I was scrolling down to Math Stack Exchange, and saw how they have the requirements to post a question, where you have to properly present the background of a question since they are not a "homework site". I would like to present such an idea on Law Stack Exchange, so the questions get higher quality. Most questions are just two pieces of lines asking about the policy, not going to lie, most questions are spam about what Indian policy is or not and it goes on spamming. Though I don't know the intent of it, I did also notice most people rely on the quality of the question posted, and we can make some parameters of how to post a question.

  • Questions can be formatted as they do in Code Golf Stack Exchange, however, I am not saying to directly copy the structure. The questionnaire should provide a Case Problem.

  • The questionnaire can provide a legal description of that issue and what it is.

  • An example or application of that law to the real world can be optional but recommended to be provided in the question.

  • If we have a knowledgeable expert again, they can present the relevant case.

In that way, I would propose questions seem like:

Case Problem

Explain what is the legal problem they are tackling with


What is the worth of this problem, they be able to describe the problem in their own words


Provide an example of how the law can be used in real-life applications. Where can this law be applied?

Case Study

Citations of relevant statutory or other references

Should there be a structured alternative, like this, or no structure where anyone can directly post two lines or tell me what is the policy?

Edit 1: By background, I would clarify the clear intent of background, a notable act that has occurred. For example, someone can query about defamation, and describe the notable case Depp v. Heard with case problem. Descriptions be reliable judgments to close questions seeking legal advice.

  • 1
    Have you flagged as spam the "questions are spam about what Indian policy is or not and it goes on spamming"? If you have, were they deleted as such? Only asking, as the questions I have seen, and answered, about India's legislation don't seem to be spam at all - poorly written maybe, but one makes allowances for non-native English speakers.
    – user35069
    Commented Apr 30, 2023 at 18:24
  • I am not racist @Rick and I mentioned their purpose to ask more questions but they lack format. It's my personal view that it might be like they can keep spamming this. If protocols are followed, less questions be posted
    – Velma
    Commented Apr 30, 2023 at 22:42
  • Wow, that escalated quickly. Anyway, I curious as to how your proposal might deal with this question and answer? Delete it as spam because it's only 25 words long? Or leave it as is, because it's users working together to build a library of detailed answers to every question about law?
    – user35069
    Commented May 1, 2023 at 6:45
  • 1
    The question should not be deleted as spam as it is a creditable one, but if my proposal was accepted, it would be closed for asking direct questions without presenting a background. I just want to say, this site should not be a homework site. Other sites do have such protocols and body structure,
    – Velma
    Commented May 1, 2023 at 19:25
  • @AitzazImtiaz Often, you don't need a background, especially for a terminology question. e.g. "What is a Tort defined as?" is a perfectly fine question on its own, while other times the case problem arises from the situation depicted, like for example when I use old comic panels to depict a situation framed as a legal problem. But in general, I do see the problem you face, and offered a frame challenge.
    – Trish
    Commented May 9, 2023 at 14:00

1 Answer 1


It's unlikely we need a prescibed format, but we do have procedures in place already

As you might notice, there are many questions about recently, many of them by two users. Quite some of the questions suffer from similar problems, which often require substantial edits, or details. As such, the existing policies do suffice:

  • Some questions are incomprehensible and lack all details needed to answer them. The closure for lack of clarity will be in order.
  • Some questions lack proper capitalization and add a whitespace in front of every sentence structure mark, which makes them borderline illegible. Again, this can result in a lack of clarity, as the lacking grammar obscures the clarity of the question.
  • Other questions don't indicate where snippets of law or possible snippets of law/caselaw come from. If the source of the snippet is really relevant, closing for lack of clarity is in order.
  • Other questions ask multiple unrelated or barely related things in a question. Closing for lack of focus is in order then.
  • Some questions are closed, then deleted and reappear some time later asked as a new question. That violates stack policy and requires flagging for mod attention. The proper way is to edit the old question for the Reopen Queue, then wait.

You must log in to answer this question.

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