5

I wanted to bring this to meta.

What are the differences of the Open Connectivity Foundation membership levels?

I have two points I want to address in that question and ask meta if we should accept such questions.

  1. Firstly, that information seems easily researchable. Sure, you gotta read that pdf, but it's on their site. Thus, I'd argue we should close for No Research.
  2. Secondly, are membership questions regarding organizations that have something to do with IoT even in scope? I'd argue they shouldn't be.

Discuss.

4
  • 1
    What's your argument behind point 2? Dec 6 '16 at 22:47
  • @ZachSaucier I'd ask the other way round. How is this relevant? It's essentially their membership conditions. It's a complete duplication of publicly available information. Any business that wants to join that organization has to do an own due diligence assertion if that's a sensible move. Duplicating information on this site that might be outdated tomorrow brings no value.
    – Helmar Mod
    Dec 6 '16 at 22:52
  • If you would ask the other way around, why are you asking it the way I asked about in the question?? Dec 6 '16 at 22:53
  • 1
    The question linked isn't a very good question to judge this based off of because it is a poor, unsearched question in the first place, regardless of the topic Dec 6 '16 at 22:54
3
  1. Firstly, that information seems easily researchable. Sure, you gotta read that pdf, but it's on their site. Thus, I'd argue we should close for No Research.

I disagree that closure is the correct course if you think a question could have been easily researched - instead, downvote as the tooltip suggests ("This question does not show any research effort; it is unclear or not useful."). Otherwise I think it sets a dangerous precedent of closing questions that are too easy, which seems counterproductive to me - a question is not invalid just because it's straightforward (but is worth downvoting if you think it's a waste of time).

  1. Secondly, are membership questions regarding organizations that have something to do with IoT even in scope? I'd argue they shouldn't be.

That's a far more interesting point. I would say yes, it is on-topic (although arguably quite localised in its usefulness) - since the organisation is very relevant to IoT, I think it fits within the scope of the site. I can imagine far more interesting questions related to the OCF which would definitely be on-topic here, and wouldn't want to exclude them due to just one poorly-researched question.

2
  • So, you'd say questions regarding organizations which concern themselves with IoT are on topic?
    – Helmar Mod
    Dec 7 '16 at 16:05
  • @Helmar: yes, I would, especially where the question would be useful/applicable to people concerned with IoT. I totally understand where you're coming from though with that particular question - "define ..." questions don't tend to be very good, but I'm sure that there are some more useful questions in future (e.g. about the standards that an organisation provides which are applicable to IoT).
    – Aurora0001
    Dec 7 '16 at 19:00

You must log in to answer this question.

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