A large number of Stack Exchange mods resigning over new policies • Hacker News Board

Re: A large number of Stack Exchange mods resigning over new policies

#201

Post by gqcwwjtg » Mon, Sep 30, 2019, 3:56 PM UTC

mark-r wrote: post #187

jordanpg wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with this is that one of the best way to learn real lessons that stick in this line of work is to do it the hard way first. Being told you’re doing it the hard way and never learning firsthand why is no kind of lesson. These XY answers should contain a mention of Y, if relevant, skip the scolding, and answer the question.

So you'd be in favor of the question "What's the best regular expression for parsing HTML?"

Sure, there's a pretty reasonable answer about regex flavors with recursive extensions and how that makes them non-regular, which transitions nicely into a discussion of why you should just use a standard parser.

Re: A large number of Stack Exchange mods resigning over new policies

#202

Post by ratww » Mon, Sep 30, 2019, 4:03 PM UTC

ceejayoz wrote: post #192

ratww wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it were a wood chipping forum/chatroom, sure, but it's a programming Q&A... people might need the answer in the future. If you have the answer but would rather the person not do it, just put a disclaimer on top of your answer. If the question/answer combo is way too specific that there's no chance someone is going to to benefit from it the future, maybe it should die, like other posters said.

There are cases where there isn't an answer. A common one I come across is people trying to track who's online/offline with window.onbeforeunload. The answer is always "that's not reliable, you can't really use it for this". A good answer mentions the alternatives - storing the user's last activity and considering them logged out after X minutes, using websockets for a presence channel, etc. I see no reason to avoid…

> The answer is always "that's not reliable, you can't really use it for this".

Only if the question is "Is window.onbeforeunload reliable to track online/offline users?"

In every other case, that should be a disclaimer on top of an answer to the actual question.

Maybe future users don't need 100% reliability for some reason. Maybe they're just trying to find out if something like onbeforeunload even exists.

Sure, showing better ways is fine. As long as there is an actual answer somewhere (preferably with the disclaimer), instead of cute but condescending non-answers like [1].

[1] https://stackoverflow.com/a/1732454

Re: A large number of Stack Exchange mods resigning over new policies

#203

Post by ratww » Mon, Sep 30, 2019, 4:07 PM UTC

mark-r wrote: post #187

jordanpg wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with this is that one of the best way to learn real lessons that stick in this line of work is to do it the hard way first. Being told you’re doing it the hard way and never learning firsthand why is no kind of lesson. These XY answers should contain a mention of Y, if relevant, skip the scolding, and answer the question.

So you'd be in favor of the question "What's the best regular expression for parsing HTML?"

Why not?

Like it or not, regexes are able to parse a limited subset of HTML.

By explaining why they only can parse this small subset is a great teaching opportunity on Chomsky Hierarchies. And the people searching for it might learn that XML parsers exist.

By actually giving an answer to the question (after saying the above of course) you might be helping thousands of people parse very simple HTML when they're in a hurry.

By saying [1] you're just adding low-effort content on the internet that doesn't teach anyone anything, but make you look cool to your peers.

[1] https://stackoverflow.com/a/1732454

Re: A large number of Stack Exchange mods resigning over new policies

#204

Post by latk » Mon, Sep 30, 2019, 4:10 PM UTC

Dobbs wrote: post #174

latk wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a perpetual tension between those who want SE to be helping everyone, and those who want to curate a helpful resource. People involved with community moderation aspects tend to fall into the latter group. For the last half decade or so SE has progressively abandoned this latter group, leading to a lot of pent-up frustration. Some changes SE has made are sensible (e.g. striving to be more welcoming and more i…

I really wish more details about this was available. > it seems that SE is unwilling to protect trans moderators from vitriol by other mods. Reading Monica's post made me pretty sure this was trans related. I'm sad that I was right. > [From Monica's Post] unlike the rest of the CoC, this rule mandates specific, positive actions. This is something I've heard many times from anti-trans activists in order to justify the…

I understand your scepticism, and was thinking hard about this before I published the linked post.

Anti-trans and anti-CoC sentiment are certainly part of the issue at hand, but likely not by Monica. Some of the resignations may be partially motivated by hate, many of the responses definitely are. However, there are many other aspects of the firing that are problematic by themselves, regardless of the reason for the firing.

It doesn't matter what Monica believes, only how she acts and speaks. It is my understanding (based on hearsay) that at no point in this incident did she make statements that would be considered transphobic by a reasonable person. While she was uncomfortable with upcoming CoC changes, she was also asking for clarification and guidance in good faith. Definitely not in that “I'm just asking a question!” trolling style. Asking sincere questions would be the sign of a potential ally, it is illogical to shut those down. However, some of the relevant correspondence is in personal emails, so we'll never know the truth.

I'm confident that she didn't say or do anything that would violate the current or upcoming SE CoC, but that the director firing her felt that Monica's questions were evidence that she would not uphold the upcoming CoC. This is silly: if a mod feels they are unable to fulfil their position they can just resign, no need to boot them in advance. I dislike the “thoughtcrime” meme, but here it might actually fit.

There's also an aspect that I find more troubling, which is the legitimacy of CoCs. They only protect the community when violations are investigated fairly. Normally the problem is that the CoC is not enforced enough. Here, a CoC was enforced without there being a violation, and that gives ammunition to the idiots who think the sole purpose of a CoC is to silence insufficiently progressive speech.

Edit 1: the first resignation is in that explicitly lists the CoC as reason for resignation [1]. The CoC will apparently require that correct pronouns are used.

Edit 2: the new CoC will allegedly require pronouns, i.e. will not allow the avoidance of pronouns. As a person who prefers non-standard pronouns, such a requirement is counterproductive because it requires some people to act against their conscience, whereas avoiding pronouns still avoids misgendering and lets everyone save face.

[1]: https://christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6718/b...

Re: A large number of Stack Exchange mods resigning over new policies

#205

Post by celticmusic » Mon, Sep 30, 2019, 4:18 PM UTC

charlesism wrote: post #105

bane wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You see this phenomenon here on HN all the time. Find anybody asking a question or help to figure something out and the first couple answers will likely be "why are you doing it that way?", followed by almost completely useless advice to do something else entirely a completely different way.

Well, it is often useful to ask why a user wants to do something a particular way, and commendable to inform them if it’s bad practice. The trouble is, if you’re going to reply that way, you should strive to first answer the question, as asked . If the answer is bad practice, of course, you should mention that. That’s the respectful way to handle a misguided question, in my opinion. Give the reader both solutions, ex…

seriously.

I've been doing this stuff a long time, there's usually a reason why I'm doing it the way I'm doing it. I understand you don't like it, think it shouldn't be done that way, and so forth.

But I promise you, I've already considered the alternatives. And if you mention an alternative I haven't considered, I'll consider it then.

But please, for the love of god, just answer the effing question and stop assuming you know the nuances of my problem better than I do.

Re: A large number of Stack Exchange mods resigning over new policies

#206

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Sep 30, 2019, 4:19 PM UTC

jasode wrote: post #127

wokwokwok wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Asking the poster about X, and offering a solution Y' which will solve X should at least be attempted. No! Goodness me, why is this so difficult? It should not be attempted. That’s an arbitrary expression of your opinion on the poster. If the question can’t be solved in the way it’s asked let it die gracefully with a “no you can’t do it that why” and suck up the down votes when someone comes along and proves yes yo…

>I know it’s frustrating for you, but asking a question _isn’t about you_. Well, if StackOveflow/StackExchange is still following Jeff Atwood's philosophy, asking a question isn't necessarily about the questioner either. The question & the answer is for the community more than questioner.[0] Understandably, most question askers see Stack Overflow as a "Siri/Alexa" type of resource to ask a question. E.g. If I ask Sir…

[deleted]

Re: A large number of Stack Exchange mods resigning over new policies

#207

Post by celticmusic » Mon, Sep 30, 2019, 4:24 PM UTC

zbentley wrote: post #99

pjc50 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

StackExchange needs a sibling forum. I know forums are in opposition to everything that SE stands for, but for quite a lot of cases the questioner would benefit more from a back-and-forth, or open-ended discussion, and then at the end of the process if it's been refined then turn it into a question. If not, then let the thread auto-close and maybe even expire into deletion. Also, any SE equivalent needs to understand…

Programmers, among others, are notoriously unable to give up on arguments. What makes you think discussion would help someone refine inquiries into a question rather than just an endless tribal war or bikeshedding session? Additionally, I can't imagine any format less friendly to a beginner/intermediate programmer than an endless thread of experts arguing minutiae and holy-wars couched as objective fact. Even as an a…

those arguments are how you learn.

I get what you're saying, but I can tell you personally I learned SOOO much from getting into arguments with people and then going off and doing research during the argument.

And sometimes I'll completely do a 180 after a few years because I REMEMBER those arguments, and I eventually understand their perspective because I started coming across the problems they were having.

I may not always do a 180, but I WILL more fully understand the pros and cons of everything.

And this is a major reason why the "discourse" here on HN is only half useful.

Too many people think not being challenged is somehow good and educational. Perhaps for a subset of people, but there are many like me who learn through challenge.

Just consider that often the very act of responding to someone forces you to consider their position better. Which is why trite dismissal is one of the poorest forms of argumentation ever made.

Re: A large number of Stack Exchange mods resigning over new policies

#208

Post by celticmusic » Mon, Sep 30, 2019, 4:26 PM UTC

mieseratte wrote: post #31

goatinaboat wrote: post #9

I have always found Monica Cellio to be a great moderator. If she has been fired then something is deeply wrong over at Stack Exchange.

First manager I've had, great guy and despite his shortcomings I'd work with him again. Straightforward honest guy, did he work well, mentored me well. Then one day he assaulted another coworker in the break room. Someone's on-the-job performance doesn't mean they are always and forever in the right. Given the lack of any concrete evidence posted but lots of hand-wringing and pearl clutching about vague incidences, I…

I'm curious as to what lead up to the assault.

Re: A large number of Stack Exchange mods resigning over new policies

#209

Post by crispyambulance » Mon, Sep 30, 2019, 4:27 PM UTC

TedPetrou wrote: post #200

crispyambulance wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is a perpetual tension between those who want SE to be helping everyone, and those who want to curate a helpful resource. ... This is the core issue and it's really hard to perceive unless you've watched stackexchange sites evolve over the years. There's a sizeable contingent of folks who truly believe in "the mission" of stackexchange and have uncanny strict interpretations of the rules as expressed in the F…

When I visit someone else's house, I do my best to adhere to any rules or customs they may have. I usually stay quiet, listen, and attempt to understand their ways. Stack Exchange is not really any different than visiting a stranger's home. SE has its own set of rules and customs. It takes effort to sit back, listen, and understand them without questioning them. Just accepting them for what they are without any judgm…

    > SE is successful because there are a strict set of rules that restrict the set of content that can be posted. It is these rules that have lead to its success.

Well, you can have "the rules" in a spectrum of ways ranging from "loose", to "reasonable", to "strict" to "pedantic". The contingent that I am talking about has been leaning very hard on "pedantic".

The sites have never been even remotely consistent in their enforcement of the rules, so it is really not possible to make the claim that "strictness" is what has made stackexchange a success. Many of the things that the strict people abhor are some of the best things on the sites-- like comments, open-ended questions, answers that question the question. This is especially true in stackexchanges like "The Workplace".

It remains to be seen what really caused Monica to get ousted (not "fired") as a moderator. I expect it to be something quite ugly relating to the upcoming guidelines that most people haven't seen yet.

Re: A large number of Stack Exchange mods resigning over new policies

#210

Post by Dobbs » Mon, Sep 30, 2019, 4:30 PM UTC

latk wrote: post #204

Dobbs wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really wish more details about this was available. > it seems that SE is unwilling to protect trans moderators from vitriol by other mods. Reading Monica's post made me pretty sure this was trans related. I'm sad that I was right. > [From Monica's Post] unlike the rest of the CoC, this rule mandates specific, positive actions. This is something I've heard many times from anti-trans activists in order to justify the…

I understand your scepticism, and was thinking hard about this before I published the linked post. Anti-trans and anti-CoC sentiment are certainly part of the issue at hand, but likely not by Monica. Some of the resignations may be partially motivated by hate, many of the responses definitely are. However, there are many other aspects of the firing that are problematic by themselves, regardless of the reason for the…

Thanks. I do appreciate the details, and the discussion around this. As I said I don't know what Monica said so I'm trying to reserve judgement, but I am sceptical because of how I've seen many of these arguments play out. I would be interested in seeing the details of the particular conversation, because this is one of those situations where details really truly matter.