See this exchange in the comments, about closing the question.

I would like to see, as a possible reason to close a question, a judgment as to whether the OP made a minimal effort to find the answer.

I think that a question should mention what research the OP undertook to try to find the answer, before asking here.

This judgment is relative to the question and the perceived knowledge level of the user, of course. A user who seems to know the basics of how to get around in Lisp or Emacs should be expected to make a minimal effort to ask Emacs (e.g. C-h f or C-h v), IMO.

A complete newbie would not be expected to know how to ask Emacs in even a basic way. The bar could be much lower for an obvious newbie.

But the page about how to pose questions here could also mention some basics about how to ask Emacs - that would be helpful, I think. There is no shame in ignorance, and obviously, all levels of Emacs users are welcome to pose all kinds of question.

But I do think that a lack of specifying in the question just what the OP has tried should be grounds for voting to close. This is similar to what is done on StackOverflow and english.stackexchange.com. And to me, it constitutes part of asking a good question.

This is about adding this as a reason to close. That's all. Closure requires judgment and votes by multiple people.

Just one opinion.

See this exchange in the comments, about closing the question.

I would like to see, as a possible reason to close a question, a judgment as to whether the OP made a minimal effort to find the answer.

I think that a question should mention what research the OP undertook to try to find the answer, before asking here.

This judgment is relative to the question and the perceived knowledge level of the user, of course. A user who seems to know the basics of how to get around in Lisp or Emacs should be expected to make a minimal effort to ask Emacs (e.g. C-h f or C-h v), IMO.

A complete newbie would not be expected to know how to ask Emacs in even a basic way. The bar could be much lower for an obvious newbie.

But the page about how to pose questions here could also mention some basics about how to ask Emacs - that would be helpful, I think. There is no shame in ignorance, and obviously, all levels of Emacs users are welcome to pose all kinds of question.

But I do think that a lack of specifying in the question just what the OP has tried should be grounds for voting to close. This is similar to what is done on StackOverflow and english.stackexchange.com. And to me, it constitutes part of asking a good question.

This is about adding this as a reason to close. That's all. Closure requires judgment and votes by multiple people.

Just one opinion.

See this exchange in the comments, about closing the question.

I would like to see, as a possible reason to close a question, a judgment as to whether the OP made a minimal effort to find the answer.

I think that a question should mention what research the OP undertook to try to find the answer, before asking here.

This judgment is relative to the question and the perceived knowledge level of the user, of course. A user who seems to know the basics of how to get around in Lisp or Emacs should be expected to make a minimal effort to ask Emacs (e.g. C-h f or C-h v), IMO.

A complete newbie would not be expected to know how to ask Emacs in even a basic way. The bar could be much lower for an obvious newbie.

But the page about how to pose questions here could also mention some basics about how to ask Emacs - that would be helpful, I think. There is no shame in ignorance, and obviously, all levels of Emacs users are welcome to pose all kinds of question.

But I do think that a lack of specifying in the question just what the OP has tried should be grounds for voting to close. This is similar to what is done on StackOverflow and english.stackexchange.com. And to me, it constitutes part of asking a good question.

Just one opinion.

See this exchange in the comments, about closing the question.

I would like to see, as a possible reason to close a question, a judgment as to whether the OP made a minimal effort to find the answer.

I think that a question should mention what research the OP undertook to try to find the answer, before asking here.

This judgment is relative to the question and the perceived knowledge level of the user, of course. A user who seems to know the basics of how to get around in Lisp or Emacs should be expected to make a minimal effort to ask Emacs (e.g. C-h f or C-h v), IMO.

A complete newbie would not be expected to know how to ask Emacs in even a basic way. The bar could be much lower for an obvious newbie.

But the page about how to pose questions here could also mention some basics about how to ask Emacs - that would be helpful, I think. There is no shame in ignorance, and obviously, all levels of Emacs users are welcome to pose all kinds of question.

But I do think that a lack of specifying in the question just what the OP has tried should be grounds for voting to close. This is similar to what is done on StackOverflow and english.stackexchange.com. And to me, it constitutes part of asking a good question.

This is about adding this as a reason to close. That's all. Closure requires judgment and votes by multiple people.

Just one opinion.