91–100 of 304 posts
So far. I still haven't participated in SO very much. For the most part it isn't even worth asking a question. (It's a good thing and a bad thing) Also I have noted that they try to prevent you from deleting. After you click that submit button it's their property apparently.
Though perhaps there are good, legitimate questions out there, it is also conceivable that some frustrated new users think that their question is appropriate for SO when it is not. This most often happens, from what I've seen, in the "far too broad" category. Just looking at SO right now, for example, I saw a question that was asking how to pass data on an iOS app from one place to another. In that user's mind, he/she has probably been trying to figure out the basics of making an iOS app, and this seems a legitimate question. However, this is an incredibly broad architecture/design question. SO isn't a resource to hand-hold you when you're learning something new. It's a resource for asking specific questions when you can't find the solution anywhere else (and you've actually tried).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Do we reduce moderation? Help vampires take over. Every moderator on every site will tell you this; without this narrative they wouldn't exist. Is there any proof that this is the case though? To me SO is super useful with ~20% of great threads killed for being off topic. Voting puts good topic on top, no need for administrator intervention.
On top of what? Help vampires waste answerers time, not readers time. Which is why they vote to close. No one wants to browse 200 lines of code to find the missing semicolon.
Also, let's be real. It's not the marking dupes that's problem it's all the "off topic" closures.
Side note: you work at SO and call your users "help vampires". I think that elitist attitude is a huge part of the problem we're discussing here.
There is also the familiar rush to be the first to post some news story, which is almost impossible.
All that said, I've had extremely overall positive experiences on both SO and HN. The breadth of collective expertise and depth of comments on both sites is really awe-inspiring. I view the strict rules of engagement as a feature, not a bug.
Disclaimer: I work in the Q&A team at Stack Overflow. What people don't understand is that SO serves literally all developers. No matter what choices we make there will be upset people. Do we reduce moderation? Help vampires take over. Do we keep moderation as is? People complain we are too strict (or not enough). Do we allow only English? We are elitist. Do we allow SO in other languages? We are fragmenting the comm…
What do you mean by "vampires"? I have an interest in forums, but I'm not familiar with that "category".
People always talk about how SO is so terrible, and yet it's still the best resource by a mile. People have just forgotten that the lack of that carefully curated environment created the complete mess that was all the forums we used to have before. Sure, it's not ideal - SO could do better in terms of helping people understand the site's goals and enforcing the rules in a less hostile way, but they are working on tha…
> People always talk about how SO is so terrible, and yet it's still the best resource by a mile. I can often stick with second best in class as long as it doesn't have a habit of biting you for no apparent reason all the time. > People have just forgotten that the lack of that carefully curated environment created the complete mess that was all the forums we used to have before. People keep saying that and I keep wo…
Compare with the complete shitshow you can still see on some of the survivors of the old era, like tomshardware, Msdn, and others.
> However, a 2013 study has found that 77% of users only ask one question, 65% only answer one question, and only 8% of users answer more than 5 questions. Is this actually a problem? I've always viewed Stack Overflow as a "write once, read many" community. For top questions, it looks kind of like Quora. Checking my own stats: I've been a member for 7 years, asked 4 questions, and given 45 answers while reaching ~86k…
That being said, I probably hit StackOverflow at least once a month for my job, and if I'm working on a personal side project it's probably more like once an hour.
> How do I ask a good question?
> Search, and research
> Write a title that summarizes the specific problem
> Introduce the problem before you post any code
> Help others reproduce the problem
> Include all relevant tags
> Proof-read before posting!
> Post the question and respond to feedback
> Look for help asking for help
However, writing questions in this way where you provide a MCVE, explain everything you've tried, and relate it to existing questions to help reviewers is time consuming. It shifts part of the time burden of a good question onto the asker vs reviewers or early answerers.
As someone who's done many reviews on Stack Overflow, I think following these guidelines is the best way to not get downvoted or flagged.
[1]: How do I ask a good question? http://stackoverflow.com/help/how-to-ask
If experts are uptight and arrogant the desire to learn quickly vanishes. Being friendly does not preclude being firm.
I have noticed many questions being closed in an arbritrary manner and worse in a mean spirited way. The first may be ok but the second is simple unacceptable. Who are all these people on power trips and why does SO allow it?