-12

Especially given AFAICT professionals are welcome to answer on this site.

The example below says "If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question." despite that already does fit, since the help centre has no rule barring questions having answers that require professionals.

The case is https://archive.is/9nSBu#selection-757.0-781.1

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason: "The question is out of scope for this site. The answer to this question requires either advice from Wolfram support or the services of a professional consultant." – Kuba, blochwave, MarcoB, Pickett, Öskå If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

| |
  • 10
    "the services of a professional consultant." refers to work, as in "job", as in "you may need to pay for it". Also, this site isn't the best place to post questions that can only be answered by WR representatives. – Dr. belisarius Aug 5 '15 at 0:52
  • 10
    The full discussion, proposals, and voting for the "off-topic" close reasons is here. I think this will answer many of your questions about this procedure and why it is as it is. You will note that several of the reasons are not as crystal-clear as we had intended them because we have been forced to condense them into only three catch-all options. The text surrounding the given reasons is also not capable of being changed, as I have mentioned before, so you can expect some incongruity. – Oleksandr R. Aug 5 '15 at 1:18
  • 3
    It really should go without saying, but: none of the WRI employees actively participating here are acting in an official capacity. (They're not getting paid for interacting with us either, so we really show our appreciation when they interact.) – J. M.'s technical difficulties♦ Aug 5 '15 at 5:03
  • 5
    What Oleksandr said. Please also read the close reason carefully: there are two possible reasons: EITHER (1) only Wolfram Support can answer - this is the one relevant to the question you refer to; OR (2) what you want is so large in scope that you will probably have to pay someone to do it, because it's too much to expect someone to do for free in their spare time. Your question met (1) but not (2). As noted in other comments, we had to shoehorn multiple close reasons together because we had to fit them into three "reasons". – Verbeia Aug 5 '15 at 5:12
  • 13
    You have been playing word games and splitting hairs about close reasons for nine meta questions now. The least you could do is actually read those close reasons properly. To be honest, you are wearing out everyone's patience. You might wish to take a break from the site to cool off. – Verbeia Aug 5 '15 at 5:14
  • @belisarius "this site isn't the best place to post questions that can only be answered by WR representatives." Since you evidently don't know the answer to the question cited, how can you know that the question can only be answered by WR representatives? – ChrisJJ Aug 5 '15 at 23:41
  • @ Verbeia "(1) only Wolfram Support can answer - ... Your question met (1)" if you don't know the answer to the question, what makes you think no-one else (non-WS) here does? – ChrisJJ Aug 5 '15 at 23:44
  • 6
    @ChrisJJ You've already used up my attention allowance. Don't expect answers from me for some time. – Dr. belisarius Aug 6 '15 at 0:01
  • 6
    @ChrisJJ - I make that assessment based on the fact that it took a comment from a Wolfram employee (ilian, it says he is a Wolfram employee on his profile to answer it. Quite frankly, your behaviour on this site is becoming increasingly counterproductive. It is also disrespectful of the other users who are giving their time for free here. – Verbeia Aug 6 '15 at 2:05
20

The question you gave is a good example of a question that cannot be adequately answered by the community. The reason this was closed was adequately answered for you in the commments section:

As we have told you in other questions, WPC is a beta product and only supports a subset of what's available in Mathematica. The documentation you refer to is for Mathematica if it doesn't say anything else (as it does for some functions.

And

till the valid documentation is released this question requires WRI support to be answer(ed).

Consequently, it was decided this could not be reasonably answered here and required WRI support to be answered.

| |
  • Thanks, but you're addressing a different aspect of the example given, and not the question: What's the basis for the claim that having an answer requiring advice from a professional makes a question off-topic? – ChrisJJ Aug 5 '15 at 23:45
  • @ChrisJJ see here and here. It is supposed to apply to questions that we think one would normally have to pay someone to answer. – Oleksandr R. Aug 6 '15 at 10:24
  • @Oleksandr No answer seen there. – ChrisJJ Nov 18 '15 at 21:19

You must log in to answer this question.

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