Context: A recent neuroscience proposal got shot down as a duplicate of Cognitive Science.
This proposal apparently was created by a group of experts:
This was a concerted effort across multiple institutions established by top practitioners in the field to create a much needed venue to exchange expertise and technical knowledge between students and researchers.
They were told questions which could be asked on their proposed site could find a place at Cognitive Sciences:
Bring your questions there. The claim is that "we already created your site!"
This is true, neuroscience questions are very much on topic here! However, historically, to differentiate our site from others like Biology and Stack Overflow, to some degree it was agreed that "when questions do not pertain to the mind or behavior, they are off topic here". Unsurprisingly, the people behind the Area51 Neuroscience proposal are upset, since many such questions they would like to ask on their site are being closed here. A latest example, also demonstrating this is an ongoing discussion, was posted by Petr, of which I was made aware about the Community team.
First of all, we need to initiate a discussion with the people behind this proposal; Robin Kramer already took the first steps to this end some time ago.
Clearly, this will involve being more open to more technical questions. If this brings along with it a group of experts, I see no reason not to do so, given this is high up on our list of currently ongoing efforts.
I therefore suggest to loosen the 'off-topic' close votes for neuroscience questions in an effort to reach out to this community. I have informed them about this (and this ongoing discussion) on the Area51 proposal, and will invite them to join in on the discussion of scope on our site.
has how the brain process X been studied beforewhere do you think it would get better answers? I also made a meta for it: cogsci.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2302/…