3

I had fun with an answer and said fun was edited out:

https://ux.stackexchange.com/posts/60379/revisions

Which, I'm fine with if that's the general rule-of-thumb here. But I would like to lobby a little bit to allow a little humor into the site. We are UX people after all. Injecting a little fun into our products is part of what we do...

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
4

I rolled back the edit. I saw no problem with it in this case and, as I mentioned in the comment, the question itself showed no research effort at all so instead of just leaving a "Let me Google That For You" answer you have actually given a useful answer in a light-hearted fun way.

The problem is really with the question more than your answer. We would expect people to have done their research before posting questions on the site. And that question really didn't show any research effort at all really.

Plus, Point Break is a kickass movie, so that helps.

2
  • 2
    Linking "Point Break" to its imdb or wiki page might have helped here too. While I see the point of removing "unnecessary fun" in answers, are comments a place for some content-related jokes?
    – msp
    Commented Jun 26, 2014 at 11:39
  • 1
    "[during a skydiving game of chicken with Johnny, both falling with no parachute open] Six seconds. We're going to be meat waffles." So. Good.
    – Charles Wesley
    Commented Jun 30, 2014 at 20:51
3

I don't really see a problem with the light-heartedness but if I am working on a project and I need to find an answer so that I can move on, it might be a little annoying to read that joke before getting to the answer. As a community, joking will make us closer but Stack Exchange as a tool for information would not welcome it. Think Wikipedia or a dictionary. We use those tools to learn and find information.

Unlike Wikipedia or a dictionary, Stack Exchange is answered by individuals. We aren't collaborating to find the best-worded and most complete answer. When people look at Wikipedia articles, "Wikipedia" is an entity that is speaking. We don't expect "Wikipedia" to make jokes. However, when people look at Stack Exchange answers, we are fully conscious that it is a single person adding input. But at the same time, if editing becomes more intense and people continually improve on the answer, the "Wikipedia"-like quality starts to show.

So it could really go both ways depending on what we choose to make of this site. I think it is important to keep in mind that we are humans interacting with humans, and at least for now we should allow a bit of fun.

1
  • 3
    "keep in mind that we are humans interacting with humans" I like that statement. In fact, that's a great UX thought in general. More of my clients need to take heed in those words...
    – DA01
    Commented Jun 25, 2014 at 21:19

You must log in to answer this question.

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