# Can we stop this "I dont know the answer therefore I downvote" thing?

There are a few questions, e.g. this and this that I feel are getting downvotes for no reasons beside requiring a real expertise to answer them. They may not be phrased perfectly, probably because coming from new users, (yet there are tons of users eager to fix even the slightest error in other peoples post, so that should be no problem) but to someone with the right knowledge they look absolutely reasonable and answerable. So WHY downvote them?

• Can we stop this "I can read the mind of anonymous voters on the internet" thing?
– user5664
Sep 13 '17 at 16:41
• Yes we can stop it by leaving a comment on downvote Sep 14 '17 at 7:11
• @Caterpillaraoz Apparently that doesn't stop it.. As I said in my answer, both questions already had comments explaining what's wrong, yet you still choose to assume ulterior motives for the people who downvoted. Sep 14 '17 at 7:46
• IMHO downvote should be possible only after comment. Anyway, a few people decide to downvote and look for "what was wrong" and some others provided nice, informative and rather complete answers without indulging in nipticking. I tend to prefer the second kind of approach, it fills aviation.se wit valuable content and doesnt scare off newbies, but to each his own.... Sep 14 '17 at 8:06
• Encouraging comments for downvotes has been discussed at length on Meta.
– fooot Mod
Sep 14 '17 at 15:53

The questions you're pointing two have one downvote each. I downvoted one of them. I didn't see the other until following your link, but I think in both cases the existing comments captured the problems with the questions. In your first example, the question is based on a false premise: "why don't we have x" - we do have x. I can imagine a good answer to that question, giving a brief overview of helicopter auto-pilots, but I don't think the question is useful or interesting.

In the second example, the question doesn't explain what's missing from the questioner's understanding. Are they asking for the physical principles of IR fire detection, or how the detector interfaces with other avionics systems? It's really not possible to write a good answer without knowing that.

I don't think either question needs much domain expertise to answer. I don't think the problem is with the phrasing in either case: it's with the preparation that went into the questions, or lack thereof.

• "half-false" premise, FBW on hely is really behind the aircrafts one. Anyway probably the issue here is "what is a good question". Is one super formally-correct that can have exact and precise answers or is one that can stem really interesting and constructive answers? If it the former yes, bad question, if the latter, great question :-) Sep 14 '17 at 7:13

In your second question, I did not down-vote but I did vote to close. My reason is that the question (at the time I saw it) was not related to aviation; it might be better on Engineering.SE or similar.

The question also lacks focus (analogy: "Explain how a compiler work?"). The scope of an answer can scale from a few paragraphs to an entire chapter in a book. From these perspectives, I can understand why it was down-voted.

My advise is not to take down-votes too personally; rather take them as a signal that something can be improved. This community is pretty helpful and usually someone will pass by and try to edit a question to improve it, but not everyone does that.

• "Explain how a compiler work?" is a damn GREAT question! Anyway it is no personal issue, it is just deterring new users downvoting without explanation questions that can generate very interesting answers Sep 14 '17 at 7:16
• @Caterpillaraoz it is a great question in a knowledge perspective, but not a good fit for Stack Exchange. It can be a good question for the site after some editing. Sep 14 '17 at 13:03
• @ I did believe Stack exchange was also open for enthusiast and want-to-know-more... Sep 15 '17 at 6:57