3 ms·
So you base that Stack Exchange has failed on one out of the two failed sites, out of over forty proposals that are still there? As has already been mentioned
by ivoflipse 16y ago
So you base that Stack Exchange has failed on one out of the two failed sites, out of over forty proposals that are still there?
As has already been mentioned elsewhere, if the site lacks genuine expertise of the topic, the blind will simply follow the other blind. Putting a site that doesn't work out of it's misery is doing the users a favor in the long run
- caf 16y agoI'm not sure that raw activity level is a good proxy for the amnount of genuine expertise in the topic that is present. Some topics - of which AI is quite possibly one - are simply more niche than others, and therefore naturally will have less askers, less answerers and less experts. Perhaps a better metric than raw activity level would be proportion of questions without an accepted answer? The tumbleweed sites that "don't work" would be characterised by many unanswered questions.