Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why I no longer contribute to Stack Overflow

michael.richter.name

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 243 posts

Re: Why I no longer contribute to Stack Overflow

#71

Post by corresation »

crntaylor wrote: post #31

The author's main problem stems from his desire to use Stack Overflow as a mechanism for gaining internet points - as is illustrated by his confession that "I saw a simple Java question, hit Google, read briefly, then synthesized an original answer." Why bother? Instead, I use Stack Overflow predominantly for three reasons -- 1. To ask interesting questions that I think will get a better answer there than anywhere el…

While you call out the author, note that the primary motivator StackOverflow offers to users are those very internet points you decry: You can't blame someone for playing to the very mechanics of the site.

Would StackOverflow be popular if it didn't have leader boards and reputation points and arrays of expertise-claiming badges? Would people spend their time working on other people's problems if it didn't earn them something they hoped to spin into professional credibility?

I suspect no.

And of course StackOverflow uses gamification to encourage people to do work for other people, for free. It is no big secret that many users are essentially free labor that do the dirty work of digging through a lot of terrible links on Google to try to find something that answers the question. For those who take advantage of this it is a wonderful resource.

There are some supremely excellent questions that through the crowd and wiki-like editing the answer ends up being exemplary. But in the general case it does seem that it allows people to skip the boring work and get groups of people fighting for badges and imaginary credibility to do it for you.

Re: Why I no longer contribute to Stack Overflow

#72

Post by adamb_ »

Did SO get everything right? No.

Is SO the best code Q/A resource available? Absolutely yes.

Remember what was used before SO? Pure shit. Open-ended help forums scattered throughout the web that had little/no moderation and no indication of where the solution could be found in the discussion, or if a solution was ever found at all. SO's aligned everyone's incentives to post the solution & the site's formatting makes it trivial and find the best solution provided.

I've personally experienced times where my questions/answers have been affected by wikipedia-esque moderation, but at the end of the day I still click on SO results first in Google & and I still visit from time-to-time to see if I can help anyone out.

Re: Why I no longer contribute to Stack Overflow

#74

Post by mbq »

crntaylor wrote: post #31

The author's main problem stems from his desire to use Stack Overflow as a mechanism for gaining internet points - as is illustrated by his confession that "I saw a simple Java question, hit Google, read briefly, then synthesized an original answer." Why bother? Instead, I use Stack Overflow predominantly for three reasons -- 1. To ask interesting questions that I think will get a better answer there than anywhere el…

Points ain't fully imaginary; they sometimes give top~100 users stickers or t-shirts (;

Re: Why I no longer contribute to Stack Overflow

#77

Post by cruise02 »

pygy_ wrote: post #58
cruise02 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's generally accepted by the community at Stack Overflow that you don't edit other people's answers except to make improvements to formatting and punctuation. Changing the code should be left to the original author of the post, as that changes the meaning of the answer. The people who rejected the edit probably didn't notice that it was the same person who suggested the edit. Mike could have avoided that by just us…

None of that changes the fact that his valid edit was rejected by incompetent mods.

99.99% of the time, rejecting a suggested edit that changes code is the right thing to to. The competence of the reviewers isn't really the issue. The author should have just used his original account to make the edit and this would have been a non-issue.

Re: Why I no longer contribute to Stack Overflow

#78

Post by cruise02 »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #68
cruise02 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, new and anonymous users do have another option, they can post their own answer. That's irrelevant anyway, since that's not what happened here. The author of the post tried to edit his own answer with a second account. He should have just used his original account and this would have never happened.

No, new and anonymous users do have another option, they can post their own answer. Which is less wrong than an edit but it`s still wrong when the appropriate response is a comment. A community can be judged by it`s responses to newbies. By this measure it fails miserably since the most common feedback many newbies get from SO are bare downvotes and rejections. What should happen is a polite response explaining the p…

The appropriate response was an edit by the author with his original account, not a comment.

Re: Why I no longer contribute to Stack Overflow

#79

Post by LanceH »

corresation wrote: post #71
crntaylor wrote: post #31

The author's main problem stems from his desire to use Stack Overflow as a mechanism for gaining internet points - as is illustrated by his confession that "I saw a simple Java question, hit Google, read briefly, then synthesized an original answer." Why bother? Instead, I use Stack Overflow predominantly for three reasons -- 1. To ask interesting questions that I think will get a better answer there than anywhere el…

While you call out the author, note that the primary motivator StackOverflow offers to users are those very internet points you decry: You can't blame someone for playing to the very mechanics of the site. Would StackOverflow be popular if it didn't have leader boards and reputation points and arrays of expertise-claiming badges? Would people spend their time working on other people's problems if it didn't earn them…

There is value in answering questions beyond just the points. A lot of answers require understanding the mechanics of the code and not just getting the right result. Then there is the matter of effectively communicating that to someone else. Last, there is feedback about your answer which further refines your skill.

He wants it to be an educational site instead of the much more pragmatic site that it is clearly designed to be. He doesn't have fun working in 2 languages he hates. He thinks that obscure answers that few people care about should count more than answers seen and used by many.

"Hey Doc, it hurts when I do this." "Stop doing that." -- He managed to play that out over a couple pages of bloated text and blames the site and not himself.

Re: Why I no longer contribute to Stack Overflow

#80

Post by V-2 »

Any idea where they went wrong? Any suggested alternative?

Some trivial Java question gets one more points than a brilliant solution for some obscure problem - okay. Isn't that the nature of all things? Is this StackOverflow's fault?

He recommends:

"Engage with other users of the tools you use in the form of user groups, mailing lists, web forums, etc."

Don't "mailing lists, web forums" suffer from the same bias? Even if there is no formalized reward system (points) there?

Post reply on HN