<p>There has been some discussion on CV Meta of how to deal with <a href="https://stats.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/12/how-should-we-deal-with-obvious-homework-questions">homework questions</a> and also <a href="https://stats.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/3104/policy-on-questions-that-read-like-how-should-i-do-my-job">job-related questions</a>. Either can be unreasonable in certain cases, but the latter really annoy me, since they ask users of CV to do the work of the OP. These "do my job for me" questions seem to have two main variations, both of which are problematic:</p>

<ul>
<li><p>I am programming ML algorithm X.  Here is my code; it doesn't work.  What went wrong?</p></li>
<li><p>I want to analyse data on Y.  Here is a broad description of the problem/data.  What do I do?</p></li>
</ul>

<p>In both cases, the question seems to invite CV users to essentially do the professional work of the OP for them. In the first case, there is very specific information given, but it is essentially a request for debugging of code. In the second case, the information given is usually very broad, and it is a request for formulation of a statistical model for an applied project. Unless the questions highlight some useful general principle that is helpful to other users, these kinds of questions do not appear to me to be valuable on the site.</p>

<p>I have sometimes seen the first type of question closed as "off-topic (out-of-scope)" and the second type of question closed as "too broad". However, I wonder if a stronger response is warranted for these questions. Would it would be better to give a custom explanation for closure, along the lines of "off topic (CV is not a site to do your modelling/debugging for you)". Is this overstepping/rude?</p>

<p><strong>What is best-practice for dealing with these questions?</strong> </p>
