3 ms·

I disagree with the tweet about SO being a toxic wasteland, but OP really undermines his point by being so combative about it. Especially when he turns around a

I disagree with the tweet about SO being a toxic wasteland, but OP really undermines his point by being so combative about it. Especially when he turns around and says stuff like: > If someone really believes that Stack Overflow is toxic then they should back it up with actual data and not hysterical and slanderous remarks. It's poor form to call a woman's opinion "hysterical". There are other words that can convey a similar meaning without the heaps of sexist baggage that "hysteria" has historically implied. I suggest "inflammatory" here. It's pretty telling that of the few comments on medium, two are actually people from SO trying to distance themselves from OP's "challenge".

minimaxir 9y ago
Yes, I recommend reading the comments on this article, they're interesting. When a commenter argued that the fee is unfair toward minorites, OP replied: > What is it about minorities that makes you believe they have less propensity to make the donation? That’s blatantly racist. If you know you are going to win $10k, then it shouldn’t matter to you. I’ll be happy to lower this to $100 in 6 months if nobody makes a submission. That attitude is arguably more toxic than the typical Stack Overflow comment.
- xixi77 9y ago
  What is particularly toxic about this comment though? I would actually agree that there won't be many poor/minority people participating, but that has more to do with the challenge itself, not the fee. Poor people buy a lot of lottery tickets, particularly when the chance of winning is high. The issue here is that the chances of winning are not high, so the only reason someone would try and go after the prize would be to prove a point, and spending a lot of time and effort to prove a point like this one is a luxury many people don't have.
TedPetrou 9y ago
Thank you for the constructive feedback. I agree that I should have used 'inflammatory' and have just now changed it. The comments from SO were, unfortunately, strawmen arguments. They apparently indulge in self-flagellation to appeal to the loudest. I think it would be better if the SO team said something assertive along the lines of "No, we are not a toxic wasteland, but we have problems ..."

minimaxir 9y ago

Yes, I recommend reading the comments on this article, they're interesting. When a commenter argued that the fee is unfair toward minorites, OP replied: > What is it about minorities that makes you believe they have less propensity to make the donation? That’s blatantly racist. If you know you are going to win $10k, then it shouldn’t matter to you. I’ll be happy to lower this to $100 in 6 months if nobody makes a submission. That attitude is arguably more toxic than the typical Stack Overflow comment.

xixi77 9y ago
What is particularly toxic about this comment though? I would actually agree that there won't be many poor/minority people participating, but that has more to do with the challenge itself, not the fee. Poor people buy a lot of lottery tickets, particularly when the chance of winning is high. The issue here is that the chances of winning are not high, so the only reason someone would try and go after the prize would be to prove a point, and spending a lot of time and effort to prove a point like this one is a luxury many people don't have.

TedPetrou 9y ago

Thank you for the constructive feedback. I agree that I should have used 'inflammatory' and have just now changed it. The comments from SO were, unfortunately, strawmen arguments. They apparently indulge in self-flagellation to appeal to the loudest. I think it would be better if the SO team said something assertive along the lines of "No, we are not a toxic wasteland, but we have problems ..."