On current content of the site

Question

Feels like we have a problem with content: to many questions are either 1) homework or 2) soft-questions/intuition/terminology — whatever but not a "well-defined math question that actually have a specific answer". Just reading the list of 15 active questions: homework, homework, soft-question, homework, soft-question, soft-question, asking for a definition — almost one half.

I wish we can change the situation.

Update. The main point is not that we have to close more question (although we probably should) but that now we don't have enough questions that should be, I believe, main content of the site: mathematical non-homework well-defined questions having a specific answer.

Update2. There's nothing wrong with soft-question (I certainly don't want to ban them from the site — in fact, I upvoted at least some of them) in general (and I apologize if I somehow offended posters of these questions). But it's well-known that stackexchange engine is better suited to question having particular answer than to informal-discussion-type questions (although latter type is probably more important in [learning] mathematics). And the site can be healthy only if most of the questions are of former type — as we can see e.g. on MathOverflow.

Answer 1

I'd agree that the website needs more specific math questions. However, I myself don't have a problem with questions such as the one on EGA. But admittedly that was mine, so let me list a few more which I think are definitely appropriate:

Why should I care about fields of positive characteristic?

Is there an atlas of algebraic groups?

Why are superalgebras so important?

Why? These are reasonable questions which can be answered objectively (i.e., aren't about one's Fields Medal predictions) and involve some mathematical sophistication, and would be quite reasonable for a student to ask. The fact that they don't have a mathematically precise answer does not mean that they do not have an answer. I would imagine that these would be tolerated (if with some grumbling) on MO, so I think we should accept them here.

What I'm less happy with are the questions that are obviously homework-y. I myself am in favor of closing them and answering in the comments. Until we have more high rep users, that may not happen though.

The point is that it's hard to ask questions of the SE ideal: namely, as in the MO FAQ, of the form "Is every regular doodad a widget?" It's especially hard for students who aren't necessarily engaged in research and still are learning the fundamentals of their fields (which may not be mathematics, but presumably will be closely related). The questions of this form will likely be homework-y or not particularly interesting ("Is every group of prime order abelian?"). Though admittedly I may be incorrectly projecting my own limitations on others. This is why I support greater lenience on this website than is generally practiced on MO.

Since this website is intended to cater to undergraduate students, I support questions that have an answer even if that answer is a brief explanation. Note that a "brief explanation" might be standard mathematical lore but not necessarily easily findable (or existent) on standard sources like Wikipedia. These are the kinds of things that one can absorb well with the help of conversations. As an example, I'm going to mention the fact that a lot of properties in basic algebraic geometry are constructible---I was fully aware of Chevalley's theorem, but someone had to explain me some examples before I actually appreciated it and could make any connections.

In a sense, this answer is an expansion of what Matt E said in the comments above.

Answer 2

Lets consider some of the questions you have listed.

This question is asking for what the question means, not for an answer, so it is valid in my book.

Whether this question question is a soft question is debatable. Regardless, it is a world away from: "Who is your favourite mathematican"/"What is your favourite maths joke", ect.

I don't think that it is an issue if we end up with a large number of definitional type questions. I can understand why you might object to them - after all can't these simply be looked up in a maths book or Wikipedia? For a start, maths books tend to assume that you have read the previous chapters, which means trying to understand a definition often requires recursively chasing down definitions and notations. In many cases, there is an intuitive explanation that makes the definition clearer. Additionally, while Wikipedia is usually quite reliable for definitions, but sometimes not, it is much more often difficult to understand. In summary, not all definitions are equal.

That being said, dealing with homework questions is an issue that will only increase in importance.

Answer 3

This should be a comment in response to the earlier comment (Old joke: Professor: "Does anyone have questions?" Student: "I don't understand that step in the proof." Professor: "It's a statement, not a question. Does anyone have questions?"), but I don't have enough rep points, so I'll answer instead.

It isn't even a joke. It's an actual decription of the sort of thing that goes on. It happened to me. The prof was walking around the class. I put my hand up. He came over. I wanted to ask him about a certain problem and I began by saying "I'm stuck" and at that he immediately interjected "just think about it" and walked off to speak to the next person without saying another word or waiting for me to ask the question, leaving me with extreme irritation at his attitude. I mean I'm paying for this education, and this prof behaves like this.

Like I said it's not a joke. It's true life.