Return to Answer

It was silly to close this question, for several reasons:

1. We're way too stuck on our interpretation of the will of the SE overloads. As far as I can tell, the justification for pushing out "expat" questions is entirely dogmatic: it's based on one post from two years ago by someone who was then staff. If you read the post, you'll see that it's rather informal: doesn't specify that we must close anything remotely smelling of expats. If we're going to treat all things expat as toxic, we should at least get more recent confirmation that this is what SE wants. After all, they also rely on us to give feedback and evolve on our own.

2. Pushing away expat-like questions pushes out expats, and that's bad for the site: some of the best traveling experiences I've had were when I visited expats and got to see a country in a way you don't experience as a short term traveler. Would you rather hear about France entirely from tourists who snapped a few pictures of the Eiffel Tower and ate some over-priced cheese, or would you like to hear (in addition) about the hidden beauty of the remote villages no one ever goes to see? Do you want to push out the Peace Corps volunteer who's spent the last two years in Tanzania, in favor of one more testimony from the guy who went on safari once? Expats learn a lot that Lonely Planet doesn't know, pushing them away is silly.

3. That the post's author has some form of temporary long-term visa is irreverent, the question was about reentering the their country of residence (France). Returning to your country of residence is a major part of traveling. The question wasn't about living in France, but rather about traveling from France.

It was silly to close this question, for several reasons:

1. We're way too stuck on our interpretation of the will of the SE overloads. As far as I can tell, the justification for pushing out "expat" questions is entirely dogmatic: it's based on one post from two years ago by someone who was then staff. If you read the post, you'll see that it's rather informal: doesn't specify that we must close anything remotely smelling of expats. If we're going to treat all things expat as toxic, we should at least get more recent confirmation that this is what SE wants. After all, they also rely on us to give feedback and evolve on our own.

2. Pushing away expat-like questions pushes out expats, and that's bad for the site: some of the best traveling experiences I've had were when I visited expats and got to see a country in a way you don't experience as a short term traveler. Would you rather hear about France entirely from tourists who snapped a few pictures of the Eiffel Tower and ate some over-priced cheese, or would you like to hear (in addition) about the hidden beauty of the remote villages no one ever goes to see? Do you want to push out the Peace Corps volunteer who's spent the last two years in Tanzania, in favor of one more testimony from the guy who went on safari once? Expats learn a lot that Lonely Planet doesn't know, pushing them away is silly.

3. That the post's author has some form of temporary long-term visa is irreverent, the question was about reentering the their country of residence (France). Returning to your country of residence is a major part of traveling. The question wasn't about living in France, but rather about traveling from France.

It was silly to close this question, for several reasons:

1. We're way too stuck on our interpretation of the will of the SE overloads. As far as I can tell, the justification for pushing out "expat" questions is entirely dogmatic: it's based on one post from two years ago by someone who was then staff. If you read the post, you'll see that it's rather informal: doesn't specify that we must close anything remotely smelling of expats. If we're going to treat all things expat as toxic, we should at least get more recent confirmation that this is what SE wants. After all, they also rely on us to give feedback and evolve on our own.

2. Pushing away expat-like questions pushes out expats, and that's bad for the site: some of the best traveling experiences I've had were when I visited expats and got to see a country in a way you don't experience as a short term traveler. Would you rather hear about France entirely from tourists who snapped a few pictures of the Eiffel Tower and ate some over-priced cheese, or would you like to hear (in addition) about the hidden beauty of the remote villages no one ever goes to see? Do you want to push out the Peace Corps volunteer who's spent the last two years in Tanzania, in favor of one more testimony from the guy who went on safari once? Expats learn a lot that Lonely Planet doesn't know, pushing them away is silly.

3. That the post's author has some form of temporary long-term visa is irreverent, the question was about reentering the their country of residence (France). Returning to your country of residence is a major part of traveling. The question wasn't about living in France, but rather about traveling from France.

It was silly to close this question, for several reasons:

1. We're way too stuck on our interpretation of the will of the SE overloads. As far as I can tell, the justification for pushing out "expat" questions is entirely dogmatic: it's based on one post from two years ago by someone who was then staff. If you read the post, you'll see that it's rather informal: doesn't specify that we must close anything remotely smelling of expats. If we're going to treat all things expat as toxic, we should at least get more recent confirmation that this is what SE wants. After all, they also rely on us to give feedback and evolve on our own.

2. Pushing away expat-like questions pushes out expats, and that's bad for the site: some of the best traveling experiences I've had were when I visited expats and got to see a country in a way you don't experience as a short term traveler. Would you rather hear about France entirely from tourists who snapped a few pictures of the Eiffel Tower and ate some over-priced cheese, or would you like to hear (in addition) about the hidden beauty of the remote villages no one ever goes to see? Do you want to push out the Peace Corps volunteer who's spent the last two years in Tanzania, in favor of one more testimony from the guy who went on safari once? Expats learn a lot that Lonely Planet doesn't know, pushing them away is silly.

3. That the post's author has some form of temporary long-term visa is irreverent, the question was about reentering the their country of residence (France). Returning to your country of residence is a major part of traveling. The question wasn't about living in France, but rather about traveling from France.

It was silly to close this question, for several reasons:

1. We're way too stuck on our interpretation of the will of the SE overloads. As far as I can tell, the justification for pushing out "expat" questions is entirely dogmatic: it's based on one post from two years ago by someone who was then staff. If you read the post, you'll see that it's rather informal: doesn't specify that we must close anything remotely smelling of expats. If we're going to treat all things expat as toxic, we should at least get more recent confirmation that this is what SE wants. After all, they also rely on us to give feedback and evolve on our own.

2. Pushing away expat-like questions pushes out expats, and that's bad for the site: some of the best traveling experiences I've had were when I visited expats and got to see a country in a way you don't experience as a short term traveler. Would you rather hear about France entirely from tourists who snapped a few pictures of the Eiffel Tower and ate some over-priced cheese, or would you like to hear (in addition) about the hidden beauty of the remote villages no one ever goes to see? Do you want to push out the Peace Corps volunteer who's spent the last two years in Tanzania, in favor of one more testimony from the guy who went on safari once? Expats learn a lot that Lonely Planet doesn't know, pushing them away is silly.

3. That Gills has some form of temporary long-term visa is irreverent, the question was about reentering the Gills' country of residence (France). Returning to your country of residence is a major part of traveling. The question wasn't about living in France, but rather about traveling from France.

It was silly to close this question, for several reasons:

1. We're way too stuck on our interpretation of the will of the SE overloads. As far as I can tell, the justification for pushing out "expat" questions is entirely dogmatic: it's based on one post from two years ago by someone who was then staff. If you read the post, you'll see that it's rather informal: doesn't specify that we must close anything remotely smelling of expats. If we're going to treat all things expat as toxic, we should at least get more recent confirmation that this is what SE wants. After all, they also rely on us to give feedback and evolve on our own.

2. Pushing away expat-like questions pushes out expats, and that's bad for the site: some of the best traveling experiences I've had were when I visited expats and got to see a country in a way you don't experience as a short term traveler. Would you rather hear about France entirely from tourists who snapped a few pictures of the Eiffel Tower and ate some over-priced cheese, or would you like to hear (in addition) about the hidden beauty of the remote villages no one ever goes to see? Do you want to push out the Peace Corps volunteer who's spent the last two years in Tanzania, in favor of one more testimony from the guy who went on safari once? Expats learn a lot that Lonely Planet doesn't know, pushing them away is silly.

3. That the post's author has some form of temporary long-term visa is irreverent, the question was about reentering the their country of residence (France). Returning to your country of residence is a major part of traveling. The question wasn't about living in France, but rather about traveling from France.