Timeline for Should pseudoscience questions be closed on sight?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 24, 2015 at 16:53 | answer | added | user2821 | timeline score: 4 | |
| Mar 22, 2015 at 8:58 | answer | added | Gimelist | timeline score: 7 | |
| Mar 5, 2015 at 21:59 | answer | added | user889 | timeline score: 2 | |
| Feb 11, 2015 at 6:41 | answer | added | Fred | timeline score: 5 | |
| Feb 10, 2015 at 19:30 | comment | added | user889 | I fully support this idea. Let there be no question or uncertainty as to how these type of questions are to be received on the site. | |
| Feb 10, 2015 at 12:45 | comment | added | casey Mod | @Fred That is up to the closers, but ideally they would say that and link to this meta post. | |
| Feb 10, 2015 at 12:20 | comment | added | Fred | If such questions were to be closed immediately would it be done with or without an explanatory note such as "This question has been closed because it no scientific basis" | |
| Feb 10, 2015 at 9:56 | comment | added | Semidiurnal Simon | I suggest migrating to skeptics.se, where the question is suitable for that site (i.e. not a dupe there, has a clear cited claim that can be addressed, etc - they have quite stringent criteria). Otherwise, close it. (EDIT: Er, if the Skeptics.se people are happy for us to do that....) | |
| Feb 9, 2015 at 20:10 | history | asked | caseyMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |