[Foad Zamani]

No, I have a question and I want you to guide me!

[Jared Greathouse]

Ummmm why is this thread not a sticky topic at the very top of the forum (e.g., like the Stata conference posts/wishlist are)? This (the first post, at least) would help new users a lot, and I've never seen this thread before.
Is there someone who could do this? Maybe one of the more senior contributors would have some insight? Nick Cox Leonardo Guizzetti Clyde Schechter It may even make sense to make an example thread that's sticky that walks through this, which gives an example of how to ask questions. You know, how to use dataex, what to do when you've confidential data (not just saying "do x", actually showing real examples of what questions we respond well to). I mean, we'd have to do a little thinking of what kinda examples to include, but I think it would be quite useful anyways.

For what it's worth, I've often suggested a particular YouTube video to new users when I'm too lazy to go into detail on why the question they've asked isn't well posed (whether this is a good one, we can discuss).

One suggestion I would have is to even make answering basic stuff about Statalist mandatory. I'm not kidding, before asking a question, people should have to answer stuff like "Why is using dataex a useful feature for SL?". Make the quiz multiple choice even, something, people should have to demonstrate some level of knowledge (not of Stata, of the forum in general) before asking questions. It would allow us to at least play on the same playing field when asking and responding to questions. Make getting a 100 mandatory. I mean I'm still learning a lot about Stata, but I don't think there's anything special about me in this regard, I still give my best effort to give reproducible examples and completely contextualized code.

[Weiwen Ng]

No, I have a question and I want you to guide me!

If you were posting this as a parody, it didn’t quite come through. This is a minor risk with communicating on the internet. We can use emojis or similar indicators to show that we were being sarcastic.

if you meant this seriously, please post as a new question. And remember that we don’t work for you - we are your peers, volunteering our time.

[Leonardo Guizzetti]

Ummmm why is this thread not a sticky topic at the very top of the forum (e.g., like the Stata conference posts/wishlist are)? This (the first post, at least) would help new users a lot, and I've never seen this thread before.
Is there someone who could do this? Maybe one of the more senior contributors would have some insight? Nick Cox Leonardo Guizzetti Clyde Schechter It may even make sense to make an example thread that's sticky that walks through this, which gives an example of how to ask questions. You know, how to use dataex, what to do when you've confidential data (not just saying "do x", actually showing real examples of what questions we respond well to). I mean, we'd have to do a little thinking of what kinda examples to include, but I think it would be quite useful anyways.

For what it's worth, I've often suggested a particular YouTube video to new users when I'm too lazy to go into detail on why the question they've asked isn't well posed (whether this is a good one, we can discuss).

One suggestion I would have is to even make answering basic stuff about Statalist mandatory. I'm not kidding, before asking a question, people should have to answer stuff like "Why is using dataex a useful feature for SL?". Make the quiz multiple choice even, something, people should have to demonstrate some level of knowledge (not of Stata, of the forum in general) before asking questions. It would allow us to at least play on the same playing field when asking and responding to questions. Make getting a 100 mandatory. I mean I'm still learning a lot about Stata, but I don't think there's anything special about me in this regard, I still give my best effort to give reproducible examples and completely contextualized code.

An example thread could be a good idea. Since as long as I've been a member there has always been a short description in preamble to making a post that, among other good advice, nudges the user to use -dataex- and to read the FAQ (albeit, it's called help). New users often choose to either read and disregard, or simply skip over, the advice posted. Perhaps this is also a language issue in some cases, too. I worry that this example thread would be skipped just as much as the advice already in place, but you never know. These issues are not unique to Statalist of course, a perusing of random threads over on StackOverflow or SAS communities reveal the usual: poorly described data without a usable data example; rushing to describe the problem without clear context; the X-Y problem; vague descriptions of problems or desired outcomes; and a handful of more veteran users suggesting helpful advice to pose a better question.

As for making threads sticky, only the Statalist admins have that ability and I imagine they might want some input on what gets "stuck" -- though there shouldn't be an issue with a New User Guide or similar.

I like the idea of a Captcha-type knowledge test before posts, but I'm not sure if that's even possible with the forum software, and I would not want experienced users to have to through that -- maybe if it could appear for users with <50 posts or something.

[Leonardo Guizzetti]

No, I have a question and I want you to guide me!

In addition to Weiwen Ng's excellent advice, you may get guidance on this forum, but please don't be pushy about. We have norms that we ask all users to follow. These are described in the FAQ. One of those norms is that new topics be posted as new questions with a descriptive title. This serves two purposes. The first is to easily identify what the topic of the thread is about, so interested users may view and comment if they have some knowledge about it. The second is to aid future users with searching who may have the same or similar question to what you have asked. By posting your question under an old thread with a completely different topic, you have limited the potential views your question could get and therefore limit your chances as getting help.

We strongly encourage new users to the read the FAQ and to include a reproducible data example (using -dataex-) with their question so that users can immediately take some test data and code into their Stata and, ideally, return tested code back to when demonstrating something. It also helps to understand the structure of your data, without ambiguity of an English description

[Nick Cox]

John Tukey reportedly was prone to emphasise that "People are different" whenever someone was surprised by different attitudes or behaviour in some social situation, although there can be no doubt that he was smart enough to realise that some times that maxim merely describes a problem and doesn't explain how to solve it.

This thread has started up again, by accident. I see no point in making it sticky, which wouldn't be fair treatment of anyone confused enough to post a question in what experienced Statalist members would consider to be quite the wrong place. As others explained, it is in your best interests that a thread gets advertised best to the people you want to read it.

Even people who are experienced on Statalist, and have a positive regard for it and a good understanding of how it best works, can disagree mildly on whether and how to change its protocols or its expectations. (Some people outside Statalist evidently want it to be something else, say a site for answering the question they should have asked, and they are doomed to disappointment or frustration, just as people trying to answer their questions can be disappointed or frustrated too.)

We should remember that we are all guests of StataCorp here, even though most of the time the company lets the forum be. I can't imagine StataCorp being positive about the idea that people must pass some kind of test or quiz to be able to ask questions at all. FWIW. I don't support any such idea myself.

The idea of an example (exemplary?) thread is more interesting and a little easier to imagine. Whether that might be a good example, or a bad example, who is going to write it, and whether posting yet more stuff for people to read is really a good idea: all seem to me to remain open.

Some people take potshots at the FAQ and I agree with them. Anyone who writes or collates an FAQ can have no idea what you most need to know or understand until you show that you don't know or understand it. Sorry about that. Next time I revise the FAQ I might see if what is now #12 should be moved up, because it seems to be most often ignored.

There are choices here. People with Stata questions can ask them in lots of places, but I know of no other place without some rules and/or at an absolute minimum some expectations about what is a fair question that should be answered. Stack Overflow and Reddit are examples of places with a different overall framework: for example, your question may be downvoted or even removed. Stack Overflow (more generally Stack Exchange) has a mass of detailed guidance about writing a question, which again is often ignored. Twitter and Facebook are different and some people seem to find it natural to ask specific technical questions or make specific technical tips on either. Many individuals have started blogs or other sites to showcase their work, but most of these seem to fade away quickly or to be less open to any question whatsoever.