29 ms·

A large number of Stack Exchange mods resigning over new policies

338 points by raesene9 7y ago

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
middleload 7y ago
It's not clear to me. Were those people paid or volunteers?
- raesene9 7y ago
  mods are volunteers, who provide their time for free to improve the site, I'm not aware of any mods that are paid.
  - ianai 7y ago
    How is that acceptable? People need to be paid for working.
    - mieseratte 7y ago
      It's voluntary, volunteering... there's no need for payment. I say this as someone who has previously run for (and lost) a moderator role.
    - sverige 7y ago
      Or, people need to stop volunteering their time for free to commercial enterprises and then thinking that time investment gives them rights regarding the management of the enterprise.
      - ianai 7y ago
        If you pay people for their labor then you can set terms in exchange for pay. It validates and reinforces the agreement. I’m being attached here for saying people should be paid for work.
        deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
        icebraining 7y ago
        Not having to accept terms is the point, or one of the major points, though. As an employee, you're beholden to the company, whereas as a volunteer, you don't owe them anything. That doesn't mean exploitation isn't real and shouldn't be combated, but I think there's also a grey area that should be acknowledged. By the way, what do you think of open source, and companies which use it?
        sverige 7y ago
        My intent was not to attack you but rather the idea that contributing to internet forums somehow gives you any ownership rights to the forum. For example, I don't know if HN makes money off this forum, but all of us commenters are contributing content that furthers the site's goals (hopefully). Yes, dang and sctb are paid to moderate this forum, but if there were no comments, there would be nothing to moderate. Does that mean that by virtue of participating here for seven years I somehow have some right to tell them how to run their business? No, because there's no employment agreement. And even if there were any agreement, I doubt we would have the ability to do anything about some sudden change in direction from the C suite. The realization that mere comments or the moderation of them on an internet forum create uncompensated content that someone else may profit from is apparently not as plain as I thought it was.
      - MauranKilom 7y ago
        Of course it doesn't grant them explicit rights, but it for sure grants implicit leverage if said commercial enterprise depends on these voluntary contributions. "Alienate your contributors, lose the basis of your business" doesn't sound very sustainable.
    - johannes1234321 7y ago
      Volunteering is a common concept in many communities. We have volunteer fire fighters, volunteer paramedics, volunteer librarians, volunteer social worker, volunteer ... Some of these in fields, and sometimes even in close alignment to payed people. In the context of SO there is a community producing Creative Commons (while there was recently a license change making the company less trustworthy) contents to help people and some people love helping others and the assumption is that the value this brings to all is bigger than the value for the company. Until recently the combination seemed to work. The company runs the platform to advertise their job boards and enterprise versions of SO and the community manages the content. But recently changes seem to be frustrating. For comparison see also Wikipedia volunteers vs. Wikipedia foundation, Mozilla foundation&corp vs. Contributors, and even people happily submitting pull requests to Microsoft products on GitHub.
      - syshum 7y ago
        Wikipedia and Mozilla were at one time mainly Non-Profits that people volunteered at for the same reason people volunteer at other non-profits, to benefit wider society Both are turning more and more to be more profit-seeking, (Mozilla more than Wikipedia ) and it is tarnishing their reputations SE has always been a for-profit business, this makes Volunteering more like Free Labor and less like "doing something good for humanity". Generally speaking, I do not believe For-Profit business should be allowed to seek Volunteers for their labor, this includes SE, Reddit, etc If a business model can not pay for labor, then it needs to be a Non-profit Foundation, not a for-profit business
        mieseratte 7y ago
        > SE has always been a for-profit business, this makes Volunteering more like Free Labor and less like "doing something good for humanity". > If a business model can not pay for labor, then it needs to be a Non-profit Foundation, not a for-profit business Considering executive compensation at many non-profits, I don't think non-profit status alone is a good indicator of anything. As for SO / SE, I didn't volunteer time and effort in light of their non-profit status, I volunteered in light of their mission. It was about putting in some amount of effort to make the world a better place. I couldn't care less if they made money off of it, just like I don't care if someone takes my open-source work and manages to make a business of it.
    - cies 7y ago
      There is a lot of "work" that goes unpaid. House work. Internships. And many artist work for free in order to get exposure.
      - icebraining 7y ago
        > Internships. And many artist work for free in order to get exposure. Both of those (assuming the work is for for-profit companies) are controversial as well.
      - scollet 7y ago
        You listed two jobs here.
fffjdtcsebj 7y ago
> "they think I will in the future violate a thoughtcrime-style provision of a Code of Conduct change that hasn't been made yet" Seems like a code of conduct issue?
jmkni 7y ago
Spotted this on the hot question list, totally out of the loop on the latest SE drama, can somebody fill me in?
- latk 7y ago
  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 inclusive), but the volunteer work of curators has only become more difficult. SE refuses to implement new tools to aid moderation, so that e.g. spam fighting is mostly done by volunteer projects. That only sets the general scene. Since the last year or so SE has stopped engaging the community on Meta, mostly just announcing changes top-down. Tweets by third parties have larger impact on SE policy than long-standing complaints by the community. This has led to a further deterioration of the relationship. The illegal changes to the content license a month ago are a perfect example of this top-down, uncooperative approach. Now the actual drama starts: in a closed moderator chat, there was some kind of discussion or disagreement. I'm not privy to the details. Not all of this is nice, e.g. it seems that SE is unwilling to protect trans moderators from vitriol by other mods. But to everyone's confusion, Monica Cellio was suddenly removed as a volunteer moderator. She is known as being extremely reasonable, experienced, and sincere. While she might have tried to discuss sincere questions, it is beyond belief that she would attack another moderator. So moderators and other engaged users are deeply frustrated, see a company that no longer engages with the community, does stupid decisions, and has now fired one of the best volunteer moderators in a despicable manner. For a lot of people, this is the straw that broke the camel's back. E.g. one mod I know decided to resign because they now see themselves completely unable to achieve any positive change on the site. And if Monica isn't a good-enough mod, how can they hope to be remotely adequate? Disclosure: I wrote the linked Meta.SE question. It is my belief that SE the company and SE the community need to cooperate for both to be successful. Yes, the community can sometimes be toxic. But the company seems to have given up completely on engaging with the community, and that does not bode well.
workthrowaway 7y ago
that's like, not a "large number" but i digress... just wanted to say that i empathize with the mod that wrote they just were just tired. mods getting tired is reason #1 i left a few communities in the past. it usually means that things aren't looking good. but there is little that could be done about it. i have not seen it last though. a new wave of people tend to come along with a fresh view on how to handle things. the meantime, though, is what's hard to live through. it's what makes people tired and what makes them move on...
nfogort 7y ago
Yay, maybe interesting questions/discussion won’t be shut down now!
- Avamander 7y ago
  I have the feeling the people who fought back at the annoying closing and overly strict rules got pushed out, not vice versa.
goatinaboat 7y ago
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.
- mieseratte 7y ago
  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 think reserving judgment is the proper course.
  - baud147258 7y ago
    Considering how rarely the community get any answer from the SE company, I doubt we'd ever get their side of the story.
    - mieseratte 7y ago
      Well until someone comes forward with some concrete evidence we'll never anything beyond this he said, she said tale.
      - nullc 7y ago
        Don't you mean, "a she-said / stonewall-silence tale"?
  - vorpalhex 7y ago
    Aren't you ignoring your own advice by supporting the dismissal of a moderator before the policy they supposedly might break is even in effect? It seems like SE got rid of a mod because they voiced concerns about an upcoming rule change... comparing that to assaulting someone is a cheap shot.
ykevinator 7y ago
The moderators don't add value.
- mellosouls 7y ago
  I think this is untrue. Some do, some less so. Certainly there is a toxic tendency for some mods to become power crazed, assume a higher understanding of the world than the lowly non-mods and mod everything into oblivion. There is also sometimes a tribal back-slapping tendency that doesn't always weed out this nonsense but encourages it. I don't know if that is involved in this case.
  - SnarkAsh 7y ago
    There are a lot of very toxic moderators on the network. As far as I recognize, none of them are among the resigned. They'll probably be more prominent now that reasonable kind people like Monica have been removed.
scarejunba 7y ago
Every one of these community groups inevitably has some sort of internal political strife of some sort. I've never found any meaning in attempting to engage their politics in any more than the most basic sense. The groups always exaggerate the impact of actions upon the rest of us when it's usually a no-op as far as we're concerned. E.g. Reddit iama had this massive controversy around a Reddit facilitator being fired and everyone predicted insta failure or whatever. Lots of time passed and the product is still pretty damned successful (Bill Gates was on it within the last year). I'm sure Wikipedia has had "I'm stepping down" posts and whatnot. Perhaps the learning is that it isn't a worthwhile way to seek meaning in your life to give away volunteer hours moderating sites unless they're your own or you're paid for it. It is a pointless place to put your self-worth because disagreements will occur and they will be enforced as the site owner desires. Your hours earn you no power.
- Avamander 7y ago
  I think I haven't really read an AMA for years now, they're all very bland now.
  - mieseratte 7y ago
    Bigger names, politicians, etc. too often seem to be bland, seemingly PR-run affairs. For smaller names and niche topics, there is often some legitimate discussion worth reading. Of course sometimes the bigger ones are great for another reason, their PR-run effort blows up in their face. The recent Beto AMA was a great dumpster fire of a read.
- dsr_ 7y ago
  The quality of iama clearly declined and has not recovered. Is that success? Not by my standard. But it might be successful from Reddit's corporate point of view, since they are no longer paying her salary.
- hos234 7y ago
  Misguided yet understandable conclusion. People enjoy doing things for others. It's a deep Need people have. If mass violence and wars, natural disasters of all kinds through the ages, have not been able to make us more selfish and wipe out that need, internet drama is not going to either. The process is messy sure, and if you are experiencing it for the first time it can be confusing, repulsive and misleading. It's not a good idea to follow those feelings and make conclusions. Because those conclusions will obscure from your view, the reasons why anything good happens in the world.
mellosouls 7y ago
There is no detail of the actual argument, just loads of people claiming to be in the know and indicating toxic behaviour and dramatic battles behind the scenes. There's a lot of flouncing resignations and "we need to talk" style essays also revealing little of substance. Considering the passion involved some people have clearly been hurt, but perhaps that's due to the amount of time they have invested in somebody else's commercial enterprise ("our community") while believing it's something more. Perhaps what they are trying to say is the "something more" (presumably the voluntary contributions) is being undermined by paid staff. It's not clear. At the moment it all reads a bit like a tin pot Game of Thrones though.
- mieseratte 7y ago
  > There's a lot of flouncing resignations and "we need to talk" style essays also revealing little of substance. I feel similarly, I've read all of Monica Cellio's posts and still have no real idea what is going on. Lot's of talk of DMs and messages and emails, but nothing concrete posted, just he said / she said, all while alleging personal innocence and purity. If there is some concrete evidence and examples, put up or shut up. This is the internet, your word isn't worth much.
  - Dayshine 7y ago
    Well, they were internally discussing a proposed Code of Conduct. I imagine mods are bound by an NDA, and management are choosing not to share.
    - wendyshu 7y ago
      Ah. Very frustrating to read complaints that omit key info. Would have been nice if they explained that they're under an NDA.
      - SnarkAsh 7y ago
        I agree it should have been clarified, but the initial intended audience was meta users who would be familiar. Elected moderators need to accept the https://stackoverflow.com/legal/moderator-agreement https://stackoverflow.com/legal/moderator-agreement agreement before they're giving their privileges, and they have to agree not to disclose any information that they get obtain using their mod access, such as the private discussions between moderators and staff here. It might not be legally binding, but Stack Overflow could plausibly delete their account as punishment.
legostormtroopr 7y ago
Its bittersweet to see Stack Overflow continue its downward spiral. Given all that is happening there, I'd give it about 12 months before they start implementing a paywall there of some description.
- Insanity 7y ago
  I doubt the paywall idea to be honest. They have other revenue streams like SO for teams.
perlgeek 7y ago
Do Jeff Atwood and Joel Spolsky still a say in how SE is run? If yes, now would be the perfect time to step in and moderate the discussion.
- romanovcode 7y ago
  He quit just a month or so ago. https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2019/03/28/the-next-ceo-of-stack-overflow/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2019/03/28/the-next-ceo-of-st...
- mellosouls 7y ago
  In the linked post Jeff Atwood is in the comments moaning about the title.
  - aedron 7y ago
    I believe it was also Jeff Atwood who, for the longest time, could not fathom why people did not like being forced to use OpenID to log into Stack Overflow. Like, he could literally not fathom it and agonized in blog posts over his own inability to understand people (he was quite honest about it). Even though they caved on this point, to this day Stack Overflow actively fights new users trying to get in and participate on the platform (I have long since given up).
    - falsedan 7y ago
      Jeff seems to have a lot of trouble empathising with users, especially when they want something that clashes with whatever he has discovered is the 'right' solution. See blocklists in discourse, why people join unions, &c.
- w-m 7y ago
  One of the moderators resigned by citing a persistent pattern of corporate missteps and a monumentally deplorable moderator dismissal. Jeff Atwood commented under the resignation: "It is definitely hard to see long time deep contributors go, but this is sometimes the way of life. I don't begrudge anyone after ~10 years wanting a change." https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/389906/moderator-resignation-notice#comment730705_389906 https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/389906/moderator-re... Hardly seems helpful to me in calming down the heated minds.
raxxorrax 7y ago
I see a lot of people arguing about mods being too strict. I abhor the recent trend of content decontamination like many others do. But for Q&A sites like SE, I think it is a necessity to stay on topic. Yes, some moderators might have been too eager in some cases, happened to me too. But since these people are all volunteers, I think they should get some support from the community. I mean I might have to look for another job if SE ever gets shut down and a lot of knowledge would immediately be lost. Many people seem to know some mods personally. I have spend a lot of time on that site and couldn't even name one moderator by name/handle. Quite ironic that a site with a wealth of knowledge has problems with monetization. Some things in the internet economy seem to be quite off.
- TheOtherHobbes 7y ago
  IME business cultures polarise along the politics/product axis. When politics - i.e. status games and power plays - are prioritised over product quality, bad things happen. Unfortunately SE seems to have chosen the former over the latter. I have suspicions that amateur modding is part of the problem. I hope SE doesn't shut down, because currently it's still helpful in spite of itself - although probably more for experienced users than absolute beginners. But I think a lot of people would like to see a saner and more concise alternative with a more generous and less confrontational culture.
- dandare 7y ago
  > necessity to stay on topic Try a little exercise: ask a computer literate person not familiar with SE to find out what questions are on-topic on https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/ https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/
  - aloisdg 7y ago
    Ask about... software development methods and practices requirements, architecture, and design quality assurance and testing configuration, build, and release management Not all questions work well in our format. Avoid questions that are primarily opinion-based, or that are likely to generate discussion rather than answers. Questions that need improvement may be closed until someone fixes them. Don't ask about... explaining, writing or debugging code support for tools or products finding or recommending products or services, including tools, libraries or packages, programming languages, books, scholarly papers, tutorials, articles, or blogs career or education advice legal advice or aid from the faq/tour: https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/tour https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/tour
MrStonedOne 7y ago
This is natural selection at work. Stack Exchange has become a frustrating site to use. "Closed as duplicate: different and unrelated question" reopen further explaining the question and how its not related "Closed as duplicate: the first question that was immediately closed with no replies" OR! Google around, find SE link on issue, everybody is arguing about why the user wants to do it that why, convinces them to do it another way, only I don't have that option, so I open my own question, and its closed as a dupe of the one from google where the original question was never answered. or Post helpful answer that actually answers the users question as asked without berating them for wanting to do it that way Get yelled at in the comments for creating noise? --- The moral of the story is that stack exchange needs to die so that something else can come from its ashes that is able to look back at SE as an example of how not to do shit.
- Avamander 7y ago
  It would help to just remove the current moderators that are super pedantic about building a "knowledge base", when actually they just like exercising their power. I've also noticed a recent trend that moderators on SO are also now deleting questions to stop any objections to the close votes from lower-ranked users, it's ridiculous.
  - LeoNatan25 7y ago
    Questions are rarely deleted by moderators. The community, through voting, is very often the one to delete through voting directly, or through severe downvoting, in which case a bot removes bad questions. And if you have higher score, you can still see these deleted questions and answers.
    - Avamander 7y ago
      Moderators are part of the community that can vote and high-ranked people that vote have access to mod tools - they're basically moderators - just without the diamond. I can see quite a lot, not everything though, and I don't want to grind reputation asking inane questions to get access to more, to keep my detailed questions from being closed without explanation and then deleted. These kafkaesque trials are ridiculous and obnoxious.
_Codemonkeyism 7y ago
Stack Exchange has developed the same group of power people that rule Wikipedia. They have arcane rules with the major effect of keeping people out. Stack Exchange is good to read, but hard to ask a question that is not immediately due to some rule.
sireat 7y ago
What I am curious why haven't we seen a quality mashup of a SE site? Some sort of interesting curation/filters etc. Even the new CC-share-alike allows commercial mixins https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ . So being that SE started with SO and thus heavy programming emphasis there should be a plethora of interesting mashups. Instead the only SE content derived sites have been banal copies.
- kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
  Google will kill it like the Wikipedia clones.
thrownaway954 7y ago
In order for a community to succeed, there must be a continual rotation of the people in power so that no one can be corrupted by it. Moderators to me are the same as a dictatorship. There shouldn't be any moderators on SE, the community should be voting on what is valid question and upvoting the best answers as it has always done. There is no need for a single person to police each community. If something is off topic then the community can vote on removing or moving the topic or answer. The issue with SE is the fact that they have allowed moderators to have too much power and too control over the communities. In changing their policies it has caused a removal of the moderators so that communities are force to come together to survive then I feel that this was a good step for SE as a whole. Though there will be some hard times at first I think that SE will become the site that it founders actually envisioned.
- baud147258 7y ago
  I think the issue is not just moderator vs rest of the community, but also SE company (well, its employees) vs the moderator vs the rest of the community, with all groups having different purposes and goal (and even the moderators and community have more sub-groups, around openness, quality, governance and so on). It's not just the case of mods having too much power.
  - baud147258 7y ago
    And one could even add more fault lines, between SO's community and mods and the rest of the sites of SE, since the rest of the sites don't have the same issues as SO, for example regarding discrimination, inclusivness, welcoming..., but rules are made and applied by the SE company on all the sites, creating even more issues.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
fabian2k 7y ago
In most, if not all of the resignations the primary reason for resigning was the way the firing of one moderator was handled. The internally announced changes to the policies were not necessarily the reason for the resignations. The headline is pretty misleading in that regard.
chrshawkes 7y ago
I personally decided to boycott the site for several reasons explained here. In short, the site allows dicks to run rampant and I find more answers on GitHub these days. http://bit.ly/2mfUvCs http://bit.ly/2mfUvCs
- iliketocomplain 7y ago
  Why the heck would you use a short link? On HN?
Jun8 7y ago
My understanding is that the train of events that resulted in mod Monica Cellio’s demodding from SE started with a gender-related complaint tweet (https://medium.com/@cellio/dear-stack-overflow-we-need-to-talk-13bf3f90204f https://medium.com/@cellio/dear-stack-overflow-we-need-to-ta...). Companies are now very sensitive to this pattern, esp. true for SE due to the ongoing changes there.
- ForHackernews 7y ago
  > esp. true for SE due to the ongoing changes there For the benefit of those of us who don't closely follow Stack Overflow meta-drama, can you explain what this is alluding to?
  - Jun8 7y ago
    Recent change in management discussed here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21062191 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21062191 was widely interpreted as getting ready for SE to be sold. At this point any sort of bad publicity would be shunned, especially. of the “it’s not a welcoming community” kind.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
- lonelappde 7y ago
  That Twitter kerfuffle was in 2018. Has there been ongoing train of events since then? Monica mentions "this rule mandates specific, positive actions." but not what the rule is, which I find disquieting. What is the rule, and if it's so bad, and also public (it's a new rule everyone has to know, right?), why is being kept secret?
  - hapless 7y ago
    Using the correct pronouns for trans people. That’s it.
  - 7y ago
jjakque 7y ago
Anyone else felt disconcerting about the reoccurring theme of platform attracts communicated generated content, only to shift interest/motive once critical mass is achieved?
- marcosdumay 7y ago
  Community starts with good people; creates good content; attracts more people; that new people tends to average; contents tends to average; new people tends even more to average; contents quality becomes average; community isn't good anymore. The cycle certainly didn't start with groups over a computer network, but I think it's very unlikely that it started before written texts. So there's ~8k years window there. It's not literally timeless, but does feel like so.
  - Wowfunhappy 7y ago
    GP wasn't talking about the community, but of changes dictated by the corporation running the website for that community, which is an important distinction.
umvi 7y ago
So why hasn't an alternative to SO emerged where users can come, everyone who thirsts, come to the waters; and he who has no money, come, ask and learn! Come, ask questions and get expert answers without money and without price
- MauranKilom 7y ago
  Isn't that how literally any forum operates? Maybe the SO format has some merit that made it come out so far ahead of any kind of forum?
Wowfunhappy 7y ago
I am legitimately curious—and concerned—about the relicensing of answers. It really seems as though they shouldn't be able to do that. And if they can, can they also change the license to "all rights reserved by SE"?
- oliwarner 7y ago
  Like GPL, CCBYSA allows you —the licensee— to pick a future version of the same license. That is, if you receive a copy of work under v3, you can make it available under v4, no questions asked. That's all SE has done here. Exercised a clause in the license. If you don't like that, don't submit content under licenses that allow it.
  - Wowfunhappy 7y ago
    I don't think that's true, see: https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/4.0_upgrade_guidelines https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/4.0_upgrade_guidelines > Original contributions remain under prior version unless express permission to upgrade is obtained.
    - oliwarner 7y ago
      Edit: I'm misreading the text[0]. Section 4, clause b: > You may Distribute or Publicly Perform an Adaptation only under the terms of: (i) this License; (ii) a later version of this License with the same License Elements as this License ... That only covers adaptations. Ignore me. [0]: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode
Pfhreak 7y ago
Reading between the lines, it looks like a queer mod felt unsupported by SE over a long period of time, and SE eventually decided to make a code of conduct change. These mods disagreed with that change (some using language like "thought crime") which precipitated their resignations?
- MrStonedOne 7y ago
  It looks more like one mod voiced something potentially ranging between legit concerns to outright argumentative opposition (we don't know) and got demodded for that, and a bunch of other mods are quitting in protest in part because of that, and in part because they feel it went from a mod as first class citizens community with a business component to a top down structure of decisions they have no say in. Basically if there was going to be a new rule, some of the mods would have preferred if SE had came to meta and asked for help writing it and feedback on it, and instead of being told what the new rule was going to be.
- commandlinefan 7y ago
  > reading between the lines The lines here are so blurry, I can’t make heads or tails out of any of this. All I can tell for sure is that some of the mods are upset about something (but won’t or can’t say what) and they’re leaving SO. The forced abstraction of this whole saga reminds me of stories I’ve heard from people who lived under communist dictatorships: they’d have to peel back multiple layers of insinuations to try to figure out what was actually meant. The way some of the commenters on here are dancing around saying anything concrete suggests that there are a few people who do know what’s going on but are afraid to come out and say what it is.
  - csande17 7y ago
    I read through the resignation notices linked from OP, and this one seems to provide some more detail: https://christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6718/brothers-i-must-go https://christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6718/b...
    - 7y ago
wendyshu 7y ago
What's the best alternative to Stack Overflow?
- danesparza 7y ago
  Well ... Google? shrugs
  - commandlinefan 7y ago
    Nearly every google search I’ve done for the past decade pulls up SO first.
- jolmg 7y ago
  Official and unofficial documentation, IRC, mailing lists, forums, and source code.
- kaffeemitsahne 7y ago
  Github issues is something I've seen mentioned in this context.
LoneWolf123 7y ago
Back in the day I used to be among top users on that site - they even sent me a T-shirt at some time. Left several years ago, as the site became toxic. I'm not mentioning this "top user" thing on my resume anymore, because not relevant. The site is still an excellent source of information about all things that were cool ten years ago, such as Java, Spring, SQL, Python.
dimillian 7y ago
So much politics about that. I go on on SO from Google, find solution to my problem. Sometime add my own answers. And sometime I post question when I can't find solution. End of the story. Why the fuck it need to be so complicated?
- twic 7y ago
  The problem is, of course, the humans.
- lonelappde 7y ago
  Because at the end of the day, SO/SE and everything is in the service of human culture, not a Platonic ideal in and of itself. So the culture wars fold back in on it.
quantguy11959 7y ago
I got downvoted to oblivion for reporting a bug to them, with several SO devs trying to explain it’s not a bug, this doesn’t surprise me.
chance_state 7y ago
Is there any detail anywhere about why Monica Cellio was fired? Will no one leak the internal chat that was supposedly the justification for her firing? All I can see online is everyone vaguely talking around the issue. Make the facts public and let people decide for themselves.
calibas 7y ago
Why did this story drop off the front page so quickly when it was one of the most popular? Is the flag system being abused?
Havoc 7y ago
RIP SE Reminds me of the company take overs where the key asset is human capital and they all just walk out the door after the deal. Congrats you bought an empty building for billions Don't think SE is ever going to be profitable if they can't keep key figures happy
rurban 7y ago
Without studying it thoroughly I would comment: Great, finally! Moderator abuse was the biggest problem on SO, without any oversight.
csande17 7y ago
This resignation notice from a moderator on the Christianity Stack Exchange appears to provide the most detail about what's going on: https://christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6718/brothers-i-must-go https://christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6718/b...
- wendyshu 7y ago
  Aha, the Jordan Peterson issue.
  - doordonot 7y ago
    Yes, it's exactly the same issue; FORCING specific speech which is quite different than BANNING some speech (hate speech for instance).
    - apta 7y ago
      And the far left doesn't even realize what they're doing.
      - fapjacks 7y ago
        If ever there were any doubt about the validity of the horseshoe theory...
- 9HZZRfNlpR 7y ago
  The whole pronoun drama that is inherently American is tearing down international communities left and right despite it not being even an issue.
  - chipotle_coyote 7y ago
    If it really wasn't even an issue, this wouldn't be coming up as often as it does, though, would it? To me, "if someone tells you they prefer singular 'they', use that" is non-controversial, just like "if someone tells you they go by 'Goldie,' use that" should be. Insisting "No, I am going to call you by the pronouns I believe are 'correct' for you" is akin to "No, your legal name is 'Marigold,' and I am going to call you 'Mary.'" Insisting that you will not, under any circumstances, call a person what they've requested you call them is -- to me -- pretty clearly being a discourteous jerk. There are a lot of valid complaints about the way Stack Overflow moderates in general, but I don't get the impression that this particular squabble is over moderation practices -- it seems to be about upcoming changes to SO's Code of Conduct. I don't know what those changes are, so I'll reserve judgement. I am certainly hoping that it doesn't boil down to "I cannot abide being required to refer to transgender women with 'her' and 'she'," though.
johnwheeler 7y ago
The old system, whatever it was, incentivized bad mod behavior and ruined the experience.
cannabis_sam 7y ago
The whole concept is pretty asinine: ”Collect points to gain the power to fuck with other peoples questions!”
hapless 7y ago
The policy in question appears to be affirmatively requiring moderators not to (deliberately) mis-gender trans people, or allow user content to do the same. All these ex-mods wrote these coy essays with discussions of free will and human rights in order to avoid discussing the issue at hand. Trans people are surely a more important part of the StackExchange community and business than a few unpaid volunteers. I am not sorry that Monica’s feelings were hurt by a demand for basic human decency.
- yanderekko 7y ago
  >The policy in question appears to be affirmatively requiring moderators not to (deliberately) mis-gender trans people This is either incorrect or relies on an unconventionally broad notion of "misgendering." Normally misgendering is understood to be the act of using pronouns other than a person's preferred pronouns, the point of controversy is that now simply avoiding pronouns can be considered an act of misgendering. This is new territory.
  - lilyball 7y ago
    If you very conspicuously avoid using pronouns for someone, it’s pretty obvious what’s going on and that you’re deliberately avoiding gendering someone correctly. It’s not as bad as using the wrong pronouns, but it’s still very disrespectful.
    - Wowfunhappy 7y ago
      I think we need to see this policy. Particularly on a Q&A site, avoiding gendered pronouns altogether strikes me as the _most_ practical policy. It's what I (try my best to remember to) do on Hacker News. I don't know what pronouns the GP prefers, and I can't very well ask them right now, so if I have to refer to them, I'll either say "they" or "the GP".
      - dragonwriter 7y ago
        The specific complaint made by one of the mods is that avoiding pronouns for or disengaging from a specific person to avoid using is viewed as improper under the new CoC. That's not the same as avoiding pronouns generally, it's differential treatment of an individual for not conforming to your preferred gender expression.

338 points by raesene9 7y ago

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

middleload 7y ago

It's not clear to me. Were those people paid or volunteers?

raesene9 7y ago
mods are volunteers, who provide their time for free to improve the site, I'm not aware of any mods that are paid.
- ianai 7y ago
  How is that acceptable? People need to be paid for working.
  - mieseratte 7y ago
    It's voluntary, volunteering... there's no need for payment. I say this as someone who has previously run for (and lost) a moderator role.
  - sverige 7y ago
    Or, people need to stop volunteering their time for free to commercial enterprises and then thinking that time investment gives them rights regarding the management of the enterprise.
    - ianai 7y ago
      If you pay people for their labor then you can set terms in exchange for pay. It validates and reinforces the agreement. I’m being attached here for saying people should be paid for work.
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
      - icebraining 7y ago
        Not having to accept terms is the point, or one of the major points, though. As an employee, you're beholden to the company, whereas as a volunteer, you don't owe them anything. That doesn't mean exploitation isn't real and shouldn't be combated, but I think there's also a grey area that should be acknowledged. By the way, what do you think of open source, and companies which use it?
      - sverige 7y ago
        My intent was not to attack you but rather the idea that contributing to internet forums somehow gives you any ownership rights to the forum. For example, I don't know if HN makes money off this forum, but all of us commenters are contributing content that furthers the site's goals (hopefully). Yes, dang and sctb are paid to moderate this forum, but if there were no comments, there would be nothing to moderate. Does that mean that by virtue of participating here for seven years I somehow have some right to tell them how to run their business? No, because there's no employment agreement. And even if there were any agreement, I doubt we would have the ability to do anything about some sudden change in direction from the C suite. The realization that mere comments or the moderation of them on an internet forum create uncompensated content that someone else may profit from is apparently not as plain as I thought it was.
    - MauranKilom 7y ago
      Of course it doesn't grant them explicit rights, but it for sure grants implicit leverage if said commercial enterprise depends on these voluntary contributions. "Alienate your contributors, lose the basis of your business" doesn't sound very sustainable.
  - johannes1234321 7y ago
    Volunteering is a common concept in many communities. We have volunteer fire fighters, volunteer paramedics, volunteer librarians, volunteer social worker, volunteer ... Some of these in fields, and sometimes even in close alignment to payed people. In the context of SO there is a community producing Creative Commons (while there was recently a license change making the company less trustworthy) contents to help people and some people love helping others and the assumption is that the value this brings to all is bigger than the value for the company. Until recently the combination seemed to work. The company runs the platform to advertise their job boards and enterprise versions of SO and the community manages the content. But recently changes seem to be frustrating. For comparison see also Wikipedia volunteers vs. Wikipedia foundation, Mozilla foundation&corp vs. Contributors, and even people happily submitting pull requests to Microsoft products on GitHub.
    - syshum 7y ago
      Wikipedia and Mozilla were at one time mainly Non-Profits that people volunteered at for the same reason people volunteer at other non-profits, to benefit wider society Both are turning more and more to be more profit-seeking, (Mozilla more than Wikipedia ) and it is tarnishing their reputations SE has always been a for-profit business, this makes Volunteering more like Free Labor and less like "doing something good for humanity". Generally speaking, I do not believe For-Profit business should be allowed to seek Volunteers for their labor, this includes SE, Reddit, etc If a business model can not pay for labor, then it needs to be a Non-profit Foundation, not a for-profit business
      - mieseratte 7y ago
        > SE has always been a for-profit business, this makes Volunteering more like Free Labor and less like "doing something good for humanity". > If a business model can not pay for labor, then it needs to be a Non-profit Foundation, not a for-profit business Considering executive compensation at many non-profits, I don't think non-profit status alone is a good indicator of anything. As for SO / SE, I didn't volunteer time and effort in light of their non-profit status, I volunteered in light of their mission. It was about putting in some amount of effort to make the world a better place. I couldn't care less if they made money off of it, just like I don't care if someone takes my open-source work and manages to make a business of it.
  - cies 7y ago
    There is a lot of "work" that goes unpaid. House work. Internships. And many artist work for free in order to get exposure.
    - icebraining 7y ago
      > Internships. And many artist work for free in order to get exposure. Both of those (assuming the work is for for-profit companies) are controversial as well.
    - scollet 7y ago
      You listed two jobs here.

fffjdtcsebj 7y ago

> "they think I will in the future violate a thoughtcrime-style provision of a Code of Conduct change that hasn't been made yet" Seems like a code of conduct issue?

jmkni 7y ago

Spotted this on the hot question list, totally out of the loop on the latest SE drama, can somebody fill me in?

latk 7y ago
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 inclusive), but the volunteer work of curators has only become more difficult. SE refuses to implement new tools to aid moderation, so that e.g. spam fighting is mostly done by volunteer projects. That only sets the general scene. Since the last year or so SE has stopped engaging the community on Meta, mostly just announcing changes top-down. Tweets by third parties have larger impact on SE policy than long-standing complaints by the community. This has led to a further deterioration of the relationship. The illegal changes to the content license a month ago are a perfect example of this top-down, uncooperative approach. Now the actual drama starts: in a closed moderator chat, there was some kind of discussion or disagreement. I'm not privy to the details. Not all of this is nice, e.g. it seems that SE is unwilling to protect trans moderators from vitriol by other mods. But to everyone's confusion, Monica Cellio was suddenly removed as a volunteer moderator. She is known as being extremely reasonable, experienced, and sincere. While she might have tried to discuss sincere questions, it is beyond belief that she would attack another moderator. So moderators and other engaged users are deeply frustrated, see a company that no longer engages with the community, does stupid decisions, and has now fired one of the best volunteer moderators in a despicable manner. For a lot of people, this is the straw that broke the camel's back. E.g. one mod I know decided to resign because they now see themselves completely unable to achieve any positive change on the site. And if Monica isn't a good-enough mod, how can they hope to be remotely adequate? Disclosure: I wrote the linked Meta.SE question. It is my belief that SE the company and SE the community need to cooperate for both to be successful. Yes, the community can sometimes be toxic. But the company seems to have given up completely on engaging with the community, and that does not bode well.

workthrowaway 7y ago

that's like, not a "large number" but i digress... just wanted to say that i empathize with the mod that wrote they just were just tired. mods getting tired is reason #1 i left a few communities in the past. it usually means that things aren't looking good. but there is little that could be done about it. i have not seen it last though. a new wave of people tend to come along with a fresh view on how to handle things. the meantime, though, is what's hard to live through. it's what makes people tired and what makes them move on...

nfogort 7y ago

Yay, maybe interesting questions/discussion won’t be shut down now!

Avamander 7y ago
I have the feeling the people who fought back at the annoying closing and overly strict rules got pushed out, not vice versa.

goatinaboat 7y ago

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.

mieseratte 7y ago
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 think reserving judgment is the proper course.
- baud147258 7y ago
  Considering how rarely the community get any answer from the SE company, I doubt we'd ever get their side of the story.
  - mieseratte 7y ago
    Well until someone comes forward with some concrete evidence we'll never anything beyond this he said, she said tale.
    - nullc 7y ago
      Don't you mean, "a she-said / stonewall-silence tale"?
- vorpalhex 7y ago
  Aren't you ignoring your own advice by supporting the dismissal of a moderator before the policy they supposedly might break is even in effect? It seems like SE got rid of a mod because they voiced concerns about an upcoming rule change... comparing that to assaulting someone is a cheap shot.

ykevinator 7y ago

The moderators don't add value.

mellosouls 7y ago
I think this is untrue. Some do, some less so. Certainly there is a toxic tendency for some mods to become power crazed, assume a higher understanding of the world than the lowly non-mods and mod everything into oblivion. There is also sometimes a tribal back-slapping tendency that doesn't always weed out this nonsense but encourages it. I don't know if that is involved in this case.
- SnarkAsh 7y ago
  There are a lot of very toxic moderators on the network. As far as I recognize, none of them are among the resigned. They'll probably be more prominent now that reasonable kind people like Monica have been removed.

scarejunba 7y ago

Every one of these community groups inevitably has some sort of internal political strife of some sort. I've never found any meaning in attempting to engage their politics in any more than the most basic sense. The groups always exaggerate the impact of actions upon the rest of us when it's usually a no-op as far as we're concerned. E.g. Reddit iama had this massive controversy around a Reddit facilitator being fired and everyone predicted insta failure or whatever. Lots of time passed and the product is still pretty damned successful (Bill Gates was on it within the last year). I'm sure Wikipedia has had "I'm stepping down" posts and whatnot. Perhaps the learning is that it isn't a worthwhile way to seek meaning in your life to give away volunteer hours moderating sites unless they're your own or you're paid for it. It is a pointless place to put your self-worth because disagreements will occur and they will be enforced as the site owner desires. Your hours earn you no power.

Avamander 7y ago
I think I haven't really read an AMA for years now, they're all very bland now.
- mieseratte 7y ago
  Bigger names, politicians, etc. too often seem to be bland, seemingly PR-run affairs. For smaller names and niche topics, there is often some legitimate discussion worth reading. Of course sometimes the bigger ones are great for another reason, their PR-run effort blows up in their face. The recent Beto AMA was a great dumpster fire of a read.
dsr_ 7y ago
The quality of iama clearly declined and has not recovered. Is that success? Not by my standard. But it might be successful from Reddit's corporate point of view, since they are no longer paying her salary.
hos234 7y ago
Misguided yet understandable conclusion. People enjoy doing things for others. It's a deep Need people have. If mass violence and wars, natural disasters of all kinds through the ages, have not been able to make us more selfish and wipe out that need, internet drama is not going to either. The process is messy sure, and if you are experiencing it for the first time it can be confusing, repulsive and misleading. It's not a good idea to follow those feelings and make conclusions. Because those conclusions will obscure from your view, the reasons why anything good happens in the world.

mellosouls 7y ago

There is no detail of the actual argument, just loads of people claiming to be in the know and indicating toxic behaviour and dramatic battles behind the scenes. There's a lot of flouncing resignations and "we need to talk" style essays also revealing little of substance. Considering the passion involved some people have clearly been hurt, but perhaps that's due to the amount of time they have invested in somebody else's commercial enterprise ("our community") while believing it's something more. Perhaps what they are trying to say is the "something more" (presumably the voluntary contributions) is being undermined by paid staff. It's not clear. At the moment it all reads a bit like a tin pot Game of Thrones though.

mieseratte 7y ago
> There's a lot of flouncing resignations and "we need to talk" style essays also revealing little of substance. I feel similarly, I've read all of Monica Cellio's posts and still have no real idea what is going on. Lot's of talk of DMs and messages and emails, but nothing concrete posted, just he said / she said, all while alleging personal innocence and purity. If there is some concrete evidence and examples, put up or shut up. This is the internet, your word isn't worth much.
- Dayshine 7y ago
  Well, they were internally discussing a proposed Code of Conduct. I imagine mods are bound by an NDA, and management are choosing not to share.
  - wendyshu 7y ago
    Ah. Very frustrating to read complaints that omit key info. Would have been nice if they explained that they're under an NDA.
    - SnarkAsh 7y ago
      I agree it should have been clarified, but the initial intended audience was meta users who would be familiar. Elected moderators need to accept the https://stackoverflow.com/legal/moderator-agreement https://stackoverflow.com/legal/moderator-agreement agreement before they're giving their privileges, and they have to agree not to disclose any information that they get obtain using their mod access, such as the private discussions between moderators and staff here. It might not be legally binding, but Stack Overflow could plausibly delete their account as punishment.

legostormtroopr 7y ago

Its bittersweet to see Stack Overflow continue its downward spiral. Given all that is happening there, I'd give it about 12 months before they start implementing a paywall there of some description.

Insanity 7y ago
I doubt the paywall idea to be honest. They have other revenue streams like SO for teams.

perlgeek 7y ago

Do Jeff Atwood and Joel Spolsky still a say in how SE is run? If yes, now would be the perfect time to step in and moderate the discussion.

romanovcode 7y ago
He quit just a month or so ago. https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2019/03/28/the-next-ceo-of-stack-overflow/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2019/03/28/the-next-ceo-of-st...
mellosouls 7y ago
In the linked post Jeff Atwood is in the comments moaning about the title.
- aedron 7y ago
  I believe it was also Jeff Atwood who, for the longest time, could not fathom why people did not like being forced to use OpenID to log into Stack Overflow. Like, he could literally not fathom it and agonized in blog posts over his own inability to understand people (he was quite honest about it). Even though they caved on this point, to this day Stack Overflow actively fights new users trying to get in and participate on the platform (I have long since given up).
  - falsedan 7y ago
    Jeff seems to have a lot of trouble empathising with users, especially when they want something that clashes with whatever he has discovered is the 'right' solution. See blocklists in discourse, why people join unions, &c.
w-m 7y ago
One of the moderators resigned by citing a persistent pattern of corporate missteps and a monumentally deplorable moderator dismissal. Jeff Atwood commented under the resignation: "It is definitely hard to see long time deep contributors go, but this is sometimes the way of life. I don't begrudge anyone after ~10 years wanting a change." https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/389906/moderator-resignation-notice#comment730705_389906 https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/389906/moderator-re... Hardly seems helpful to me in calming down the heated minds.

raxxorrax 7y ago

I see a lot of people arguing about mods being too strict. I abhor the recent trend of content decontamination like many others do. But for Q&A sites like SE, I think it is a necessity to stay on topic. Yes, some moderators might have been too eager in some cases, happened to me too. But since these people are all volunteers, I think they should get some support from the community. I mean I might have to look for another job if SE ever gets shut down and a lot of knowledge would immediately be lost. Many people seem to know some mods personally. I have spend a lot of time on that site and couldn't even name one moderator by name/handle. Quite ironic that a site with a wealth of knowledge has problems with monetization. Some things in the internet economy seem to be quite off.

TheOtherHobbes 7y ago
IME business cultures polarise along the politics/product axis. When politics - i.e. status games and power plays - are prioritised over product quality, bad things happen. Unfortunately SE seems to have chosen the former over the latter. I have suspicions that amateur modding is part of the problem. I hope SE doesn't shut down, because currently it's still helpful in spite of itself - although probably more for experienced users than absolute beginners. But I think a lot of people would like to see a saner and more concise alternative with a more generous and less confrontational culture.
dandare 7y ago
> necessity to stay on topic Try a little exercise: ask a computer literate person not familiar with SE to find out what questions are on-topic on https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/ https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/
- aloisdg 7y ago
  Ask about... software development methods and practices requirements, architecture, and design quality assurance and testing configuration, build, and release management Not all questions work well in our format. Avoid questions that are primarily opinion-based, or that are likely to generate discussion rather than answers. Questions that need improvement may be closed until someone fixes them. Don't ask about... explaining, writing or debugging code support for tools or products finding or recommending products or services, including tools, libraries or packages, programming languages, books, scholarly papers, tutorials, articles, or blogs career or education advice legal advice or aid from the faq/tour: https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/tour https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/tour

MrStonedOne 7y ago

This is natural selection at work. Stack Exchange has become a frustrating site to use. "Closed as duplicate: different and unrelated question" reopen further explaining the question and how its not related "Closed as duplicate: the first question that was immediately closed with no replies" OR! Google around, find SE link on issue, everybody is arguing about why the user wants to do it that why, convinces them to do it another way, only I don't have that option, so I open my own question, and its closed as a dupe of the one from google where the original question was never answered. or Post helpful answer that actually answers the users question as asked without berating them for wanting to do it that way Get yelled at in the comments for creating noise? --- The moral of the story is that stack exchange needs to die so that something else can come from its ashes that is able to look back at SE as an example of how not to do shit.

Avamander 7y ago
It would help to just remove the current moderators that are super pedantic about building a "knowledge base", when actually they just like exercising their power. I've also noticed a recent trend that moderators on SO are also now deleting questions to stop any objections to the close votes from lower-ranked users, it's ridiculous.
- LeoNatan25 7y ago
  Questions are rarely deleted by moderators. The community, through voting, is very often the one to delete through voting directly, or through severe downvoting, in which case a bot removes bad questions. And if you have higher score, you can still see these deleted questions and answers.
  - Avamander 7y ago
    Moderators are part of the community that can vote and high-ranked people that vote have access to mod tools - they're basically moderators - just without the diamond. I can see quite a lot, not everything though, and I don't want to grind reputation asking inane questions to get access to more, to keep my detailed questions from being closed without explanation and then deleted. These kafkaesque trials are ridiculous and obnoxious.

_Codemonkeyism 7y ago

Stack Exchange has developed the same group of power people that rule Wikipedia. They have arcane rules with the major effect of keeping people out. Stack Exchange is good to read, but hard to ask a question that is not immediately due to some rule.

sireat 7y ago

What I am curious why haven't we seen a quality mashup of a SE site? Some sort of interesting curation/filters etc. Even the new CC-share-alike allows commercial mixins https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ . So being that SE started with SO and thus heavy programming emphasis there should be a plethora of interesting mashups. Instead the only SE content derived sites have been banal copies.

kevin_thibedeau 7y ago
Google will kill it like the Wikipedia clones.

thrownaway954 7y ago

In order for a community to succeed, there must be a continual rotation of the people in power so that no one can be corrupted by it. Moderators to me are the same as a dictatorship. There shouldn't be any moderators on SE, the community should be voting on what is valid question and upvoting the best answers as it has always done. There is no need for a single person to police each community. If something is off topic then the community can vote on removing or moving the topic or answer. The issue with SE is the fact that they have allowed moderators to have too much power and too control over the communities. In changing their policies it has caused a removal of the moderators so that communities are force to come together to survive then I feel that this was a good step for SE as a whole. Though there will be some hard times at first I think that SE will become the site that it founders actually envisioned.

baud147258 7y ago
I think the issue is not just moderator vs rest of the community, but also SE company (well, its employees) vs the moderator vs the rest of the community, with all groups having different purposes and goal (and even the moderators and community have more sub-groups, around openness, quality, governance and so on). It's not just the case of mods having too much power.
- baud147258 7y ago
  And one could even add more fault lines, between SO's community and mods and the rest of the sites of SE, since the rest of the sites don't have the same issues as SO, for example regarding discrimination, inclusivness, welcoming..., but rules are made and applied by the SE company on all the sites, creating even more issues.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

fabian2k 7y ago

In most, if not all of the resignations the primary reason for resigning was the way the firing of one moderator was handled. The internally announced changes to the policies were not necessarily the reason for the resignations. The headline is pretty misleading in that regard.

chrshawkes 7y ago

I personally decided to boycott the site for several reasons explained here. In short, the site allows dicks to run rampant and I find more answers on GitHub these days. http://bit.ly/2mfUvCs http://bit.ly/2mfUvCs

iliketocomplain 7y ago
Why the heck would you use a short link? On HN?

Jun8 7y ago

My understanding is that the train of events that resulted in mod Monica Cellio’s demodding from SE started with a gender-related complaint tweet (https://medium.com/@cellio/dear-stack-overflow-we-need-to-talk-13bf3f90204f https://medium.com/@cellio/dear-stack-overflow-we-need-to-ta...). Companies are now very sensitive to this pattern, esp. true for SE due to the ongoing changes there.

ForHackernews 7y ago
> esp. true for SE due to the ongoing changes there For the benefit of those of us who don't closely follow Stack Overflow meta-drama, can you explain what this is alluding to?
- Jun8 7y ago
  Recent change in management discussed here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21062191 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21062191 was widely interpreted as getting ready for SE to be sold. At this point any sort of bad publicity would be shunned, especially. of the “it’s not a welcoming community” kind.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
lonelappde 7y ago
That Twitter kerfuffle was in 2018. Has there been ongoing train of events since then? Monica mentions "this rule mandates specific, positive actions." but not what the rule is, which I find disquieting. What is the rule, and if it's so bad, and also public (it's a new rule everyone has to know, right?), why is being kept secret?
- hapless 7y ago
  Using the correct pronouns for trans people. That’s it.
- 7y ago

jjakque 7y ago

Anyone else felt disconcerting about the reoccurring theme of platform attracts communicated generated content, only to shift interest/motive once critical mass is achieved?

marcosdumay 7y ago
Community starts with good people; creates good content; attracts more people; that new people tends to average; contents tends to average; new people tends even more to average; contents quality becomes average; community isn't good anymore. The cycle certainly didn't start with groups over a computer network, but I think it's very unlikely that it started before written texts. So there's ~8k years window there. It's not literally timeless, but does feel like so.
- Wowfunhappy 7y ago
  GP wasn't talking about the community, but of changes dictated by the corporation running the website for that community, which is an important distinction.

umvi 7y ago

So why hasn't an alternative to SO emerged where users can come, everyone who thirsts, come to the waters; and he who has no money, come, ask and learn! Come, ask questions and get expert answers without money and without price

MauranKilom 7y ago
Isn't that how literally any forum operates? Maybe the SO format has some merit that made it come out so far ahead of any kind of forum?

Wowfunhappy 7y ago

I am legitimately curious—and concerned—about the relicensing of answers. It really seems as though they shouldn't be able to do that. And if they can, can they also change the license to "all rights reserved by SE"?

oliwarner 7y ago
Like GPL, CCBYSA allows you —the licensee— to pick a future version of the same license. That is, if you receive a copy of work under v3, you can make it available under v4, no questions asked. That's all SE has done here. Exercised a clause in the license. If you don't like that, don't submit content under licenses that allow it.
- Wowfunhappy 7y ago
  I don't think that's true, see: https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/4.0_upgrade_guidelines https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/4.0_upgrade_guidelines > Original contributions remain under prior version unless express permission to upgrade is obtained.
  - oliwarner 7y ago
    Edit: I'm misreading the text[0]. Section 4, clause b: > You may Distribute or Publicly Perform an Adaptation only under the terms of: (i) this License; (ii) a later version of this License with the same License Elements as this License ... That only covers adaptations. Ignore me. [0]: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode

Pfhreak 7y ago

Reading between the lines, it looks like a queer mod felt unsupported by SE over a long period of time, and SE eventually decided to make a code of conduct change. These mods disagreed with that change (some using language like "thought crime") which precipitated their resignations?

MrStonedOne 7y ago
It looks more like one mod voiced something potentially ranging between legit concerns to outright argumentative opposition (we don't know) and got demodded for that, and a bunch of other mods are quitting in protest in part because of that, and in part because they feel it went from a mod as first class citizens community with a business component to a top down structure of decisions they have no say in. Basically if there was going to be a new rule, some of the mods would have preferred if SE had came to meta and asked for help writing it and feedback on it, and instead of being told what the new rule was going to be.
commandlinefan 7y ago
> reading between the lines The lines here are so blurry, I can’t make heads or tails out of any of this. All I can tell for sure is that some of the mods are upset about something (but won’t or can’t say what) and they’re leaving SO. The forced abstraction of this whole saga reminds me of stories I’ve heard from people who lived under communist dictatorships: they’d have to peel back multiple layers of insinuations to try to figure out what was actually meant. The way some of the commenters on here are dancing around saying anything concrete suggests that there are a few people who do know what’s going on but are afraid to come out and say what it is.
- csande17 7y ago
  I read through the resignation notices linked from OP, and this one seems to provide some more detail: https://christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6718/brothers-i-must-go https://christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6718/b...
  - 7y ago

wendyshu 7y ago

What's the best alternative to Stack Overflow?

danesparza 7y ago
Well ... Google? shrugs
- commandlinefan 7y ago
  Nearly every google search I’ve done for the past decade pulls up SO first.
jolmg 7y ago
Official and unofficial documentation, IRC, mailing lists, forums, and source code.
kaffeemitsahne 7y ago
Github issues is something I've seen mentioned in this context.

LoneWolf123 7y ago

Back in the day I used to be among top users on that site - they even sent me a T-shirt at some time. Left several years ago, as the site became toxic. I'm not mentioning this "top user" thing on my resume anymore, because not relevant. The site is still an excellent source of information about all things that were cool ten years ago, such as Java, Spring, SQL, Python.

dimillian 7y ago

So much politics about that. I go on on SO from Google, find solution to my problem. Sometime add my own answers. And sometime I post question when I can't find solution. End of the story. Why the fuck it need to be so complicated?

twic 7y ago
The problem is, of course, the humans.
lonelappde 7y ago
Because at the end of the day, SO/SE and everything is in the service of human culture, not a Platonic ideal in and of itself. So the culture wars fold back in on it.

quantguy11959 7y ago

I got downvoted to oblivion for reporting a bug to them, with several SO devs trying to explain it’s not a bug, this doesn’t surprise me.

chance_state 7y ago

Is there any detail anywhere about why Monica Cellio was fired? Will no one leak the internal chat that was supposedly the justification for her firing? All I can see online is everyone vaguely talking around the issue. Make the facts public and let people decide for themselves.

calibas 7y ago

Why did this story drop off the front page so quickly when it was one of the most popular? Is the flag system being abused?

Havoc 7y ago

RIP SE Reminds me of the company take overs where the key asset is human capital and they all just walk out the door after the deal. Congrats you bought an empty building for billions Don't think SE is ever going to be profitable if they can't keep key figures happy

rurban 7y ago

Without studying it thoroughly I would comment: Great, finally! Moderator abuse was the biggest problem on SO, without any oversight.

csande17 7y ago

This resignation notice from a moderator on the Christianity Stack Exchange appears to provide the most detail about what's going on: https://christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6718/brothers-i-must-go https://christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6718/b...

wendyshu 7y ago
Aha, the Jordan Peterson issue.
- doordonot 7y ago
  Yes, it's exactly the same issue; FORCING specific speech which is quite different than BANNING some speech (hate speech for instance).
  - apta 7y ago
    And the far left doesn't even realize what they're doing.
    - fapjacks 7y ago
      If ever there were any doubt about the validity of the horseshoe theory...
9HZZRfNlpR 7y ago
The whole pronoun drama that is inherently American is tearing down international communities left and right despite it not being even an issue.
- chipotle_coyote 7y ago
  If it really wasn't even an issue, this wouldn't be coming up as often as it does, though, would it? To me, "if someone tells you they prefer singular 'they', use that" is non-controversial, just like "if someone tells you they go by 'Goldie,' use that" should be. Insisting "No, I am going to call you by the pronouns I believe are 'correct' for you" is akin to "No, your legal name is 'Marigold,' and I am going to call you 'Mary.'" Insisting that you will not, under any circumstances, call a person what they've requested you call them is -- to me -- pretty clearly being a discourteous jerk. There are a lot of valid complaints about the way Stack Overflow moderates in general, but I don't get the impression that this particular squabble is over moderation practices -- it seems to be about upcoming changes to SO's Code of Conduct. I don't know what those changes are, so I'll reserve judgement. I am certainly hoping that it doesn't boil down to "I cannot abide being required to refer to transgender women with 'her' and 'she'," though.

johnwheeler 7y ago

The old system, whatever it was, incentivized bad mod behavior and ruined the experience.

cannabis_sam 7y ago

The whole concept is pretty asinine: ”Collect points to gain the power to fuck with other peoples questions!”

hapless 7y ago

The policy in question appears to be affirmatively requiring moderators not to (deliberately) mis-gender trans people, or allow user content to do the same. All these ex-mods wrote these coy essays with discussions of free will and human rights in order to avoid discussing the issue at hand. Trans people are surely a more important part of the StackExchange community and business than a few unpaid volunteers. I am not sorry that Monica’s feelings were hurt by a demand for basic human decency.

yanderekko 7y ago
>The policy in question appears to be affirmatively requiring moderators not to (deliberately) mis-gender trans people This is either incorrect or relies on an unconventionally broad notion of "misgendering." Normally misgendering is understood to be the act of using pronouns other than a person's preferred pronouns, the point of controversy is that now simply avoiding pronouns can be considered an act of misgendering. This is new territory.
- lilyball 7y ago
  If you very conspicuously avoid using pronouns for someone, it’s pretty obvious what’s going on and that you’re deliberately avoiding gendering someone correctly. It’s not as bad as using the wrong pronouns, but it’s still very disrespectful.
  - Wowfunhappy 7y ago
    I think we need to see this policy. Particularly on a Q&A site, avoiding gendered pronouns altogether strikes me as the _most_ practical policy. It's what I (try my best to remember to) do on Hacker News. I don't know what pronouns the GP prefers, and I can't very well ask them right now, so if I have to refer to them, I'll either say "they" or "the GP".
    - dragonwriter 7y ago
      The specific complaint made by one of the mods is that avoiding pronouns for or disengaging from a specific person to avoid using is viewed as improper under the new CoC. That's not the same as avoiding pronouns generally, it's differential treatment of an individual for not conforming to your preferred gender expression.