Why wasn't this an acceptable question?

Question

https://bicycles.stackexchange.com/questions/1717/notable-century-ride-names-closed

I asked this for several reasons.

1. I do some traveling and try to work cycling into my trips when possible.
2. I enjoy group rides, meeting people and seeing different parts of the country by bike.
3. The names of centuries (or other group rides) are often indicative of the ride characteristics and thus useful in determining interest.
4. I find it useful to be able to ask others about first hand experience.
5. The names are also often indicative of the 'fun' factor of a ride.

I'm a cyclist. I asked an answerable question that has useful answers both for me and potentially others. I asked the question on a Q&A site about cycling and the question is shot down. Huh?

I'm told that the question is more suited to forums. Ok. Then why the question regarding for/against bike helmets? That question was apparently carefully phrased to pass muster. Yet, since reading and participating in usenet forums since the '90's, I've seen dozens of various incarnations of that question. So, what's the utility in rehashing for/against bike helmets?

I personally think that a site on the subject of bicycling needs to be 'looser' than that of the stackoverflow mothership. Why? Computer programming is constantly evolving and mutating. Cycling, not so much. I don't think it will take too long to cover most of the essential cycling questions, and once that ground is covered the questions will start to trickle in.

Anyway, that's my 2 cents. It's late.

One other thing. Neilfein said on the question comment section, "I'd love to try and help you come up with a way to ask this question that fits the site. " So, you're saying that I can ask the exact same question, but just need to have the way I phrase it approved?

Answer 1

This question is addressing a question that's going to be crucial to whether this site lives or dies - and I've already said as much elsewhere.

Over time the questions will start to get more and more specific. The 'big' general questions have all be been asked and the only way to not duplicate content is going to be esoterica.

I can't see anything particularly wrong with this kind of question, perhaps it is a bit general, but it's a question, albeit with subjective answers, a reasonable candidate for a CW. Perhaps it could be more localised - "I'm going to be in $REGION next year, what rides might you recommend?" but that's a different question.

Answer 2

If this kind of question isn't suitable for bicycles.stackexchange.com then I think the site is doomed (or at least, metaphorically in a ditch in the rain trying to mend a puncture).

There aren't really all that many technical, objective questions about bicycles. Bicycles are pretty simple machines really, and once the pool of questions about number of gears, frame material, crank length, handlebar setup, etc have been asked and answered, then what's left for the site? If there's going to be any ongoing asking and answering, it's going to be about riding bicycles, and that's going to involve the personal circumstances of the asker.

Since the site is in beta and, to be honest, isn't actually overflowing with interesting questions, the site moderators might want to think about what kinds of question are going to keep the site alive and healthy in the future.

If a question is too personal, then moderators do have the power to edit the question so that it invites general contributions as well as specific ones. Similarly, if a question is too vague, moderators can edit it to be more specific, or invite the asker to clarify or improve the question. In the circumstances, this might be more productive than closing everything down.

Answer 3

To me it seems like a perfectly reasonable question. Something leading to a nice overview of 100 mile rides. Nothing too subjective about it either. A ride fits the description (100 miles) or not. If it does, list it, if it doesn't... don't.

Maybe someone links the global inventory of 100 mile rides. If that exists, then all other answers to the question are redundant, but it is still nice to have a link to it in answer to an obvious question on this site.

I think the response here should have been "please rephrase to make the question more clear" rather than "close".

Answer 4

One other thing. Neilfein said on the question comment section, "I'd love to try and help you come up with a way to ask this question that fits the site. " So, you're saying that I can ask the exact same question, but just need to have the way I phrase it approved?

I never said "approved". And it's more than the way you phrase a question, it's finding a question that has a single answer that's the hard part. We do have several questions here that have multiple answers, perhaps we should start being a little harder on these as they're asked.

If you're having trouble coming up with a way to ask the question that works in the Stack Exchange Q&A format, perhaps the community can help you identify what the core of your question is that's answerable. Alternately, if you don't care for this idea, just re-post the question in a different form, or edit the existing one and ask for it it be re-opened. "Closed" is an unfortunate term on Stack Exchange, it implies that the question is gone for all time; it isn't.