Second pass at: How to ask a question when you cannot say why you are asking it posts 31–60
This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1 · go to the accepted answer.
Quantities without units are the single commonest reason a question sits unanswered. "Two and a half" is not a dose, a volume or a concentration until you say which.
That is the practical version. The rigorous version is longer and says the same thing.
Building on post #30 rather than restating it.
Say what you have already ruled out. "It is not the diluent because I tried a second vial from a different box" saves three replies suggesting the diluent.
I would not lead a decision with this, but I would not ignore it either.
Post #32 put the caveat in the right place and I want to underline it.
The specific question in the title is more useful than you might think. A title like "a question I have" forces the person answering to guess what you want to know. A title with the actual question gets you an answer in two hours instead of two days.
Chromatography questions need the method before anything else: column, gradient, wavelength, injection volume. A purity figure with no method attached cannot be discussed, only repeated.
This is the sort of thing that ought to be settled and apparently is not.
Taking post #34 at face value and following it one step further.
"Has anyone had this happen" gets you anecdotes. "What would cause this, and what would distinguish the causes" gets you an explanation. The second question is almost always the one you wanted.
Useful. I have added it to my own notes with the date on it.
Questions you cannot explain: "I cannot say why I am asking this, but is this compound stable at room temperature?" is more productive than no question at all. People here know that some questions cannot be asked in public and they will work with that constraint.
I would want to see it done twice before believing it once.
I read post #36 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.
Five questions in one post gets you one answer: the easiest one, usually not the one you needed most. Post them separately or pick the one that depends on the others least and ask that one first.
Collapsed as off-topic by two members at trust level 3 or above
Picking up post #41: that is the part I would want checked first.
If your question has a deadline — a parcel in transit, a delivery you have to accept or refuse — say so. People answer differently when there is a clock on it.
Timeline questions need the timeline. Dates, in order, with what happened on each. "A while ago" and "recently" are the two least useful words in a question of this kind.
That is the version I use. It may not be the version that is correct.
Asking a follow-up: new topic or reply in the old one? If the answer depends on the previous post, reply. If it is a question that makes sense without the previous post, new topic. The second gets faster answers.
That holds for the case as described. Change the assumptions and it may not.
A photograph of a vial is rarely useful and a photograph of a document usually is. Redact the identifiers before you post either.
Anyone who has looked at this more carefully, please correct the record.
Say what you want out of the answer. "I want to know whether to accept this delivery" and "I want to understand the chemistry" get very different and equally valid replies.
That has held every time I have looked, which is not the same as always.
Disagreeing with an answer you got: cite what you disagree with, say what contradicts it, and ask which one holds. Do not open with "I think you are wrong". Lead with the evidence.
The honest answer is that it depends, and here is what it depends on.
Collapsed as off-topic by two members at trust level 3 or above
When you quote a figure from somewhere else, say where from. Not as a formality — the answer frequently depends on whether the number came from a certificate, an independent report or a forum post.
Marking that as an opinion rather than a finding.
Picking up post #48: that is the part I would want checked first.
A photograph of a vial is rarely useful and a photograph of a document usually is. Redact the identifiers before you post either.
That matches what I was told, which is not the same as knowing it.
On post #50 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.
If you are asking about a document, quote the exact wording of the line you are asking about. Paraphrasing a specification is how a discussion ends up about a document nobody has read.
Not the whole picture, but the part of it I can speak to.
Avoid "any advice?" at the end. It is so generic that people do not know which part of the post it refers to. Pick the specific part and ask that specific question instead.
Happy to be the one who is wrong here if it settles the question.
Post #55 describes the usual case. This is about the unusual one.
A question about somebody else's post should be a reply to that post, not a new topic. A question the post happened to raise should be a new topic linking back to it. The difference is whether the answer is useful without the original.
Adding the caveat now so it does not have to be extracted later.
Confirming post #56 from a second method, which matters more than confirming it from a second person.
If the answer you got does not fit your case, say which part does not fit rather than restating the question. Otherwise the next reply is the same as the last one.
Noting that I have skin in this question and have tried to discount for it.
Collapsed as off-topic by two members at trust level 3 or above
Speaking as somebody who asked badly last month and got a polite request for four missing details: writing the question properly the first time takes ten minutes and saves two days. Learn from me.
If your question has a deadline — a parcel in transit, a delivery you have to accept or refuse — say so. People answer differently when there is a clock on it.
Context that matters: compound, how long in, current dose, relevant history. Context that does not matter: how you feel, your hopes for the outcome, your medical history beyond what affects this specific question. The first set gets you answered. The second set makes the reply longer without making it better.
I would want the raw data before agreeing with my own summary of it.