2

I suggest that we change our scope to the following:

"We exist as a site to ask about the rules, regulations, practices and minutia surrounding sports. Questions about training, and the actual physical activities of the sport should directed to Fitness & Nutrition."

Fitness and Nutrition already covers most of the ground surrounding training and active participation in most sports. I don't see why we should not cover new ground instead of retreading the ground they already cover. I suggest we focus on rules, regulations, and surrounding activities rather than covering the actual participation in sport.

  • 2
    Where would "How do I run faster for my 5K?" fit in here? – Tonny Madsen Feb 9 '12 at 14:36
  • 2
    Not sure, but I know it's on topic on F&N. The question is "Should it be on topic here" and I think ultimately the answer should be "No." – wax eagle Feb 9 '12 at 14:48
  • 1
    BTW if anyone sees this there is an ongoing chat discussion with some F&N mods and SE employees about where this site is going and what it's true purpose is. – wax eagle Feb 9 '12 at 15:57
  • The difficulty here is that most sports can be categorized one of two ways - mostly participant sports and mostly spectator sports. The kinds of questions you'll get from sports that are mostly participant sports (running, swimming, cycling) will tend more towards "how can I be better at ____"? The kinds of questions you'll get from mostly spectator sports will fit more into the scope you've proposed. That being the case, using that as the scope turns "sports.stackexchange" into "sportsfans.stackexchange", does it not? – Zannjaminderson Feb 10 '12 at 17:37
  • @Zannjaminderson per the discussion in chat. SE does not feel that a sports fan site by itself will not succeed. I'm not sure whether or not I agree, but that was the reasoning behind combining all of the sports proposals into this one. – wax eagle Feb 10 '12 at 19:37
  • That's fine - my concern is that narrowing the scope as you've proposed essentially does turn this into a sports fan site by shuffling a good portion of sports participants over to F&N. – Zannjaminderson Feb 10 '12 at 20:42
  • 1
    @Zannjaminderson not quite. I'd rather see this site focus on what F&N doesn't really cover. That being rules, stats, strategy, history etc. It would be useful for both fans and participants (some of those things go both ways). I personally don't see the point of covering the same ground fitness already does quite effectively. – wax eagle Feb 11 '12 at 1:05
  • 1
    This is the precise reason why the last minute merging of proposals should have never happened. – Jason N. Gaylord Feb 18 '12 at 16:00
5

I think we're making a very big deal of something that doesn't need to be.

  • If something is on topic there, it can stay there.
  • If something is on topic here, it can stay here.
  • If something is off topic there, but on topic here, we migrate (or flag until migration paths exist) just like any other SE site
  • If something is off topic here, but on topic there, we migrate (or flat, until migration paths exist) just like any other SE site

As Stack Exchange grows, site overlap is inevitable and ultimately not a bad thing. Our responsibility is to determine what is and is not on topic on this site without regard to what is or is not on topic on another.

If it arises that a staggeringly high percentage of questions (50+ %) would be on topic on another site, that's a different story. It's also something that will be blatantly apparent and not something we or anyone else would really need to investigate. I don't think we're anywhere close to that, and neither are they. Until we reach that point, I think we're making much ado about nothing.

Edit:

I've been thinking more about this, and have some thoughts to lay out.

A question like "What can I do to rebound better [in basketball]" is on topic here. A question like "What can I do to jump higher" is on topic on fitness. I think these two things are cut and dry. So is the first question on topic on fitness? And is the second question on topic here? I think answering those two questions will lead us to the our goal of understanding scope.

  • I think there's just going to be some unavoidable overlap. Fitness and sports go hand in hand in a lot of ways. I would think that the fitness type questions on sports would be about trying to obtain a target for a given sport. Users will get good answers for those style questions on either site. My only worry is stepping on the toes of Fitness. – Dynamo Feb 10 '12 at 14:53
4

I agree with the first half of the scope, but I'm not sure about the second half mainly because it seems like we are limiting the questions to only address a certain part of the sport (rules, regulations, practices, minutia) and not other parts of the sport (training, physical activity, technique).

The F&N FAQ has the following:

Fitness - Stack Exchange is for fitness professionals, athletes and trainers. If you have a question about

  • improving your exercise performance or technique

  • choosing a training program

  • nutrition as it relates to exercise

  • gear and gadgets used during exercise

  • achieving physique milestones

  • injury prevention

This to me sounds more like the physical activity questions suited for F&N are more along the lines of physical fitness, physical training or just general exercise which is different than questions about the physical techniques used in a particular sport. For example, I think that this question would be off-topic at F&N and should be on-topic here:

Difference between one gap and two gap techniques for defensive linemen

I think that both of these can coexist on the same site, but we just need to make a clear distinction between fitness for the sake of fitness and training for a particular sport.

Here is my proposed revision to your original scope:

We exist as a site to ask about the rules, regulations, training and techniques surrounding sports. Questions about physical fitness and general exercise should directed to Fitness & Nutrition.

  • 2
    training and physical activity are both on topic at F&N. Technique could likely remain on topic here, but it's borderline between the two IMO. – wax eagle Feb 9 '12 at 14:48
  • Training just to be "in-shape" is different than training for your next big game, IMO. I agree, there's a thin line separating the two at times, but I think for the experts in each of these fields (physical trainers) it is more of a clear distinction. – Marcus Swope Feb 9 '12 at 14:57
  • 1
    fair enough, but Fitness has an inclusive scope that pretty much includes athletics in general. (fitness is misleading honestly). – wax eagle Feb 9 '12 at 14:58
  • There is nothing wrong with asking about athletic enhancement on Fitness no matter what your level. We're not excluding any because of it. Those type of experts are the people Fitness wants. – Matt Chan Feb 9 '12 at 16:24
  • Getting back to my pet sport, running, then almost everybody in Denmark that runs also participate in races a couple of times every year. Most of these still primary use the running to keep in shape, but I think they all will be very confused about where to post question given the above definition. To them it will be all about training, so they should post to Sports, but I take it, you want them to post to F&N... – Tonny Madsen Feb 10 '12 at 9:57
  • 1
    @TonnyMadsen at the moment they are on topic both places...but my question is whether that is a good thing or not. – wax eagle Feb 10 '12 at 13:03
1

"We exist as a site to ask about the rules, regulations, practices and minutia surrounding sports. Questions about training, and the actual physical activities of the sport should directed to Fitness & Nutrition."

I think this is good starting point to separate what is on-topic and off-topic for both Sports and Fitness. Training, increasing your performance, improving a technique or physique are perfectly fine for Fitness. We don't discourage athletes from asking questions about how to train so long as they frame in the context of what is outlined in our faq. Rules of a sport are off-topic on Fitness.

Personally I think it would be great if more athletes participated on Fitness so that there would be a good mix of experts that could help coach others on how to improve their level of activity regardless of someone is at a beginner, intermediate, or elite level.

You must log in to answer this question.

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