0
$\begingroup$

This question may be subjective enough and complex enough that it is more appropriate as a real question to the meta, not to chat. Plus it's not about the simple mechanisms of the site.

I want to track how a certain kind of airspace was designated on US sectional charts over time (basically since 1945).

I want to ask something like this:

a) what is the earliest date we can find when marking "A" first appeared on US sectional charts? Specify geographic title of a chart that bore such a marking on this date.

b) what is the earliest date we can find when marking "B" first appeared instead of the previous marking "A" on US sectional charts? Specify geographic title of a chart that bore such a marking on this date.

And so on through about 7 parts.

After posting I'll post an answer stating the earliest dates I have at present.

One way for others to answer would be to copy my answer and edit it to reflect any refinement (earlier dates) they are able to provide. A later user could do the same for their answer. And on and so forth.

Obviously this site also allows anyone to edit a previous answer outright, but that might get messy in this particular case. (Imagine two users making an answer at the same time.)

I'll require that the geographic title of the relevant chart be included in the answer so we can keep track of what's what and it doesn't just turn into one great big mess.

Obviously w/ this sort of question the goal is to increase knowledge and not have someone hope that their particular answer will get the most "upvotes".

So, would that be kosher?

OR should I just ask each part as an individual unique question?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ PS apologies about all those questions to the meta about the mechanisms of the site. Will take them to chat next time. $\endgroup$ – quiet flyer Oct 15 '18 at 19:25
2
$\begingroup$

No, multiple-part questions like that just don't fit the site's format well. Let's say someone posts an answer to all seven parts. I check out their answer and three parts are good but four parts are bad. Do I upvote or downvote? Then someone posts another answer that doesn't answer the parts that were already well-answered, with a better answer to two of the bad parts but worse to the other two. Which post should rise to the top? How will someone coming to the site find the best answer to all your questions, when it's split between a bunch of posts with unpredictable votes? It would be as bad as an old-fashioned forum with good answers spread among several pages of "replies" and no way to tell which is which.

This isn't Reddit: votes aren't just a way to encourage answers. They also allow the good answers to rise to the top. This only works when there's one answer per answer post.

To be honest, I think if you post seven similar questions you'd also be downvoted because it looks very lazy, like you're flooding the site for your own purposes. Better would be to generalise the question: ask one question about how to find out when and where was the first use of a particular marking.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I don't understand the Reddit reference, I don't know what that is. Thank you for answering though. I don't care who thinks I'm doing what for my own purposes; it is not possible to gather the information I am seeking in a single question.(absent multiple parts) $\endgroup$ – quiet flyer Oct 16 '18 at 2:23
  • $\begingroup$ Anyway, I will probably try to figure out how to pare it down to the two questions I am most interested in and ask those individually (and simultaneously). Please reply if this seems not a good practice. Thank you for your answer to my question. $\endgroup$ – quiet flyer Oct 16 '18 at 2:59

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .