3 ms·

Offtopic: "Comments have been moved to chat; please do not continue the discussion here." What a shitty place that website has become, dang!

furyofantares 3y ago
dang has nothing to do with it.
- bigmattystyles 3y ago
  I think they meant dang, the interjection or exclamation, not all mighty dang! Praise be.
  - sergiotapia 3y ago
    Correct! (dang please don't ban me!)
esafak 3y ago
I think it's a fundamentally flawed premise of the site: that answers ought to be self-contained and all else is noise. No debate, no commentary. That's why they reject opinion-based questions. But not all things in life are cut and dried. I get it, though; subjectivity makes it difficult to promote quality answers.
- andrewflnr 3y ago
  Yeah, they pretty much explicitly disclaim those questions that don't have cut and dried answers. But I think that means they never should have dipped into topics like "workplace", which has vanishingly few cut and dried topics.
  - aaronchall 3y ago
    On these sites the idea is that answers belong in the top-level answer posts where they can be voted up and down for the purpose of sorting the competing ideas and forms of responses to the primary question post. Criticisms should remain in the comments until they are integrated and addressed in the answers, at which point they are obsolete and can be removed. Therefore chats belong elsewhere, and are helpfully moved into chat rooms, which you can click through to and read if you're interested.
    - andrewflnr 3y ago
      That's, uh, not quite what I was talking about.
- JamesBarney 3y ago
  I get the theory, but I've seen the effects of that decision. The pre-objectivity police StackOverflow was sooo much more useful (2010ish). 85% of the top 1000 questions had incredibly well written and insightful answers to subjective questions. Things like "How do I become a better software engineer?" which is far more useful than "How can I rename a local Git branch?" For a time these bled out into other smaller stack exchange communities, but many eventually fell to the objectivity police.
  - sergiotapia 3y ago
    I learned so much as a young dev in 2009 when I first used Stackoverflow. Experts poured their hearts out and shared so much. Now the busybodies are there to police everything and what are you left with... a dead site with nothing but hall monitors! What a shame for the next generation of developers.
- verve_rat 3y ago
  Yup, that might work for stackoverflow, or the math stackexchange, but not for 99% of the other sites under the umbrella.

furyofantares 3y ago

dang has nothing to do with it.

bigmattystyles 3y ago
I think they meant dang, the interjection or exclamation, not all mighty dang! Praise be.
- sergiotapia 3y ago
  Correct! (dang please don't ban me!)

esafak 3y ago

I think it's a fundamentally flawed premise of the site: that answers ought to be self-contained and all else is noise. No debate, no commentary. That's why they reject opinion-based questions. But not all things in life are cut and dried. I get it, though; subjectivity makes it difficult to promote quality answers.

andrewflnr 3y ago
Yeah, they pretty much explicitly disclaim those questions that don't have cut and dried answers. But I think that means they never should have dipped into topics like "workplace", which has vanishingly few cut and dried topics.
- aaronchall 3y ago
  On these sites the idea is that answers belong in the top-level answer posts where they can be voted up and down for the purpose of sorting the competing ideas and forms of responses to the primary question post. Criticisms should remain in the comments until they are integrated and addressed in the answers, at which point they are obsolete and can be removed. Therefore chats belong elsewhere, and are helpfully moved into chat rooms, which you can click through to and read if you're interested.
  - andrewflnr 3y ago
    That's, uh, not quite what I was talking about.
JamesBarney 3y ago
I get the theory, but I've seen the effects of that decision. The pre-objectivity police StackOverflow was sooo much more useful (2010ish). 85% of the top 1000 questions had incredibly well written and insightful answers to subjective questions. Things like "How do I become a better software engineer?" which is far more useful than "How can I rename a local Git branch?" For a time these bled out into other smaller stack exchange communities, but many eventually fell to the objectivity police.
- sergiotapia 3y ago
  I learned so much as a young dev in 2009 when I first used Stackoverflow. Experts poured their hearts out and shared so much. Now the busybodies are there to police everything and what are you left with... a dead site with nothing but hall monitors! What a shame for the next generation of developers.
verve_rat 3y ago
Yup, that might work for stackoverflow, or the math stackexchange, but not for 99% of the other sites under the umbrella.