A methods point on Reading order rather than a substantive one: if the comparison is not like for like, the difference you are measuring is the difference in method.
23 likes 17d
Start Here · Welcome · continued
Reading order for a first week here, and what to skip until later — what changed since posts 31–60
This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1.
h.brandt, post #1: Reading order for a first week here, and what to skip until later — what changed since Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. What changes if the standard account of Reading order is wrong? I ask because I have been treating it as settled and I noticed this week that I could not say why.… Go to post
Joining rather than answering. I have read the orientation set twice and the thing that finally made it click was realising the documentation pages are the destination and topics are how they get written.
This has been discussed before and I could not find the thread, so, again.
The moderation log is public. Every staff action is logged with the rule cited and the reasoning stated. If you get moderated, the explanation is there and it is worth reading even if you disagree with the action.
It is a small point and it changes the answer, which is an awkward combination.
1 like 16d
Following this. I have the same question and no better information than the first post.
17 likes 16d
e.ferreira, post #4: Fair, and the limits you put on it are the part I will remember. Go to post
Marking my uncertainty on Reading order explicitly. I am confident about the direction, much less confident about the size, and not confident at all that it generalises past the case in the first post.
The tag pages are usually a better entry point than the categories for a first read. A tag cuts across categories, so following one shows you how the same subject is treated by the analytical people and the practical people at once.
I have left out the parts I could not verify.
0 likes 15d
d.achebe, post #22: The compound and evidence pages are updated regularly and they are worth reading when you are new. They answer the meta questions like "do we have data on this" and "what do the trials actually show" before you ask them. Go to post
The Lounge is a real category rather than a dumping ground. The sourcing rule still applies there, which surprises people, but the register is looser and nobody minds a digression.
I have kept the units in throughout, for the obvious reason.
h.hutchings, post #32: Joining rather than answering. I have read the orientation set twice and the thing that finally made it click was realising the documentation pages are the destination and topics are how they get written. This has been discussed before and I could not find the thread, so, again. Go to post
Reading the guidelines before you post is genuinely worth the twenty minutes. Not because you will break one, but because the rules explain why the place reads the way it does.
The moderation log is public. Every staff action is logged with the rule cited and the reasoning stated. If you get moderated, the explanation is there and it is worth reading even if you disagree with the action.
8 likes 14d
ca.vermeulen, post #20: The Lounge is a real category rather than a dumping ground. The sourcing rule still applies there, which surprises people, but the register is looser and nobody minds a digression. If anyone can point at the primary source I would be grateful. Go to post
A note on scope: what I am saying about Reading order applies to the case in the first post and I would not extend it further without checking.
Agreed on all of that, and I have nothing to add to it.
0 likes 13d
On the reading order question specifically: start with the how-to-ask materials in this category, then read the one to three subcategories where your main questions live. The rest will be discoverable by tag once you understand the structure.
Anyone who has looked at this more carefully, please correct the record.
13 likes 13d
Adding a null result on Reading order. I looked, carefully, and found nothing, and null results deserve posting precisely because they never are.
4 likes 13d
endpoint_line, post #17: Distinguishing three things in the Reading order discussion that keep getting used interchangeably: the observation, the proposed mechanism, and the recommendation that gets attached to both. Go to post
Reading order would be much easier to settle if anyone reported the denominator. Almost nobody reports the denominator.
se.okafor, post #7: Worth separating Reading order as a question about the compound from Reading order as a question about the documentation. They get answered by different people and only one of them is answerable here. Go to post
The Lounge is a real category rather than a dumping ground. The sourcing rule still applies there, which surprises people, but the register is looser and nobody minds a digression.
I would be interested in a counterexample if anyone has one.
h.krastev, post #24: That is clearer than the version I had in my head. Thank you. Go to post
The moderation log is public. Every staff action is logged with the rule cited and the reasoning stated. If you get moderated, the explanation is there and it is worth reading even if you disagree with the action.
A single observation, in a thread that deserves better than single observations.
Agreed on Reading order, with one qualification that I think matters. The reasoning holds for the case as described. Change the starting assumption and it does not, and the starting assumption is the part nobody states.
28 likes 11d
Introducing yourself is fine and requires no question. Post in this subcategory, describe the context that matters for why you are here, and lurk for a bit before posting technical questions. That order works well.
0 likes 11d
Staff post. Actions described here are recorded in the public moderation log and may be challenged in Meta.
Welcome. Two practical notes from staff. Your first few posts are rate-limited, which is an anti-spam measure and not a comment on you, and it lifts on its own. If you hit it and have something to add, edit the post you already made.
Adding the caveat now so it does not have to be extracted later.
5 likes 11d
DKwiatkowski, post #21: The documentation on Reading order is better than this thread and I say that as someone who has posted in the thread. Go to post
Nothing to add, except that this is the answer I would give if asked.
The Lounge is a real category rather than a dumping ground. The sourcing rule still applies there, which surprises people, but the register is looser and nobody minds a digression.
The variance between people here is larger than the effect being discussed.
0 likes 10d
Taking Reading order seriously for a moment rather than deflecting: the honest position is that the community has observations and no controlled comparison, and those two things support very different sentences.
0 likes 10d
Marked solutions are the site's way of saying that someone asked a good question and someone else gave an answer that actually worked. It is not a competition and it does not appear on your record — it is just how the site learns which topics stay useful six months later.
Not the whole picture, but the part of it I can speak to.
8 likes 10d
endpoint_line, post #17: Distinguishing three things in the Reading order discussion that keep getting used interchangeably: the observation, the proposed mechanism, and the recommendation that gets attached to both. Go to post
The tag pages are usually a better entry point than the categories for a first read. A tag cuts across categories, so following one shows you how the same subject is treated by the analytical people and the practical people at once.
Speaking for myself and not for anyone else who has posted here.
Collapsed as off-topic by two members at trust level 3 or above
That is a cleaner way of putting what I was circling around.
The Lounge is a real category rather than a dumping ground. The sourcing rule still applies there, which surprises people, but the register is looser and nobody minds a digression.
One more caveat and then I will stop qualifying: the sample selected itself.
29 likes 9d