3 ms·

I stopped being really active on SO around the end of 2012. I don't think the reason was anything from the article. For me it was 2 fold: the rise of members wh

I stopped being really active on SO around the end of 2012. I don't think the reason was anything from the article. For me it was 2 fold: the rise of members who criticize everything and the feeling of shouting into a void. I don't have a good name for these users like help vampires. They seem more like Harry Enfield's old "Only Me!" character who show up to say "you don't want to do it like that" without providing anything useful. Post an answer to something that is tricky and doesn't really have a good solution and within minutes you'd have a comment saying "that's not the way to do it, the real solution is for the OP to start over using some other methodology". Often I'd get an accepted answer, but the comments were just grating. They'd gloss over the problem to post a rep-safe comment undermining your answer. Then the other problem I had was I would find a problem that I'd suffered before asked as a question. It was usually something fairly uncommon. I'd post an answer, then there'd be nothing. No upvotes, no response from the OP, no comments... just nothing. I figured if the original askers don't care about their questions, why should I bother? Eventually from 2012 to 2015 I just stopped answering at all. I still occasionally visit the site but don't feel motivated to get involved any more. :-(

jasonm23 10y ago
You want a nice misty buff.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
Drdrdrq 10y ago
> Then the other problem I had was I would find a problem that I'd suffered before asked as a question. It was usually something fairly uncommon. I'd post an answer, then there'd be nothing. No upvotes, no response from the OP, no comments... just nothing. I figured if the original askers don't care about their questions, why should I bother? I try to look at it the other way around. My memory is not that good and I might encounter the same problem again a few years later... Wouldn't it be nice if I found a nicely articulated answer on SO? :) That has actually happened to me more than once. I myself stopped being active (as in: chasing the score) when a question I put a lot of effort in and was actually important to me got shut down because "we don't do library recommendations here". It wasn't the first time either, but that straw broke the camel's back. Now I just take care of myself when I need something and ignore the rest of the circus. (5k+)
charlesism 10y ago
I'm with you. As far I'm concerned, Answer Puritans are more harmful than Help Vampires. Just as you mention, for most questions on StackOverflow, there is at least one "Never Do That!" answer. Nobody seems to be aware that users seldom care enough about the sites the visit to "Read the FAQ" and no matter how many of them you hunt down and guilt, you will never find them all. The site has so much moral righteousness, it's kind of like the "Stanford Prison Experiment" of help sites. While StackOverflow has many good qualities, it makes the mistake of "blaming the customer." It's an illusion to think you can improve a site by making people feel bad. The energy they spend on hunting witches, would be better spent on ways to fix the quality problem that focus on carrots only. The problem with addressing question quality by making people feel bad, is that you're setting yourself up to be (ugh) "disrupted." As soon as someone finds a way to get the same quality of results without all the pithiness, and finger pointing, you're at a big disadvantage.

jasonm23 10y ago

You want a nice misty buff.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

Drdrdrq 10y ago

> Then the other problem I had was I would find a problem that I'd suffered before asked as a question. It was usually something fairly uncommon. I'd post an answer, then there'd be nothing. No upvotes, no response from the OP, no comments... just nothing. I figured if the original askers don't care about their questions, why should I bother? I try to look at it the other way around. My memory is not that good and I might encounter the same problem again a few years later... Wouldn't it be nice if I found a nicely articulated answer on SO? :) That has actually happened to me more than once. I myself stopped being active (as in: chasing the score) when a question I put a lot of effort in and was actually important to me got shut down because "we don't do library recommendations here". It wasn't the first time either, but that straw broke the camel's back. Now I just take care of myself when I need something and ignore the rest of the circus. (5k+)

charlesism 10y ago

I'm with you. As far I'm concerned, Answer Puritans are more harmful than Help Vampires. Just as you mention, for most questions on StackOverflow, there is at least one "Never Do That!" answer. Nobody seems to be aware that users seldom care enough about the sites the visit to "Read the FAQ" and no matter how many of them you hunt down and guilt, you will never find them all. The site has so much moral righteousness, it's kind of like the "Stanford Prison Experiment" of help sites. While StackOverflow has many good qualities, it makes the mistake of "blaming the customer." It's an illusion to think you can improve a site by making people feel bad. The energy they spend on hunting witches, would be better spent on ways to fix the quality problem that focus on carrots only. The problem with addressing question quality by making people feel bad, is that you're setting yourself up to be (ugh) "disrupted." As soon as someone finds a way to get the same quality of results without all the pithiness, and finger pointing, you're at a big disadvantage.