4 ms·

Seems to me like you're part of the problem. Of course it's not my problem anymore because I no longer contribute there.

by yuzzi 1y ago

zahlman 1y ago
From GP: > We're there to build a searchable Q&A knowledge base and spread knowledge. Some people who ask questions misunderstand and think we're there to help them, personally. To work for free for that single person, and we're not there for that. We write answers for the tens, hundreds, thousands of people who will search for it. Why is any of this a "problem"? Why should we not create this knowledge base? Why should we help you, personally, for free? Why should we write answers for a single person who asks, instead of for arbitrarily many people who find it later?
int_19h 1y ago
It's almost comical. SO is increasingly useless for new questions precisely because so many top contributors left (because they don't agree with this approach), while the ones that remain have convinced themselves that not only this new state of affairs is fine, it's actually preferable, and what they are doing is somehow beneficial.
- zahlman 1y ago
  > while the ones that remain have convinced themselves that not only this new state of affairs is fine, it's actually preferable, and what they are doing is somehow beneficial. None of you have done anything at all to explain why it somehow isn't, except perhaps to indicate that it isn't how you want the site to work. Or that the company is losing business. (As a reminder, the company has never paid any of us a red cent.) Why is it "comical" for people you don't identify with to have a vision?
  - int_19h 1y ago
    It's comical because it has been explained to you specifically dozens of times by several different people already right here in HN comments, but every time you do the equivalent of "la la la can't hear you" in response. It's sad because most of us remember how much more useful SO used to be.
    - zahlman 1y ago
      > It's comical because it has been explained to you specifically dozens of times by several different people already The only thing that any of you have explained is that the site doesn't measure up to your standards. You have given me no reason why I should evaluate the site by your standards.
      - deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
- Arnt 1y ago
  Citation needed. I know why one top contributor left (cancer) and I heard the same about another. I haven't heard what you say about any, except in sweeping statements like yours.
  - int_19h 1y ago
    I still have 100k SO rep from the glory days of old - is that enough for you to count my vote as "you dun fucked it up" in that category?
    - zahlman 1y ago
      I can think of multiple users offhand with 500k+ rep that I think are more damaging to the site than any newcomer ever could be. (No, I will not name names.) And I previously showed you a link of someone with 60k+ rep (slightly more than me) who went 14 years without even trying to use the meta site for anything and demonstrated a complete failure to understand the basic standards for questions.
Arnt 1y ago
If I'm part of the problem, then that's because of something I do, or else something I don't do. The thing I do is build a knowledge base. If that's it, can you explain why it's a problem? The thing I don't is something you also don't. If that's it, can you explain why you're not part of the problem?

Seems to me like you're part of the problem. Of course it's not my problem anymore because I no longer contribute there.

by yuzzi 1y ago

Seems to me like you're part of the problem. Of course it's not my problem anymore because I no longer contribute there.

zahlman 1y ago

From GP: > We're there to build a searchable Q&A knowledge base and spread knowledge. Some people who ask questions misunderstand and think we're there to help them, personally. To work for free for that single person, and we're not there for that. We write answers for the tens, hundreds, thousands of people who will search for it. Why is any of this a "problem"? Why should we not create this knowledge base? Why should we help you, personally, for free? Why should we write answers for a single person who asks, instead of for arbitrarily many people who find it later?

int_19h 1y ago

It's almost comical. SO is increasingly useless for new questions precisely because so many top contributors left (because they don't agree with this approach), while the ones that remain have convinced themselves that not only this new state of affairs is fine, it's actually preferable, and what they are doing is somehow beneficial.

zahlman 1y ago
> while the ones that remain have convinced themselves that not only this new state of affairs is fine, it's actually preferable, and what they are doing is somehow beneficial. None of you have done anything at all to explain why it somehow isn't, except perhaps to indicate that it isn't how you want the site to work. Or that the company is losing business. (As a reminder, the company has never paid any of us a red cent.) Why is it "comical" for people you don't identify with to have a vision?
- int_19h 1y ago
  It's comical because it has been explained to you specifically dozens of times by several different people already right here in HN comments, but every time you do the equivalent of "la la la can't hear you" in response. It's sad because most of us remember how much more useful SO used to be.
  - zahlman 1y ago
    > It's comical because it has been explained to you specifically dozens of times by several different people already The only thing that any of you have explained is that the site doesn't measure up to your standards. You have given me no reason why I should evaluate the site by your standards.
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
Arnt 1y ago
Citation needed. I know why one top contributor left (cancer) and I heard the same about another. I haven't heard what you say about any, except in sweeping statements like yours.
- int_19h 1y ago
  I still have 100k SO rep from the glory days of old - is that enough for you to count my vote as "you dun fucked it up" in that category?
  - zahlman 1y ago
    I can think of multiple users offhand with 500k+ rep that I think are more damaging to the site than any newcomer ever could be. (No, I will not name names.) And I previously showed you a link of someone with 60k+ rep (slightly more than me) who went 14 years without even trying to use the meta site for anything and demonstrated a complete failure to understand the basic standards for questions.

Arnt 1y ago

If I'm part of the problem, then that's because of something I do, or else something I don't do. The thing I do is build a knowledge base. If that's it, can you explain why it's a problem? The thing I don't is something you also don't. If that's it, can you explain why you're not part of the problem?