I don't think so, I just think we just get a surprising number of questions in the same general area that only small number of users are qualified to answer. In short, we get a lot of questions about Nazis and Vikings.

I think I might be the "Resident Italian" here, but I don't know that I'm a "Superuser." If it were up to me I'd be rambling on about what primary sources tell us about eleventh-century Lombardy, but that's not really a popular topic. A lot of times I find I have done enough research or reading to write about most other Italian questions, which is enough to contribute and hopefully teach someone something new they're interested in learning about. That's what we're here for, after all.

This is absolutely something on my mind when I go to answer a question, especially one outside my flair area (which is already pretty broad). To which I'll say a couple of things:

• Usually by the time I get an answer written, like today's, the thread has 50 junk comments and people complaining about the lack of answers, and 5-6 reports from users cursing out the mod team for, y'know, moderating
• I have a pretty good sense, by now, of what questions are going to be answered by what users, and I won't jump in. I know the other medieval flairs especially well, who are uniformly amazing. Outside medieval, I can think of once where my partner in crime, /u/mikedash, and I went after the same thread. Since we both tend to answer "what is interesting and kinda off the wall," that's a pretty good track record, don't you think?
• One of the mod team's current and best initiatives is our Flair Alerts team--we try to notify flairs when interesting questions arise in their area! This has notably increased the diversity of users posting the average answer. It's completely wonderful to see. If I'm writing an answer, it's usually because we couldn't think of anyone to notify in addition to me knowing the topic. That's not perfect because not all questions are answered by flairs (otherwise we'd have no recruitment!), I realize. But barring the development of psychic and prophetic powers, flair alerts and mod interventions work well enough to hold the wolves of [removed] at bay as much as possible.

It might also come down to how active someone is as a redditor. If we have ten experts relevant to a given questìon, but one is willing to answer a question a day and the rest find the time and enthusiasm once a month, did the 'superuser' discourage anyone, or did he or she rise to the occasion?

I'm not a flared user because I have a couple of eclectic topic areas I can speak to with confidence. I've never been discouraged if someone beat me to a question. If I think I can add something I do. If not, I upvote and move on.

So as someone who is in a field with a "superuser," I feel that I can give my thoughts.

So, u/commiespaceinvader covers an amazing number of posts on Hitler, the Nazis, World War II, and the Holocaust (not to mention posts on the philosophy of history). This has only occasionally led to me not answering a question. On a few occasions, we have both answered the same questions. If I saw a question that I wanted to answer, I could message him and I am certain he would either let me answer or we would discuss what our thoughts were and, if giving varying viewpoints, both answer. Honestly though, I have never done that because I have always been happy if we both answered or, if he answered a question I might have, he covered it well.

Usually, however, my expertise is more narrow, he knows what it is and will sometimes even ping me to let me know a post I might want to answer is up.

We do have some users who contribute in disproportionate amounts compared to other users, which is readily apparent. However, one has to remember that participation in this sub is entirely voluntary, and with the sub existing for over five years, we have had these "significant contributors" come and go often to the lamentations of the moderation team who misses that users contributions.

Additionally, it's also a question of availability of time and opportunity for many users in their participation. Many of our flared users have "day jobs" and can't answer a question right away and by the time they see a question that they can answer, it's already been answered in a satisfactory way, so they figure "Why bother writing 5000 words to repeat the same thing?"

As /u/AlviseFalier noted, we do have a high frequency of repeatedly regular topics which yes pretty much can be summed up as Nazis, Norsemen, and Ninjas, and the experts (and often oh so many non-experts) get to weigh in on the topic. While our experts on say...19th Century fashion, The Seleucid Empire, bakers in 19th Century England, or Medieval women, get fewer opportunities to participate with regularity so you see them less often.

With that noted, I believe according to our last analysis (or at least the one I'm recalling), we get about 100 questions a day of which maybe 10~15 see any major traction. In fact, I regularly ask questions myself in this sub to satisfy a ponder I had that often get maybe three or four upvotes and no answers, even though I know for a fact we have an expert on the subject laying around. While that can be frustrating, the Mod Team has devised ways to work against this and has at times tried to maintain a "Flair Alert System" where we try to match unanswered questions with an appropriate flaired user. The maintenance of this has varied based upon availability to perform the task by the moderators and participation of the flaired users.

Ultimately, the commonality of topics and questions (SEE THE FAQ!) does produce a perception bias of "superusers" which can seem disproportionate. However that should not discourage any users from participating because often the absolute best answers with amazing efforts put in are found on those questions with 20 upvotes on some topic such as Mississippian Culture mound building, which is fascinating but lacks the "sex appeal" of Nazi tanks. However, you must note that all of these "superusers" you see or perceive started off with one answer they thought they could answer the hell out of. They jumped in, answered and were rewarded with a Roman triumph of upvotes and Reddit Gold. After that, they got the bug and began participating more and more. In time some of these "superusers" will get distracted by another life demand, get bored of Reddit, or simply move on and be replaced by other users who are eager to participate.

I'll also note that part of the reason for seeing the same names pop-up is a factor of the kinds of questions that get asked, then factored again by the amount of time the small group of people in that field have available. But I can say from my own habit of answering questions with 2 upvotes 3 days after they've been posted that there are absolutely a wide variety of users answering a wide variety of questions that don't get noticed. I feel this is an appropriate place to plug the Sunday Digest.

As for whether this discourages more contributions, I feel the opposite. When another Mesoamericanist beats me to a post, I'm usually pretty happy, since they've done all the hard lifting of laying out an answer similar to what I might have given as well. If there is something I think they've missed or that I want to expand upon (or even something I disagree with!) then I can simply chime in with a reply. It saves me the effort of having to do the basic groundwork myself, leaving me free to add commentary. I'm happy to say that I've learned a lot from both my own follow-up questions and questions from my flaired compatriots (flairmigos?) which has only spurred further investigation which in turn has led to further contributions.

I don't think so.

I believe that as long as the answer is thorough, meets the guidelines, and can cite acceptable sources, that is enough.

I have answered 1-2 questions over the years, but my knowledge area is incredibly niche, concerning radio broadcasting, music history and promotion, etc. While there are occasional questions in these areas, I find that, usually, by the time I see them someone else has provided a thorough answer. I might add a couple small notes but the answers mostly do as good a job (or better) than what I would provide.

If anything, I think 'superusers' are quite valuable. They have broad knowledge across the most areas inquired about and often can point to previous answers as well.

Not at all, in fact, it takes the pressure way off. I frequently see questions that I feel are important to address, or that I feel like I should write about since they're in my field and interesting, but sometimes (Hi final papers I should be writing) I just DO NOT want to write anything. Especially in the last month or two, where my activity has dropped a lot, just because of intellectual and emotional exhaustion, it's nice to know that there are a ton of medievalists who can totally handle anything this place can throw at them.

My experience of two or three years on and off with occasional answers, followed by a short blitz that got me flaired, and now being a mod is obviously not typical but I did come up with a group of superusers (from my POV, at least) already present. I'm lucky enough to count them as friends now.

No one had my exact thing, but that's true for most people. If I didn't feel like I could give an AH-quality answer, then I wouldn't have posted anyway. If I got to one they might answer before they did, then I never felt discouraged. A chance to post ahead of them and maybe get a favorable comment was an incentive. So was a chance to find out that I got something wrong from someone I knew knew their stuff instead of Random Internet Person.

I don't know about other flairs, but I'll generally avoid answering a question if it's already been answered, unless it's in my specific area and I can spot something the previous answer has missed.

On another note, I answer outside my area fairly regularly. I'm definitely not a super user, but I have a list of all the questions I've ever answered (73) and about a third of those (24) are in my flaired area. The other 49 are in things that range from folklore to Mongol conquests, to the history of the Ivy League.

The reason I've been so willing to engage with questions that aren't typically my area is because I'm a researcher, so if a question hits the front page, or I spot it in new, and it's (a) unanswered, and (b) interesting, I'll make an effort to go and read some articles and find an answer.

So to answer your question from a slightly different angle, I think there are a few flaired users who have a research background, and can step outside an area they're used to. As other people pointed out, they're also flaired in topics that are extremely popular, or where they're the only user. For example, I think I might be the only NZ flair left (I haven't seen the others in awhile), so you're likely to get me answering any questions on that.

It is true that there a numer of users that contribute disproportionately to the answered questions, but I dont think "superusers" discourage the balance of contributions. As the top poster says, some topics tend to be FAR more popular than others, meaning that the contribution of a few will always be more prominent than others.

What motivated me to post answers here was actually because I felt like many of my previously posted questions didnt get answers. So i decided to do a bit of reading and give out my own answers. It worked ok so far.

What I think it does is discourages people from asking questions outside of areas that are commonly answered. The number of unanswered questions dwarfs anything that superusers are doing.

idk. What I do know is that I wrote a correct, succinct answer to a question a few days ago and I didn't get even one upvote. I'm a history major from an ivy league school. Go figure.