-5
\$\begingroup\$

I asked the question How network card communicates with other hardware components?.

What's wrong with the question and how can I make the question better to have chance for answer?

That's not fair that it was closed by the same users to have interest in spoiling the possibility of answer (in another question) and without discussion.

Is this behavior (censorship with no discussion) good for free knowledge sharing?

Another question of my questions was closed, though it was answered and the answer was very good for me and believe that will teach many others. It had upvotes before the evil close-users noticed it.

| |
\$\endgroup\$
  • 8
    \$\begingroup\$ "censorship with no discussion"? I count 10 comments underneath your question \$\endgroup\$ – Pekka's Reputation Bordello Mar 1 '12 at 15:52
  • \$\begingroup\$ This should be asked on the electronics-meta, not here. \$\endgroup\$ – Bobby Mar 1 '12 at 16:02
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Pekka'sReputationBordello Most of the comments was not constructive. \$\endgroup\$ – xralf Mar 1 '12 at 16:03
  • \$\begingroup\$ Have you read wikipedia article about Network interface controllers? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_interface_controller \$\endgroup\$ – Sandokas Mar 1 '12 at 16:06
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Sandokas I have. There is only one reference and I don't know where to find more information about this. I used google found many links that are not what I'm looking for. That's why I asked knowledgeable people and hoped that somebody will provide some answer with directions. \$\endgroup\$ – xralf Mar 1 '12 at 16:31
  • \$\begingroup\$ As a note for anyone attempting to research what has happened, the question was deleted by the OP. \$\endgroup\$ – Kortuk Mar 18 '12 at 11:00
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Kortuk I placed the questions on pastebin for people to see if they cannot see deleted posts. Note that there was deleted a discussion under Kevin answer. Discussion has no sense here if it's deleted by one side. This question can be deleted too, because only one-side opinions are here. \$\endgroup\$ – xralf Mar 18 '12 at 11:15
  • \$\begingroup\$ If a moderator deletes a discussion it is because it is non-productive/offensive. We do not delete for one side. For many people whom see this and have higher rep they will see your question even if it is deleted. I have rolled back your edit and placed your link into your comment for those that want to see it. I tried to edit it into the post but could not find a way that did not make a link that is mostly useless pop out. I also attempted to look at the deleted comments but it is not telling me there are any. Feel free to drop by chat to discuss it more. \$\endgroup\$ – Kortuk Mar 18 '12 at 11:31
  • \$\begingroup\$ let us continue this discussion in chat \$\endgroup\$ – Kortuk Mar 18 '12 at 14:56
12
\$\begingroup\$

It think the key phrase from the close description is:

overly broad,

You are asking for a complete description of how the network card works. This is not a good question for the Stack Exchange Q&A model, which favours fairly narrow, specific questions about real problems.

| |
\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ Actually I was interested in the overview of this communication process with some external resources to have possibility to gain another knowledge, but the question was closed without discussion. Without the possibility to change a few words. \$\endgroup\$ – xralf Mar 1 '12 at 15:56
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ @xralf - closed questions can (and should, if at all possible) be edited to bring them back into the site scope. Once you have edited then flag the question for moderator attention or raise a question on the site's own meta. \$\endgroup\$ – ChrisF Mar 1 '12 at 15:58
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @xralf You can continue to comment underneath the question. It is not gone \$\endgroup\$ – Pekka's Reputation Bordello Mar 1 '12 at 15:59
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Pekka'sReputationBordello Thank you. This is good to know, but because of heavy downvoters the question don't have a chance of noticing by somebody kind. \$\endgroup\$ – xralf Mar 1 '12 at 16:01
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Pekka'sReputationBordello Note, that two questions were closed. The other was answered with great answer. \$\endgroup\$ – xralf Mar 1 '12 at 16:11
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @xralf I sympathize in general, but upvotes and good answers aren't necessarily proof for a good fit for the site's Q&A format, which isn't really built fpor "how does this work" questions. SO/SE are really big on question focus, and I must say I agree most of the time - and I've had questions closed like this myself \$\endgroup\$ – Pekka's Reputation Bordello Mar 1 '12 at 16:14
  • \$\begingroup\$ It would be better to detect this social network of downvoters. \$\endgroup\$ – xralf Mar 1 '12 at 16:17
4
\$\begingroup\$

What's wrong with the question and how can I make the question better to have chance for answer?

ChrisF hit it on the head. Your question is overly broad; answering it would require an explanation of everything from networking technology to hardware interface design to operating system construction.

An evidence of this problem is the fact that you have linked to Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, its entries are intended to be summaries or overviews, like a more detailed descriptive dictionary. You seem to be confused about the nature of Wikipedia. It would be much better if you'd referenced an entry in the PCIe specification, a $5,000 set of documents which describes all of this this in great detail. If you read those documents, then you would know the answer to your question. However, acquiring the knowledge required to read these documents would likely take a lot of education that you don't evidence.

That's not fair that it was closed by the same users to have interest in spoiling the possibility of answer (in another question) and without discussion.

Is this behavior (censorship with no discussion) good for free knowledge sharing?

You seem confused about the nature of Stack Exchange. This isn't a place for "free knowledge sharing", it's a place for objective Q&A. To have the best possible repository of Q&A, we must necessarily disallow subjective, unanswerable, off-topic, localized, or otherwise problematic questions.

I closed the question without adding a comment myself because the close reason and other comments fully explained my reasoning.

Another question of my questions was closed, though it was answered and the answer was very good for me and believe that will teach many others. It had upvotes before the evil close-users noticed it.

That question was also overly broad. The presence of an answer does not mean that a question is useful.

Occasionally, if users have invested significant time and energy and have crafted a great answer for a cruddy question, we'll edit the question so that it is suitable and let it stay open. In this case, the question could not be salvaged.

| |
\$\endgroup\$

You must log in to answer this question.

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