Post History

Is Worldbuilding fit for Q&A?

There is one simple answer to this question: No. No, it does not fit into the current concept of Q&A. The topic of Worldbuilding is fundamentally different to probably all other possible community-sites, except Philosophy which faces similar problems. I concur and admit to all hardliners, that there is no way.

You can see this if you follow the StackExchange sites on those topics and have a look into their Meta. Also have a look at number of closed questions in the main queue. And if you are willing, have a look at the comments of those questions and pay attention to the notion of "How can a question in philosophy be closed because of 'too broad' or 'opinion-based' ???" -- Or "How can a question in Worldbuilding be closed because of 'out-of-scope' or 'opinion-based' ???

In other words: Worldbuilding:SE suffers from this Q&A-corset since the beginning.

<hr>

There is a fundamental misconception I like to address here. Because if "we" (the Codidact community) cannot find an agreement on this, we can stop trying to build a Worldbuilding community at once here and now. Because the hardliner's view is right: Worldbuilding does not fit Q&A (in its current form).

The misconception stems from the differences of the following views on Worldbuilding:
   * The Art of Worldbuilding
   * The Rules of Worldbuilding within a Q&A site or forum

"The Art" comprises everything about WB. It does not restrict anything. It fosters creativity. It wants to have collaboration. It is entertaining. There can be no judgement about opinions, because every piece of content is existing purely out of the fantasy of an author's mind. There are creative heads who want to create their world, but maybe lack understanding in certain fields like physics, biology, sociology, maths, quantum-mechanics etc. They maybe just need a little nudge, another idea from a like-minded fantasy creative brain that bring them further. There are those who take joy out of joining in creating a world or providing feedback that one author alone would have never been able to come up with.

I want to emphasize at this point: The proposal for Worldbuilding is a proposal for "The Art of Worldbuilding".

"The Rules" are actually what is detrimental to "the Art". It is in stark contrast to everything "The Art" stands for.
The hardliners who impose the higher goals of formulating and allowing only "proper" questions which bring a certain "value" in their answers are in fact destroying all the creative potential a topic like Worldbuilding (or Philsophy) inherently has.

So the real question here is not asking "Is Worldbuilding fit for Q&A", because it is not.

The real question is: Is Q&A fit for Worldbuilding
Rephrased: Is the Q&A-system on Codidct fit for supporting the needs of those who want to follow "The Art of Worldbuilding".
Is Codidact ready to deal with "The Art of Worldbuilding"?

There is actually only one answer to this: Yes.
Because the [vision statement](https://meta.codidact.com/posts/276296) offers a flexible way of handling things:
  * There is no one-size-fits-all Q&A system
  * It offers specialized functionality, tailored to the needs of the community
  * It puts people first, not the A, not the Q&A - the community of like-minded people.
  * There are lots of ways to deal with the special needs of a community and even more could be found via "Meta" discussions later on.

The further question is: Can Codidact be held accountable for offering those things to a community of "The Art of Worldbuilding".

If the answer is not "Yes", if there is no readiness to adapt the system to the needs, but instead further trying to squeeze the needs into the system, then there is no need and no way for "The Art of Worldbuilding" to exist (here). In this case the hardliners have won. In this case nobody here needs to deal with "The Art". "The Rules" take precedence.

But think about it: The system of "The Rules" prevail is already existing over at SE.... We do not need a second one. With that I think we all agree.

I think we also agree that constantly questioning the "Is it appropriate for Q&A" is exhausting and takes all energy out of the idea. And I really would like to have an agreement early than have a discussion about it each and every time something "special" for Worldbuilding comes up (which would also pave the way for Philosophy for example).

The final question therefore is: 

**Is the Codidact community willing/able to provide *an alternative* to the the "Rules System" so the "The Art" can have a space to thrive?**