Welcome to the staging ground for new communities! Each proposal has a description in the "Descriptions" category and a body of questions and answers in "Incubator Q&A". You can ask questions (and get answers, we hope!) right away, and start new proposals.

Are you here to participate in a specific proposal? Click on the proposal tag (with the dark outline) to see only posts about that proposal and not all of the others that are in progress. Tags are at the bottom of each post.

Post History

60%

+1 −0

Meta Scope discussion for Sports

There are two obvious ways to set the scope: Physical sports only, or anything competitive. Physical sports only: This would pretty much exclude all overlaps. You might miss out on some "came to d...

posted 5mo ago by matthewsnyder‭ · edited 5mo ago by matthewsnyder‭

Answer

#5: Post edited by

matthewsnyder‭ · 2024-07-07T20:53:01Z (5 months ago)

Copy Link

Raw

Markdown

There are two obvious ways to set the scope: Physical sports only, or anything competitive.
Physical sports only: This would pretty much exclude all overlaps. You might miss out on some "came to discuss competitive starcraft, stayed for the soccer questions" people. But if creating proposals continues to be easy, and the incubator stays as it is, I think most of these people can simply start their own proposal.
Everything competitive: This would include all overlaps that don't already have their own site. For example, if there was a "Chess" site like SO, chess questions are better sent there. You might miss out on some purists who like to complain that "X is not a real sport". But then again, those purists also complain about things like figure skating, so does it even matter? With this approach, there is also the question of excluding discussion about doing the sports as a hobby without regard to the competitive aspect.
I would say that it comes down to what seed content you (and other early users) are willing to contribute. After you amass say 100 questions, how many will actually be not about physical sports? If less than 5-10 you are better off going the narrow route.
For some specific overlaps:
* [Communities](https://proposals.codidact.com/posts/289913) can cover organizing sports leagues and clubs
* "Fitness" doesn't exist yet, but it's an obvious overlap. A lot of people exercise for health or fun, without ever caring about competition, even though all the exercises have corresponding sports. Many sportsmen tend to have fitness programs (eg. weightlifting) that supports their competitiveness in the sport.
* "Pets" doesn't exist, but maybe it's better to send all the animal stuff there, since the proposal is trying to exclude animal behavior for example. There's also things like care, feeding and veterinary care, where the "animal" aspect is more relevant than the "sport" aspect.
* [Shopping](https://proposals.codidact.com/posts/289770) can cover questions about equipment/gear, resources (like books or classes), sports paraphenelia, sports event tickets
* [Tabletop Games](https://proposals.codidact.com/posts/288796) can cover chess and other "table sports"
* [Video Games](https://proposals.codidact.com/posts/288625) can cover e-sports, competitive multiplayer, speedrunning
I tried to edit the proposal directly, but realized that I can't change some things without contradicting the scope, and I don't want to edit that. But turns out you can't revert edits (feel free to revert mine if you find a way), and copy pasting the text from the history breaks formatting. 🤷

There are two obvious ways to set the scope: Physical sports only, or anything competitive.
Physical sports only: This would pretty much exclude all overlaps. You might miss out on some "came to discuss competitive starcraft, stayed for the soccer questions" people. But if creating proposals continues to be easy, and the incubator stays as it is, I think most of these people can simply start their own proposal.
Everything competitive: This would include all overlaps that don't already have their own site. For example, if there was a "Chess" site like SO, chess questions are better sent there. You might miss out on some purists who like to complain that "X is not a real sport". But then again, those purists also complain about things like figure skating, so does it even matter? With this approach, there is also the question of excluding discussion about doing the sports as a hobby without regard to the competitive aspect.
I would say that it comes down to what seed content you (and other early users) are willing to contribute. After you amass say 100 questions, how many will actually be not about physical sports? If less than 5-10 you are better off going the narrow route.
For some specific overlaps:
* [Communities](https://proposals.codidact.com/posts/289913) can cover organizing sports leagues and clubs
* "Fitness" doesn't exist yet, but it's an obvious overlap. A lot of people exercise for health or fun, without ever caring about competition, even though all the exercises have corresponding sports. Many sportsmen tend to have fitness programs (eg. weightlifting) that supports their competitiveness in the sport.
* "Pets" doesn't exist, but maybe it's better to send all the animal stuff there, since the proposal is trying to exclude animal behavior for example. There's also things like care & feeding, where the "animal" aspect is more relevant than the "sport" aspect.
* [Shopping](https://proposals.codidact.com/posts/289770) can cover questions about equipment/gear, resources (like books or classes), sports paraphenelia, sports event tickets
* [Tabletop Games](https://proposals.codidact.com/posts/288796) can cover chess and other "table sports"
* [Video Games](https://proposals.codidact.com/posts/288625) can cover e-sports, competitive multiplayer, speedrunning
I tried to edit the proposal directly, but realized that I can't change some things without contradicting the scope, and I don't want to edit that. But turns out you can't revert edits (feel free to revert mine if you find a way), and copy pasting the text from the history breaks formatting. 🤷

#4: Post edited by

matthewsnyder‭ · 2024-07-07T20:51:45Z (5 months ago)

Copy Link

Raw

Markdown

There are two obvious ways to set the scope: Physical sports only, or anything competitive.
Physical sports only: This would pretty much exclude all overlaps. You might miss out on some "came to discuss competitive starcraft, stayed for the soccer questions" people. But if creating proposals continues to be easy, and the incubator stays as it is, I think most of these people can simply start their own proposal.
Everything competitive: This would include all overlaps that don't already have their own site. For example, if there was a "Chess" site like SO, chess questions are better sent there. You might miss out on some purists who like to complain that "X is not a real sport". But then again, those purists also complain about things like figure skating, so does it even matter? With this approach, there is also the question of excluding discussion about doing the sports as a hobby without regard to the competitive aspect.
I would say that it comes down to what seed content you (and other early users) are willing to contribute. After you amass say 100 questions, how many will actually be not about physical sports? If less than 5-10 you are better off going the narrow route.
For some specific overlaps:
* [Communities](https://proposals.codidact.com/posts/289913) can cover organizing sports leagues and clubs
* "Fitness" doesn't exist yet, but it's an obvious overlap. A lot of people exercise for health or fun, without ever caring about competition, even though all the exercises have corresponding sports. Many sportsmen tend to have fitness programs (eg. weightlifting) that supports their competitiveness in the sport.
* [Shopping](https://proposals.codidact.com/posts/289770) can cover questions about equipment/gear, resources (like books or classes), sports paraphenelia, sports event tickets
* [Tabletop Games](https://proposals.codidact.com/posts/288796) can cover chess and other "table sports"
* [Video Games](https://proposals.codidact.com/posts/288625) can cover e-sports, competitive multiplayer, speedrunning
I tried to edit the proposal directly, but realized that I can't change some things without contradicting the scope, and I don't want to edit that. But turns out you can't revert edits (feel free to revert mine if you find a way), and copy pasting the text from the history breaks formatting. 🤷

There are two obvious ways to set the scope: Physical sports only, or anything competitive.
Physical sports only: This would pretty much exclude all overlaps. You might miss out on some "came to discuss competitive starcraft, stayed for the soccer questions" people. But if creating proposals continues to be easy, and the incubator stays as it is, I think most of these people can simply start their own proposal.
Everything competitive: This would include all overlaps that don't already have their own site. For example, if there was a "Chess" site like SO, chess questions are better sent there. You might miss out on some purists who like to complain that "X is not a real sport". But then again, those purists also complain about things like figure skating, so does it even matter? With this approach, there is also the question of excluding discussion about doing the sports as a hobby without regard to the competitive aspect.
I would say that it comes down to what seed content you (and other early users) are willing to contribute. After you amass say 100 questions, how many will actually be not about physical sports? If less than 5-10 you are better off going the narrow route.
For some specific overlaps:
* [Communities](https://proposals.codidact.com/posts/289913) can cover organizing sports leagues and clubs
* "Fitness" doesn't exist yet, but it's an obvious overlap. A lot of people exercise for health or fun, without ever caring about competition, even though all the exercises have corresponding sports. Many sportsmen tend to have fitness programs (eg. weightlifting) that supports their competitiveness in the sport.
* "Pets" doesn't exist, but maybe it's better to send all the animal stuff there, since the proposal is trying to exclude animal behavior for example. There's also things like care, feeding and veterinary care, where the "animal" aspect is more relevant than the "sport" aspect.
* [Shopping](https://proposals.codidact.com/posts/289770) can cover questions about equipment/gear, resources (like books or classes), sports paraphenelia, sports event tickets
* [Tabletop Games](https://proposals.codidact.com/posts/288796) can cover chess and other "table sports"
* [Video Games](https://proposals.codidact.com/posts/288625) can cover e-sports, competitive multiplayer, speedrunning
I tried to edit the proposal directly, but realized that I can't change some things without contradicting the scope, and I don't want to edit that. But turns out you can't revert edits (feel free to revert mine if you find a way), and copy pasting the text from the history breaks formatting. 🤷

#3: Post edited by

matthewsnyder‭ · 2024-07-07T20:42:23Z (5 months ago)

Copy Link

Raw

Markdown

There are two obvious ways to set the scope: Physical sports only, or anything competitive.
Physical sports only: This would pretty much exclude all overlaps. You might miss out on some "came to discuss competitive starcraft, stayed for the soccer questions" people. But if creating proposals continues to be easy, and the incubator stays as it is, I think most of these people can simply start their own proposal.
Everything competitive: This would include all overlaps that don't already have their own site. For example, if there was a "Chess" site like SO, chess questions are better sent there. You might miss out on some purists who like to complain that "X is not a real sport". But then again, those purists also complain about things like figure skating, so does it even matter? With this approach, there is also the question of excluding discussion about doing the sports as a hobby without regard to the competitive aspect.
I would say that it comes down to what seed content you (and other early users) are willing to contribute. After you amass say 100 questions, how many will actually be not about physical sports? If less than 5-10 you are better off going the narrow route.
For specific overlaps, I'll go ahead and edit the proposal itself. However, on gear recommendations particularly, IMO it's better to allow it. A lot of discussion between people who play sports is gear talk, because the reality is that gear is a big factor. If a sports site bans gear talk that is IMO a big handicap, especially now that there's plenty of other places to talk about it.

There are two obvious ways to set the scope: Physical sports only, or anything competitive.
Physical sports only: This would pretty much exclude all overlaps. You might miss out on some "came to discuss competitive starcraft, stayed for the soccer questions" people. But if creating proposals continues to be easy, and the incubator stays as it is, I think most of these people can simply start their own proposal.
Everything competitive: This would include all overlaps that don't already have their own site. For example, if there was a "Chess" site like SO, chess questions are better sent there. You might miss out on some purists who like to complain that "X is not a real sport". But then again, those purists also complain about things like figure skating, so does it even matter? With this approach, there is also the question of excluding discussion about doing the sports as a hobby without regard to the competitive aspect.
I would say that it comes down to what seed content you (and other early users) are willing to contribute. After you amass say 100 questions, how many will actually be not about physical sports? If less than 5-10 you are better off going the narrow route.
For some specific overlaps:
* [Communities](https://proposals.codidact.com/posts/289913) can cover organizing sports leagues and clubs
* "Fitness" doesn't exist yet, but it's an obvious overlap. A lot of people exercise for health or fun, without ever caring about competition, even though all the exercises have corresponding sports. Many sportsmen tend to have fitness programs (eg. weightlifting) that supports their competitiveness in the sport.
* [Shopping](https://proposals.codidact.com/posts/289770) can cover questions about equipment/gear, resources (like books or classes), sports paraphenelia, sports event tickets
* [Tabletop Games](https://proposals.codidact.com/posts/288796) can cover chess and other "table sports"
* [Video Games](https://proposals.codidact.com/posts/288625) can cover e-sports, competitive multiplayer, speedrunning
I tried to edit the proposal directly, but realized that I can't change some things without contradicting the scope, and I don't want to edit that. But turns out you can't revert edits (feel free to revert mine if you find a way), and copy pasting the text from the history breaks formatting. 🤷

#2: Post edited by

matthewsnyder‭ · 2024-07-07T20:29:16Z (5 months ago)

Copy Link

Raw

Markdown

There are two obvious ways to set the scope: Physical sports only, or anything competitive.
Physical sports only: This would pretty much exclude all overlaps. You might miss out on some "came to discuss competitive starcraft, stayed for the soccer questions" people. But if creating proposals continues to be easy, and the incubator stays as it is, I think most of these people can simply start their own proposal.
Everything competitive: This would include all overlaps that don't already have their own site. For example, if there was a "Chess" site like SO, chess questions are better sent there. You might miss out on some purists who like to complain that "X is not a real sport". But then again, those purists also complain about things like figure skating, so does it even matter?
I would say that it comes down to what seed content you (and other early users) are willing to contribute. After you amass say 100 questions, how many will actually be not about physical sports? If less than 5-10 you are better off going the narrow route.
For specific overlaps, I'll go ahead and edit the proposal itself. However, on gear recommendations particularly, IMO it's better to allow it. A lot of discussion between people who play sports is gear talk, because the reality is that gear is a big factor. If a sports site bans gear talk that is IMO a big handicap, especially now that there's plenty of other places to talk about it.

There are two obvious ways to set the scope: Physical sports only, or anything competitive.
Physical sports only: This would pretty much exclude all overlaps. You might miss out on some "came to discuss competitive starcraft, stayed for the soccer questions" people. But if creating proposals continues to be easy, and the incubator stays as it is, I think most of these people can simply start their own proposal.
Everything competitive: This would include all overlaps that don't already have their own site. For example, if there was a "Chess" site like SO, chess questions are better sent there. You might miss out on some purists who like to complain that "X is not a real sport". But then again, those purists also complain about things like figure skating, so does it even matter? With this approach, there is also the question of excluding discussion about doing the sports as a hobby without regard to the competitive aspect.
I would say that it comes down to what seed content you (and other early users) are willing to contribute. After you amass say 100 questions, how many will actually be not about physical sports? If less than 5-10 you are better off going the narrow route.
For specific overlaps, I'll go ahead and edit the proposal itself. However, on gear recommendations particularly, IMO it's better to allow it. A lot of discussion between people who play sports is gear talk, because the reality is that gear is a big factor. If a sports site bans gear talk that is IMO a big handicap, especially now that there's plenty of other places to talk about it.

#1: Initial revision by

matthewsnyder‭ · 2024-07-07T20:26:23Z (5 months ago)

Copy Link

Raw

Markdown

There are two obvious ways to set the scope: Physical sports only, or anything competitive.

Physical sports only: This would pretty much exclude all overlaps. You might miss out on some "came to discuss competitive starcraft, stayed for the soccer questions" people. But if creating proposals continues to be easy, and the incubator stays as it is, I think most of these people can simply start their own proposal.

Everything competitive: This would include all overlaps that don't already have their own site. For example, if there was a "Chess" site like SO, chess questions are better sent there. You might miss out on some purists who like to complain that "X is not a real sport". But then again, those purists also complain about things like figure skating, so does it even matter?

I would say that it comes down to what seed content you (and other early users) are willing to contribute. After you amass say 100 questions, how many will actually be not about physical sports? If less than 5-10 you are better off going the narrow route.

For specific overlaps, I'll go ahead and edit the proposal itself. However, on gear recommendations particularly, IMO it's better to allow it. A lot of discussion between people who play sports is gear talk, because the reality is that gear is a big factor. If a sports site bans gear talk that is IMO a big handicap, especially now that there's plenty of other places to talk about it.

Communities

Post History