I have a question here that straddles a variety of fields. I have received a very nice answer looking at the problem in one way, but I wanted to also explore other ways in which it can be solved from different standpoints, leveraging different fields. I recently found out about this nugget. If I post there, it would be a new post but 'related' because 1) I have new information on my problem, and 2) I can frame the issue better now.

Before I make a first post there I would like to know what procedure there might be. Remember I have new problem formulation now - the new problem is a progeny of the old one in a sense. (Refined).

(As a side note, if there isnt already a way, how do we get the attention of various other posts on different SEs that might really benefit from insights of different fields?)



There's a policy against cross-posting on Stack Exchange, but I'm sure that you can use your best judgement to make the question different enough. You should also include a link to your question on DSP when posting Cross Validated, so that people could refer to your old question as well. If it's a new problem formulation, you should be fine by all means.

  • $\begingroup$ Thanks. What are we to do in the case of where a person makes one post, but we want to attract the attention of other fields to it? It is not economical to always reframe a question, and sometimes a question can stand on its own and be relevant across many fields to begin with. What can we do to cater to that? Do we have such a feature? $\endgroup$ – Spacey Feb 23 '12 at 19:41
  • $\begingroup$ That's a good point. I'm not sure how to answer it right now, but I'll bring it up among Stack Exchange moderators and see what answers I get. $\endgroup$ – Phonon Feb 23 '12 at 20:00
  • $\begingroup$ Awesome thanks. $\endgroup$ – Spacey Feb 23 '12 at 23:40
  • $\begingroup$ In general this is a good question. Signal processing (DSP) is applied mathematics. I have had questions moved to math exchange but this was the INCORRECT move because the domain is incorrect. The answer in math exchange were not useful because it had the incorrect context. The moderators should follow the #1 se moderator rule "do very little"! Moderators and suppose to moderate not police! One issue is that (at least FAQ) discourages general questions. It might take sometime for someone asking the question to formulate the correct question (multiple questions, etc). $\endgroup$ – Christopher Felton Mar 1 '12 at 13:20

You must log in to answer this question.

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