13
  • why Hinduism SE is still in beta? Where is it lacking?

  • Minimally, what exactly should be improved to make it graduate.

  • 5
    User's attitude is the one which should be changed first of all. It is far from graduation if it goes in current state. – Sarvabhouma Apr 13 '18 at 7:11
  • 3
  • 3
    Every beta community is expected to generate good quality Q/A consistently! If we talk about stats at area51 after the QPD, %Answered may be area to focus. – Paṇḍyā Apr 13 '18 at 11:53
  • 3
    @SK I agree. The clique is more interested in satisfying their ego by trying to unnecessarily intellectually dominating others (mostly newbies) which they have usually learnt (learnt imitation) from high traffic graduated sites. – Mr. Sigma. Apr 13 '18 at 18:15
  • @Pandya Hinduism is very vast. Why you moderators ask high authority for flexibility in %Answered. Many questions can't be easily answered here owing to large number of scriptures, theories etc – Mr. Sigma. Apr 13 '18 at 18:18
  • 1
    @Rohit. Yes, we don't ask for high priority, I'm just suggesting the possible improvement according to the stats at Area51. Btw, in fact I also believe that criteria should be different for different categories of site. – Paṇḍyā Apr 14 '18 at 0:26
  • 1
    @Rohit. When you want to be a graduated site, you should also behave like a graduated site. If our site standard is not like other high traffic graduated site, then it is not eligible for graduation. Isn't it? – Sarvabhouma Apr 14 '18 at 2:56
  • 4
    @SK I have almost never seen in you in chat. If you want sense of humour or friendship between users you can join the users on Hinduism Chat. – Sarvabhouma Apr 14 '18 at 2:57
  • 3
    I disagree. You are kicking a little bird from the nest to fly high. She will die as her wings are not enough powerful to fly. Better to be somewhat flexible till we are in beta. Stable Traffic (not considering latest) is very less. If you start censoring remaining traffic then I will need to download this site's material from archive soon. I'm not suggesting to allow irrelevant things but suggesting to be little flexible. There is huge difference between graduates & beta. – Mr. Sigma. Apr 14 '18 at 4:14
  • 1
    @SK Yet, the community here is less toxic than other SE sites. This has easily become my favorite SE because of the flexibility. Having said that, there are certainly people here who still vote based on personal opinion and preferences rather than whether or not the information is well supported. :/ – Rubellite Yakṣī Apr 22 '18 at 18:46
5

A site will be considered for graduation if it is according to the standards of Stack Exchange. It will not be considered if we as a site only think that we are eligible for graduation. There are some basic standards regarding this. One of them is Area 51 stats. Even our site requested for graduation based on those stats only.

I will say the same what I said in my comment.

User's attitude should be changed if the site needs to get graduated.

Now, a user has majorly four activities on the site.

  1. Asking questions

  2. Answering questions

  3. Voting on the questions and answers.

  4. Editing.

    1.Asking questions

    Users are not actively participating in asking questions on the main site. Questions are coming from some group of users. Sometimes 3 or 4 per day. With the efforts of those users, the site has achieved the rate of ~13 questions per day. I appreciate those users who are trying to keep the site stats in proper way but getting questions from only some users is not a good sign. A site should get questions from all the users. When the user has stopped asking questions the number has gone down to 7. So, this shows that there is not much activity from all the users. A site which is requesting for graduation should not be dependent on three or four users for its activity.

    2.Answering questions.

    Just the same case like the question. We need answers from different perspective and different users. We are not getting answers from wide range of users. We should welcome users who attempt to answer honestly. No new user knows how to answer in the first attempt. If you just look at the first answer I wrote, you will be laughing at the way it was presented. So, we should welcome new users and their answers which give useful information. User should post answers when they have information which partially answers the question. Community will help to gather sources which enhance the quality anyway.

    3.Voting on the questions and answers.

    Voting are an important aspect which encourages and discourages the user who is posting questions and answers. It is like fuel to the site. But the fact is we are getting way less votes. I have noticed that there are very less votes. Below is a graph of votes cast in the month of March 2018.

    google site analytics page

    As you can see, there were very less votes recorded. There were only 79 votes per day on the average. This shows that voters are not active on the site. There are already many posts written by various users to create awareness but it looks like there is not a very great result. Voting on the questions and answers provides encouragement to the user for writing more good posts. Especially, voting on new and active posts is important which gets the post to Hot Network Questions which brings the views across the network. This also increases visits from other users. So, voting is another field we are lacking and improved.

    4.Editing

    Editing the posts to bring them to good shape is also an important aspect which enhances the site quality. This is where the users are least interested except one or two here and there. Bad formatting and bad grammar of the posts make the even good posts unreadable and misunderstanding the original content. This is where the work of an editor becomes necessary. A good edit which improves the title, body and grammar of the post also attract upvotes to the post. Now what is a good edit is said in the help center. So, all the edits done should be following the requirements in the help center. Also remember editing is selfless. That gives no reputation if you are over 2k reputation. People should welcome constructive edits on their posts and should not comment on the editors who are giving their time for the site even when you know the editors get nothing from the edits except satisfaction (I must admit this is from my personal experience. Some people ask me to stop editing for various reasons one of them being losing upvotes after the edits. None of the edits were against the help center. When you are enjoying upvotes after the edits, then you should not complain vote cancellations of the edits). Appreciate the editors as you do voters, questioners and answerers. There is very much less love on the editors on this site when compared to other sites. So, this should be improved too.

Some honourable mentions are tags. Tags are also becoming a reason to damage the friendly atmosphere among the users. There are some edit wars going on the main site due to some tags. People have favorite tags (these are not favorite tags according to Stack Exchange, these are personal favorite). They add these tags to each and every questions and say some tags are useless on the site. The problem is people take tags literally. If someone edits out , in the question, a feeling is falsely spread that the editor is opposite to scriptures. If a user is voting to close question about a pure Sanskrit language question, then a feeling is spread that the "user is against Sanskrit language which is language of Vedas. So, this user is against Vedas which are core of Hinduism. So, this user is against Hinduism." In reality, the user only edited out a tag. Tags should be seen as tag and nothing more else. They don't represent scriptures or Vedas literally. Addition or removal of the tag will be done and should be done according to its relevance to the question and nothing else. There is no necessity of saying the user has agenda on the site based on an edit. The situation gets worse when the user makes personal remarks on the editor. So, looking at the tags as tags and not taking them literally is what we should implement in this aspect. We should not show bias in tags. They should be used based on the relevance to the question.

Judging a user's comment or answer based on the faith they follow:

This is the most important aspect where we should improve. When a user posts a question, we should judge them purely on the content he provides. Looking at the personal background or religious back ground is unimportant. Every person on the site has some favorite God in their life. If there is voting based on the back ground of the user, that will be leading to the bias. This is also one of my personal experiences on the site. When I posted a question about Adi Shannkaracharya, who is a great Advaita philospher and acharya, some user said

this is disgusting behavior. knowing this poster's sectarian affiliation, why are they creating controversy in something that doesn't concern them?

This site is not created for a sect or a faith and it is Hinduism on whole. There is no rule that a person following a path of Vaishnavism should not question about Shaivism and a person following a path of absolute non dualism should not post a question about dualism. Such questions should be seen as questions asking some information or a query but not as an attack of one user on the other sect he doesn't follow. Having said that there is an etiquette on asking questions questioning respected acharyas and popular faiths. Such etiquette must be followed. Such questions should not be seen as propanganda every time. If you observe a continuous targetting of a sect or a faith, you can ask the user to be polite and limit the question or answer to that point only. This is a point we have to improve Focus on the post not the user.

If you read the comments under the question, you will get a basic idea that there is definitely not a very healthy atmosphere among the users because there are a couple of comments mentioning "sectarian clique" and "ruling clique". When this very idea that there are "some users" who are responsible for the roadblock of graduation is given up and realises that every user irrespective of reputation, privileges and sect are apart of the community which is moderating the site, then we can start following the points I have stated above.

Last but not the least, Quality is important.

Note: These are the points I have noticed from my experience on the site for two years. There have been users who have been active and also contributed in various ways since the beginning of the site. I also request them to give their perspective why the site is not graduating and where it can be improved.

  • 1
    Appreciable explanation! – Paṇḍyā Apr 24 '18 at 12:46
  • 2
    You seem to be discussing some of the personal issues that you had with others but that's not within the scope of the answer.. For e.g someone recently bashing you for ur edits is also indirectly mentioned here.. .so do u mean to suggest that if people stop objecting to ur edits we will be granted graduation?.. how are u so sure on that? I think the people who will grant graduation are the only persons suitable to this answer this one not anyone else.. all others can just speculate. – Rickross Apr 24 '18 at 17:13
  • 2
    This board will not graduate as long as posts like hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/8031/… are considered to be about Hinduism – S K Apr 24 '18 at 19:17
  • 1
    @Rickross It is discussing my personal experiences not issues. Someone didn't bash, they asked. The irony here is they made personal comments and sectarian comments on me. When you see other graduated SE sites, all the editors are appreciated unlike our site. Not stop objecting my edits, objecting constructive edits which are inline with help center. Many people unnecessarily did it. When a question is posted on a meta. there is no rule that persons who are concerned with graduation should answer, all the members of the community should take active participation. – Sarvabhouma Apr 25 '18 at 2:26
  • 2
    @SK Don't say a question is off-topic because you don't like it. It is a Hinduism related question. – Sarvabhouma Apr 25 '18 at 2:27
  • 1
    @Rickross It is in the scope of the answer. As I said in the answer, you're now looking into the background of the answer instead of what I said in the answer. Yesterday bashing of me you mentioned is about tags which made silly and baseless comments. Now, it gave rise to some heated environment. That's also not healthy environment among the users. So, that is another point which can be added. Is it not true that some people love scripture tag as literally scripture and call other tags useless? So, I am saying they should be seen as tags and nothing else. – Sarvabhouma Apr 25 '18 at 2:31
  • 1
    @Rickross "I think the people who will grant graduation are the only persons suitable to this answer this one not anyone else.. all others can just speculate" According to that theory, if every answer to this question is speculation and opinion, then why to ask the question at first place? If it is asked, why is it not closed as POB? why request them to graduate on meta, mods can directly ask in TL. Isn't it? – Sarvabhouma Apr 25 '18 at 6:02
-1

This site will never graduate as long as members of a tiny sect (in numbers) make hateful posts such as below and other fellow sectarians defend it.

Does Shiva tell his devotees to offer human sacrifice?

  • 1
    Let us not alienate a sect based on their population or number. Don't bring division in the site. Don't see users from sectarian point of view. Hateful post means asking if revered Acharya has made hateful comments on God like one you asked recently and making caste remarks on them every time. It brings division in the site. – Sarvabhouma Apr 28 '18 at 16:15

You must log in to answer this question.

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