Why I no longer contribute to Stack Overflow

Post by auggierose » Wed, Jan 01, 2014, 5:57 AM UTC

thedufer wrote: post #206

JimDabell wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're using the fact that he had two accounts as an excuse, but it really doesn't hold up. This was an edit with inarguable merit. Yet users rejected it because they were using the heuristic "changes to code is bad" as a substitute for understanding the edit . That's bad moderation. If you don't understand a change, you shouldn't vote on its worthiness.

So instead of taking the one in a thousand chance that its the wrong thing to do (which, from what I've seen, is generous) they should let edits languish for days or weeks until someone sufficiently knowledgable shows up? That just doesn't sound like a worthwhile tradeoff.

Post by milesvp » Wed, Jan 01, 2014, 6:26 AM UTC

thearn4 wrote: post #163

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…

Is there any tangible, real-world value to points on Stack Overflow (maybe some form of recognition when applying for jobs), or are they really just imaginary internet points (like reddit karma)?

Post by Karunamon » Wed, Jan 01, 2014, 7:02 AM UTC

tetha wrote: post #170

bryanlarsen wrote: post #25

Please everybody, please post your "obscure" questions to Stack Overflow. Yes, it's unlikely that you'll get a good answer in any sort of useful timeframe for many of the reasons the OP lists. Sometimes you do get a good answer quickly, saving you hours of frustrating searching. But most times you will have to spend hours figuring it out yourself or you'll end up giving up. Answering your own question won't get you a…

The core problem lies deeper than the reasons OP listed, though: Complex problems require tradeoffs, and tradeoffs require discussion. Stack overflows format is 100% incompatible with discussion. Thus, Stack overflow is largely incompatible with complex problems. That's simply not fixable.

Post by vitd » Wed, Jan 01, 2014, 7:32 AM UTC

milesvp wrote: post #213

thearn4 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any tangible, real-world value to points on Stack Overflow (maybe some form of recognition when applying for jobs), or are they really just imaginary internet points (like reddit karma)?

I suspect a high score might lead to higher income potential. I knew a guy who claimed his high SO score led to more recruiter spam.

Post by moneypenny » Wed, Jan 01, 2014, 7:46 AM UTC

LanceH wrote: post #79

corresation wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 desig…