I've observed a certain pattern of behavior a number of times on MSE over the years (to varying degrees), but I didn't find it discussed directly on here (although some related topics have been discussed), so I'm creating this thread to do so. I'm not linking directly to examples because I don't want to embarrass or offend anyone.
This is the behavior:
- A user, typically with limited mathematical experience, decides they want to self-study a particular math book (or other resource) without access to a teacher, tutor, etc. to help them. The book is too advanced for them at their current stage of learning, but they don't realize it (for example, they're dead set on learning category theory from Mac Lane but haven't yet mastered basic mathematical notation or concepts like function composition).
- The user, while repeatedly getting stuck trying to work through the book, posts question after question on MSE (sometimes one every few hours) seeking clarification about the most elementary statements in the book.
- The user, while attempting exercises in the book, posts question after question seeking verification of their "solutions" or "proofs" which often reflect misunderstanding of the most basic notation, concepts, etc. from the book and are sometimes totally incoherent.
- The user often engages in extended back and forth replies in response to comments or answers, seeking additional clarification or explanation, or posts new questions asking about these.
- If and when good answers are provided, the user may not upvote or accept them (and may not even recognize those features exist).
While I can understand and sympathize with someone turning to MSE for help in this situation, and while MSE is explicitly intended for learners of math at all levels and welcomes even basic questions, my feeling is that the above behavior constitutes an anti-pattern for use of the site for at least the following reasons:
- The questions asked are often highly specific to the user's personal circumstance in (1), and very narrow in scope, therefore much less likely to be relevant to other users. This is often empirically evidenced by less engagement with the questions (fewer views, fewer upvotes, fewer answers, etc.).
- The questions often relate to topics that have been covered extensively on the site in some form, but because the questions are so specific and narrow they may not technically be duplicate. This pollutes the site with almost-but-not-quite duplicate content.
- The questions are more likely to attract comments and answers which are less valuable for precisely the same reasons: they're highly specific to the user's concerns and less likely to be a useful "answer for the ages".
My feeling is also that it's important to evaluate these types of questions in the broader context of the anti-pattern because the above points are true even if each individual question, when considered in isolation, otherwise meets quality guidelines and is not in violation of site policies. For example, the user may have provided context, background, motivation, definitions (possibly including unnecessary screenshots of the book), their own thoughts or work, etc. but is still polluting the site. Also, the volume is relevant here: posting a question like this once in a while is not a concern, but repeatedly posting many questions like this is.
In these situations, I've sometimes suggested that the user seek a different book or a tutor, but that's usually not well received. I'd rather be able to link to a policy discouraging this general behavior, but that would only make sense if the community agrees.
What do folks think? Is this pattern of behavior acceptable or not? If not, do the existing policies and moderation mechanisms sufficiently address it or not? (Alternatively, am I just an elitist jerk who is being unhelpful to those in need, or am I a hero without a cape?)
Related: