4 ms·

> mindbogglingly naive. Absolutely. What drives the attention of the execs at Stack Exchange is first and foremost Stack Overflow. Everything else seems like a

> mindbogglingly naive. Absolutely. What drives the attention of the execs at Stack Exchange is first and foremost Stack Overflow. Everything else seems like a liability to me, specially sites like Mi Yodeya and Christianity, where sensibilities are much shallower. Just think how unwelcoming the community of SO is sometimes... and their just talking about code! Religion SE sites must be hell IMO. So what's the demand, really? A better community? Creating a new site? SE derives its absolute value from the questions already answered. Community could have mattered in the beginning (you're trying to scale) but now? who cares? "I already have what I needed from you guys" is what execs are thinking.

l4o 7y ago
If I remember correctly, stack overflow is CC BY-SA, so were we to make a new site we could just migrate large portions of the existing content.
- james-skemp 7y ago
  Which, interestingly enough, was another issue before the Code of Conduct changes. In particular, community members were asking about SE changing from CC BY-SA 3.0 to 4.0, and what legal implications that had. I rarely check meta, but it appears to have warmed up the distrust. https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/333089/stack-exchange-and-stack-overflow-have-moved-to-cc-by-sa-4-0 https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/333089/stack-exchan...
MauranKilom 7y ago
> who cares? "I already have what I needed from you guys" is what execs are thinking. To be clear, this (perceived) exec sentiment you describe is why moderators are resigning/suspending activities. And given that, this sentiment seems incredibly short-sighted.
- ohduran 7y ago
  my understanding is that they're resigning because of how unbearable the experience as a moderator is, aka not being taken into account when taking strategy decisions. They are nonetheless not part of the SO ecosystem, and thus they are not accountable for their advice, which is a perfect reason for SO execs to not pay attention to them. This is I believe a call for self-importance. "Look at us, we matter". And execs have long being saying "no, not really". Who is right in the end, that escapes me. I lean towards those who are getting a paycheck out of it, but that's just my point of view.

l4o 7y ago

If I remember correctly, stack overflow is CC BY-SA, so were we to make a new site we could just migrate large portions of the existing content.

james-skemp 7y ago
Which, interestingly enough, was another issue before the Code of Conduct changes. In particular, community members were asking about SE changing from CC BY-SA 3.0 to 4.0, and what legal implications that had. I rarely check meta, but it appears to have warmed up the distrust. https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/333089/stack-exchange-and-stack-overflow-have-moved-to-cc-by-sa-4-0 https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/333089/stack-exchan...

MauranKilom 7y ago

> who cares? "I already have what I needed from you guys" is what execs are thinking. To be clear, this (perceived) exec sentiment you describe is why moderators are resigning/suspending activities. And given that, this sentiment seems incredibly short-sighted.

ohduran 7y ago
my understanding is that they're resigning because of how unbearable the experience as a moderator is, aka not being taken into account when taking strategy decisions. They are nonetheless not part of the SO ecosystem, and thus they are not accountable for their advice, which is a perfect reason for SO execs to not pay attention to them. This is I believe a call for self-importance. "Look at us, we matter". And execs have long being saying "no, not really". Who is right in the end, that escapes me. I lean towards those who are getting a paycheck out of it, but that's just my point of view.