off-topic". I suggest that you just ignore the suggestion that it is off-topic, if it bothers you, because all close reasons now include this. The real reason is given in the text below that. – Oleksandr R. Jul 29 '15 at 15:01
  • "Questions are off-topic that can be answered by simple reference to the documentation." What's your source? The rules AFAICS make clear what is off-topic and do not include answerable by reference to the documentation. – ChrisJJ Jul 29 '15 at 20:07
  • "It is also worth noting that the characterization of the closed question as specifically "off-topic" is due to the StackExchange implementation of closing, which it is not in our power to change." I think it is your power to change the fact you applied a close option for off-topic to a question you wanted to close by was not off-topic. "I suggest that you just ignore the suggestion that it is off-topic, if it bothers you". I suggest you not falsely mark questions off-topic. – ChrisJJ Jul 29 '15 at 20:09
  • 3
    The source is community consensus. In my opinion you have been dealt with very patiently so far given that all of your questions are due to your own incompetence. If I were you, I would not push your luck by displaying a bad attitude as well, otherwise you might not find such goodwill forthcoming any more. On a related note, there is absolutely no reason for you to stubbornly tag all of your questions wolfram-programming-cloud when they have nothing to do with it. The fact you are using it is irrelevant. If I happen to be eating when I ask a question, I don't tag it sandwich, do I? – Oleksandr R. Jul 29 '15 at 20:24
  • 1
    By the way, I did not personally vote to close any of your questions. I even upvoted you for one of them. Please do not make me regret it. – Oleksandr R. Jul 29 '15 at 20:27
  • "The source is community consensus" Do note that this is not a concensus strong enough to reflected in the rules. "there is absolutely no reason for you to stubbornly tag all of your questions wolfram-programming-cloud when they have nothing to do with it." What makes you think my questions have nothing to do with WPC? Some WL functions have undocumented behaviour differences across platforms, WPC in particular. That's good enough reason to tag with platform, surely? – ChrisJJ Jul 29 '15 at 20:31
  • That would be an extremely good reason to use the tag, if you were using any of those features. The "rules" are just some text that we (as a community) decided on to put on that page. It is a procedural requirement of a StackExchange site graduating. I'm very sorry that we forgot to mention that if people can't be bothered to read the documentation, that they can expect to have their questions closed, or indeed to anticipate the future changes StackExchange would make to the closing mechanism to add the words "off-topic" whether or not they really apply. – Oleksandr R. Jul 29 '15 at 20:32
  • I know no way to identify which features have undocumented platform dependent behaviour, whilst using only one platform - WPC . If you do know a way, please say. – ChrisJJ Jul 29 '15 at 20:37
  • "The "rules" are just some text that we (as a community) decided on to put on that page." Sad to hear people aren't taking the rules content a bit more seriously. "I'm very sorry that we forgot to mention that if people can't be bothered to read the documentation" I can be bothered to read the documentation, and did. The answer though present was hidden. – ChrisJJ Jul 29 '15 at 20:37
  • "or indeed to anticipate the future changes StackExchange would make to the closing mechanism" Anticipate?? Why not just update the rules accordingly? – ChrisJJ Jul 29 '15 at 20:40
  • 3
    There is also a limit to the amount of text that the rules page can contain. You are free to draft a new page if you think that you can do better in the available space and will be able to get people to agree on it. And while you suggest that there are undocumented behavioral differences between platforms (which is undoubtedly true), the problems you encounter are entirely due to your failure to read and understand the documentation and apply documented options. If you have no idea what causes the behavior you see and whether it is reproducible, it is better not to wildly guess. – Oleksandr R. Jul 29 '15 at 20:48
  • "the problems you encounter are entirely due to your failure to read and understand the documentation and apply documented options." You are mistaken. e.g. ControllerInformation's failure on WPC is undocumented. " If you have no idea what causes the behavior you see and whether it is reproducible, it is better not to wildly guess" I am not guessing -- hence that I am providing the information that my question is about Wolfram Programming Cloud. To omit that information out would require the reader to guess, and make the question less good. – ChrisJJ Jul 29 '15 at 20:53
  • 5
    You have never asked any question about ControllerInformation. Additonally, right from the documentation: "ControllerInformation works only in a notebook front end." Plus, it is blatantly obvious that such functions will not work in the Cloud, given that they have as their subject the hardware connected to the client computer. Anyway, I am tired of this now. It is not a productive way to spend my evening. – Oleksandr R. Jul 29 '15 at 20:59
  • 2
    @ChrisJJ to be blunt, this is not Wolfram Community, and the overlap is surprisingly small. So, for the purposes of this site, you have not asked about it. Please, I understand you're frustrated, but let's keep it civil. – rcollyer Jul 29 '15 at 21:20
11

As noted by Oleksandr above the off-topic label is is catch-all for any of the site-defined close reasons or Other if used. Please reference:

Oleksandr also notes that the chosen close reason includes easily found in the documentation which is a rather subjective measure, and it is sometimes used to close questions that seem too easy or show lack of effort.

Unfortunately (in my opinion) people often mark recent questions as easily found in the documentation which once were answered, rather than marking the question as a duplicate which is the correct action for several reasons:

  • It directs the user to existing questions and (hopefully) answers
  • It creates a search entry point to find the existing Q&A
  • It helps to indicate the relative frequency with which a question is asked. High frequency questions may be tagged with and may justify writing a canonical answer or inclusion in the pitfalls list.

@ChrisJJ You seem to misunderstand. Although in the case of your questions duplicate is a better designation, there are valid reasons to close questions. Each site can specify some of the more common ones. No matter what these are the Stack Exchange software labels all of them as off-topic. So for example we have determined that being "a simple mistake or ... easily found in the documentation" is a valid reason to close a question; this is forced under the category of "off-topic" by the Stack Exchange software, even if the question is clearly about Mathematica.

Related questions that I think you should read:

e.g. "Having a question put on hold is neither a disgrace nor a punishment. It is simply a matter site house-keeping."

| |
  • "As noted by Oleksandr above the off-topic label is is catch-all for any of the site-defined close reasons" Sorry, but that does not accord with the rules. Off-topic == off-topic. – ChrisJJ Jul 29 '15 at 20:11
  • @ChrisJJ Pardon me, what rules? I am just telling you how it is, and I find it confusing too. – Mr.Wizard♦ Jul 29 '15 at 20:13
  • the rules "What topics can I ask about here?" mathematica.stackexchange.com/help/on-topic . If those are not the rules referred to in the closure notice "If this question can be reworded to fit the rules", what is? – ChrisJJ Jul 29 '15 at 23:00
  • @ChrisJJ From your additional questions I figured that out, and I edited that page to specifically mention the custom close reasons. I hope that you find the rules more in line with the practiced reality now. Thanks for highlighting this discrepancy. – Mr.Wizard♦ Jul 29 '15 at 23:02

You must log in to answer this question.

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