As I've described previously, I keep trying to write blog posts. Arguing for the use of StackExchange by researchers. In my most recent post, I argue StackExchange is superior to Research Gate and Quora. Similar to last time, I could use some suggestions on improving it before I start publicizing it. Is the order of the arguments acceptable? In what way could they be improved?

| |
  • 3
    Thanks for your efforts. I didn't go through it in detail, but the first big thing I saw is that a title claiming that x and y are horrible is, imho, the worst possible way to start. You should start with something positive, e.g. SE is great or something. Criticizing stuff is in fact easy, positively approaching stuff and claiming why we are better (instead of x and y are worse) is more difficult, but a more inviting and a more positive way to start. – AliceD Mar 25 '18 at 14:43
  • @AliceD that's an excellent insightful point. Do you think it would be better to title it: "The Importance of Purposefulness: Why StackExchange is Superior to Quora and Research Gate" – Seanny123 Mar 25 '18 at 15:06
  • Or maybe "The Importance of Purpose: Why StackExchange Thrives where Quora and Research Gate Fail" – Seanny123 Mar 25 '18 at 15:12
  • Or finally "Guided by Purpose: Why StackExchange Thrives where Quora and Research Gate Fail" – Seanny123 Mar 25 '18 at 15:13
  • 1
    I would simply go with: "Why StackExchange is Superior to Quora and Research Gate" ... the 'purpose' part at a glance does not tell me anything (I have yet to read the article.) You could further qualify 'superior'. In some regards (Q&A), I definitely agree, but ResearchGate for example has features built-in which Stack Exchange does not even attempt to support. As they say, do not compare apples with oranges. ;p – Steven Jeuris Mar 28 '18 at 9:12
  • 1
    Read through it. As a long-term StackExchange user, of course I agree. In short: "StackExchange is good at Q&A because it is fully optimized for Q&A and does not do more. ResearchGate (and to a lesser degree Quora) have Q&A tagged on as part of a different overarching purpose. Thus, "Why StackExchange is better at Q&A than Quora and Research Gate". – Steven Jeuris Mar 28 '18 at 9:22
  • Haven't gone through it yet, but you have to realize all sites serve their own purpose. Quora is broad and low-threshold (for the masses). Research Gate is from what I can see totally unmoderated, but the good thing there is that it is de-anonymized, in the sense that researchers can be traced back to their papers and affiliation. SE user are often anonymous, with its specific drawbacks. The one thing that I personally like of SE, is its moderation. Not because I'm a mod, but the community-based moderation is imo great, leaving only acute stuff to the mods to handle (spam, hate messages etc) – AliceD Apr 3 '18 at 7:39
  • @AliceD I do address this in the end. How broad and low threshold sites inevitably wallow in poor questions which drives away people willing to commit time/effort/wisdom. Basically, my thesis is websites work when they have a clearly defined purpose and tools helping this purpose. – Seanny123 Apr 3 '18 at 15:46

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .