My question about "(Valve Product) 3" was fairly swiftly closed and the rationale provided seems fairly senseless.

The actual close reason was the "not constructive...should solicit facts, references", which is precisely why I was asking the question in the first place; for some definitive, well-referenced facts. This is a question about a rumor, but seeking to turn it into a fact (either way) with the aid of references (a-la Skeptics.SE).

Comments seem to suggest that this is not answerable ("not a real question"), but there are many scenarios where it could be definitively proven and thus answered; an official forum post directly addressing it (similar to the one agent86 posted, but with additional context), or a Valve staffer directly emailing a reputable news organization. Such a source would obviate "Rumor + trolling community + we won't know with absolute certainty until E3 2012" as we would know that the "something with a three" was true (as much as that phrase can be stretched)

"Too localized" also seems out as this does apply to the internet at large, and the question itself can't be interpreted significantly differently in the future (leading to red herring Google results)

There's "off-topic" as the FAQ forbids "Speculation of the future of the industry and of upcoming releases", but again I'm explicitly trying to not be speculative and looking for some facts either way. Is it off-topic for less codified reasons?


Any question that is trying to glean fact from rumor or trying to prove a rumor is posted based on the logic that someone wants to turn speculation into fact.

The problem, though, is that they very definition of rumor is that it is unverified. Setting a precedent for posting questions along the lines of "I heard this thing in passing, can someone prove it for me" would result in a lot of noise on the site:

  • Such questions, being not provable, would result in tons of discussion, arguments, etc in the answers (not constructive).
  • Getting "proof" from sources other than the subject of the rumor is often not the basis for a solid answer as it's not really proof.
  • Once the subject of the rumor proves it to be true or false one way or the other, the question becomes useless (too localized).

The point of this site is to take specific answerable questions and provide an answer one way or the other. Answers to rumors have two states:

  • Here's proof (thus making the question too localized)
  • We have no proof (thus the question never gets answered)

Until it's verified, we have a question with really poor answers. Once the rumor is verified, the main source for info on it ends up being the official source, not a GSE question.

In the end, it just clutters the site.

  • I agree in large part except for a proven rumor being too localized. The reason for "too localized" being a close reason is that questions can morph into something else later on down the road so the answers turn obsolete, but if it's about a well-defined event then that becomes a non-issue. (e.g. Golden Wrench) – Nick T Jan 15 '12 at 21:20
  • 3
    @NickT The question is only answerable once E3 has been, at which point it's irrelevant. That's the worst kind of too localized. – user56 Jan 16 '12 at 0:41
  • @ArdaXi you don't understand the point of "too localized". (Geographic) location doesn't apply here, and as far as time is concerned, the answer will not change and will remain valid in perpetuity. – Nick T Jan 16 '12 at 0:46
  • 3
    @NickT I understand perfectly. As far as time is concerned, the answer will change (from rumour to confirmed when E3 passes) and then it will be irrelevant. – user56 Jan 16 '12 at 6:58

If you try to nullify the "speculation of the future of the industry and of upcoming releases" by saying you're looking for facts, then the entire clause would be meaningless. What it means is exactly what your question asks for, questions about rumours. You have the word rumour in the title of the question, I can't think of a more obvious violation of this rule.

As for your question specifically. You state that you want to see a forum post directly addressing this issue. I'd contend that the post by chetf does not state anything about E3, merely about the rumours.

Additionally, Valve is not known for being very direct to news organisations about what they are planning, so the chance of them emailing a news organisation is quite slim. Maybe if they did, your point would be valid, but until then, the question can only be answered with speculation and rumours.

It's off-topic for very simple, codified reasons, namely that any possible answer on this question is going to be speculative. If you can prove otherwise, fine, show us, but as a whole it's rather unlikely.


It was closed for the wrong reasons, but it deserves to be closed.

It's off-topic, and it's too localized. In general, we don't deal with future releases here, for a host of reasons.

Potential future releases even more so.

People clicked on the wrong radio button, but that doesn't invalidate their objective in this case.

You must log in to answer this question.

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