Stackoverflow website sucks because of its moderators and Top Users
-
In stackoverflow, if a new one asks a simple question, then the top users starts down voting, ranting. If someone don't have knowledge on particular topic or another then the regular users start insulting them. They call themselves as experts. They are playing with site good reputation. Overall this website has became very funny.
I disagree. They can be rude, yes, but usually it's the questions that could be easily googled that get them going. If something was answered (maybe even on SO!) and yet it is asked again and again...they GIVE their free time in an attempt to help genuine problems...once SO got reputation they wasted their time answering how to setup arrays in C# or similar (stupid / lazy / unnecessary) questions. Give the guys a break, use search before you ask and THEN ask the question along with the list of tried things that did not work for you. And besides, looking for the answers is the way you become an expert (by your own words).
-
In stackoverflow, if a new one asks a simple question, then the top users starts down voting, ranting. If someone don't have knowledge on particular topic or another then the regular users start insulting them. They call themselves as experts. They are playing with site good reputation. Overall this website has became very funny.
-
In stackoverflow, if a new one asks a simple question, then the top users starts down voting, ranting. If someone don't have knowledge on particular topic or another then the regular users start insulting them. They call themselves as experts. They are playing with site good reputation. Overall this website has became very funny.
Unfortunately, this also happens in Code Project. And it deeply, deeply saddens me. Code Project has the best newsletters, but not the best forums. A lot of the people who participate in CP forums have the worst attitude towards ignorance. This is why I rarely participate in discussions in Code Project. The attitude from a lot of my peers here is appaling. Anyway, I always say: "Ignorance is sacred. But not wanting to learn is wrong."
-
Well, you can't tar them all with the same brush, and surely it is better to politely ask for a better phrased question that to blurt off about them being thick as a brick? There's a queue at the counter, and the person at the front asks for a coffee. The server points to the large sign saying "Sorry - our coffee machine is broken so we cannot provide any coffee today" The next person comes up and asks for a coffee. repeat. Repeat. When the tenth person asks for a coffee, the punch on the nose is a bit of a surprise. That's what it must be like on Q&A for some people. they maybe didn't read the rules, they just wanted their coffee, but don't punch 'em on the nose...
PooperPig - Coming Soon
Just taking the analogy a step further, eventually the coffee-shop customers who do read the signs stop coming because of the huge queue of people who don't. I think the general comments about SO are correct (that's why I'm here :)) but there is a flip side. Because SO are *so* strict, they do actually have - in my opinion - the best Q&A around. While I don't always agree with their decisions (or comments) I think the principle to try and keep questions and answers as readable and useful as possible should be commended. Sure, it'll upset a few people but at the end of the day, when you search in Google for a solution to your problem, which sites come up first almost every time? You can't please everyone all of the time though :java: [EDIT] I'll just add this, so my comment is clearer. A website (any website) is only as good as its content. At the moment on CP there's quite a lot of cruft in the Q&A section which means - I imagine for most - SO is the go-to site for getting decent information.
-
When clinically insane by reasons of Drink or Drugs. The rest of the time I know I'm going to lose whatever I do or say! :laugh:
You looking for sympathy? You'll find it in the dictionary, between sympathomimetic and sympatric (Page 1788, if it helps)
Makes me wonder if we shouldn't redefine true intelligence in a computer to the ability to win an argument against women. :-D
GOTOs are a bit like wire coat hangers: they tend to breed in the darkness, such that where there once were few, eventually there are many, and the program's architecture collapses beneath them. (Fran Poretto)
-
Makes me wonder if we shouldn't redefine true intelligence in a computer to the ability to win an argument against women. :-D
GOTOs are a bit like wire coat hangers: they tend to breed in the darkness, such that where there once were few, eventually there are many, and the program's architecture collapses beneath them. (Fran Poretto)
No, I like to believe AI is possible...
You looking for sympathy? You'll find it in the dictionary, between sympathomimetic and sympatric (Page 1788, if it helps)
-
I will jump in belatedly on this and say that I have never experienced those problems. The times I've asked a question, I've gotten a decent reply in short order. No insults, no ranting, no down voting. So, I'm not sure what you're talking about. Marc
I'd say the only time I've seen problems there is if a) someone has posted a question that's already been asked numerous times, or b) the question is written so badly or without enough information for anyone to actually help. Usually a prod in the right direction (not from me, btw - I don't have any kind of rank there :(() resolves both of these issues.
-
In stackoverflow, if a new one asks a simple question, then the top users starts down voting, ranting. If someone don't have knowledge on particular topic or another then the regular users start insulting them. They call themselves as experts. They are playing with site good reputation. Overall this website has became very funny.
pandu web dev wrote:
In stackoverflow, if a new one asks a simple question, then the top users starts down voting, ranting. If someone don't have knowledge on particular topic or another then the regular users start insulting them. They call themselves as experts.
Maybe I just follow the wrong threads? Because that (and other comments in the same vein from replies to your post) doesn't at all look like the StackOverflow I know. I have been an SO user for years now. It's great. Most of the times I have a question, it's already been asked and answered there a number of times, so I can even pick the solution that best fits my case. In the rare cases that I've had to ask a question myself, even when I didn't get a complete answer right away, or even any answer at all (though that was a very niche question[^]), people always tried to be helpful. Same thing with the occasional answers I gave – even when they were "edited" the changes were reasonable and duly explained, with space given for me to plead my case. I'm not saying you're lying, but SO is a really large site, and some topics seem to invite more trolls than others. As with most things, your mileage may vary[^]. But in general I think StackExchange nailed the format for a question-and-answer site, not only in StackOverflow but also in the other sites[^] of their network.
"Whereas smaller computer languages have features designed into them, C++ is unusual in having a whole swathe of functionality discovered, like a tract of 19th century Africa." -- Verity Stob http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/05/05/cplusplus\_cli/
-
In stackoverflow, if a new one asks a simple question, then the top users starts down voting, ranting. If someone don't have knowledge on particular topic or another then the regular users start insulting them. They call themselves as experts. They are playing with site good reputation. Overall this website has became very funny.
I lost my old account, created a new one asked a question, was corrected on grammar about 5 times in 2 hours, rolled them all back and got a snooty note for roll backs. It totally cured me of spending time on StackOverflow and answering questions. See there is a good side to everything!!!
-
Just taking the analogy a step further, eventually the coffee-shop customers who do read the signs stop coming because of the huge queue of people who don't. I think the general comments about SO are correct (that's why I'm here :)) but there is a flip side. Because SO are *so* strict, they do actually have - in my opinion - the best Q&A around. While I don't always agree with their decisions (or comments) I think the principle to try and keep questions and answers as readable and useful as possible should be commended. Sure, it'll upset a few people but at the end of the day, when you search in Google for a solution to your problem, which sites come up first almost every time? You can't please everyone all of the time though :java: [EDIT] I'll just add this, so my comment is clearer. A website (any website) is only as good as its content. At the moment on CP there's quite a lot of cruft in the Q&A section which means - I imagine for most - SO is the go-to site for getting decent information.
I entirely agree about the queue length - and it is an issue that is hard to address. I'd be happy to take a hard line - delete questions and answers that are deemed 'not worthy' but... a) Still being nice and polite to the OP - explaining that their question is being removed, and why b) Adhering to my idea of what makes a worthy question and answer :) really, the more I think about it, I think you need a team of editors, taking the good q&a s and moving them somewhere - thus creating a reference site of useful information without the dross. Like a Wiki I guess. isn't that why SO quality is generally good - because they don't mind editing out questions - but if one took it further ... But maybe it's too hard doing it with volunteer members, I dunno
PooperPig - Coming Soon
-
In stackoverflow, if a new one asks a simple question, then the top users starts down voting, ranting. If someone don't have knowledge on particular topic or another then the regular users start insulting them. They call themselves as experts. They are playing with site good reputation. Overall this website has became very funny.
I like answering people's questions on forums. Those forums allow people to ask questions, and allow other people to answer those questions. The main goal there is to get answersto the questions, and as a side-effect, it creates a sort of database filled with information in a Q&A format (the old topics). Stackoverflow flips this around, its main goal is get a sort of database with information in a Q&A format. And it has the side-effect that people get an answer to their question. They don't care about the people that ask the question, or the answer, all they care about is the information.
-
I entirely agree about the queue length - and it is an issue that is hard to address. I'd be happy to take a hard line - delete questions and answers that are deemed 'not worthy' but... a) Still being nice and polite to the OP - explaining that their question is being removed, and why b) Adhering to my idea of what makes a worthy question and answer :) really, the more I think about it, I think you need a team of editors, taking the good q&a s and moving them somewhere - thus creating a reference site of useful information without the dross. Like a Wiki I guess. isn't that why SO quality is generally good - because they don't mind editing out questions - but if one took it further ... But maybe it's too hard doing it with volunteer members, I dunno
PooperPig - Coming Soon
-
Well, yes - that's what I meant - the people who volunteer aren't necessarily the best ones to be impartial - a little power, and all that!
PooperPig - Coming Soon
-
I get where you're coming from, but leaving it as a free for all isn't going to make things any better either. There's got to be some "minimum level", surely?
Yep - but how to do it IRL? You and I disagree on whether a question about bypassing office internet logging is a legitimate question - if we are both mediators of questions, one of us might flag the question for deletion, the other not - without very clear rules, and the ability to remember and follow them - or some sort of voting system that works, it's not really helping.
PooperPig - Coming Soon
-
In stackoverflow, if a new one asks a simple question, then the top users starts down voting, ranting. If someone don't have knowledge on particular topic or another then the regular users start insulting them. They call themselves as experts. They are playing with site good reputation. Overall this website has became very funny.
-
Yep - but how to do it IRL? You and I disagree on whether a question about bypassing office internet logging is a legitimate question - if we are both mediators of questions, one of us might flag the question for deletion, the other not - without very clear rules, and the ability to remember and follow them - or some sort of voting system that works, it's not really helping.
PooperPig - Coming Soon
I think for a legitimate site like CP there has to be a question of whether offering advice on bypassing office IT policies crosses any legal boundaries (it certainly appears - at least to me - to have some ethical question marks hanging over it). At the end of that day I can see from my own usage (and this is entirely based on a survey of one user :)) that I use CP for finding useful articles and SO for useful Q&A's. I don't know what other users experiences are though, but I'm of the opinion (and yes, we're back to my famous survey) that I'm not a complete oddball. Looking to the future, I guess CP can either continue the status quo, drop Q&A or improve Q&A. It's not just my call though (nobody died to make me God, it just happened on merit :laugh:), it's up to everyone here at the end of the day. We all contribute to make this site what it is, and what it will be.
-
In stackoverflow, if a new one asks a simple question, then the top users starts down voting, ranting. If someone don't have knowledge on particular topic or another then the regular users start insulting them. They call themselves as experts. They are playing with site good reputation. Overall this website has became very funny.
Did anybody mention Hitler yet? This is all very silly. There seems to be some weird sense of entitlement requiring SO to be all things to all people. But out in the real world it has every right to be as nasty, exclusive, cliquey and arrogant as it wants. That's the nature of a free 'market'. It doesn't owe any of us anything. If it's not to your taste then use one of the many alternatives. Life is way too short to be demanding membership of a club which clearly does not either want or need you as a member!
-
I will jump in belatedly on this and say that I have never experienced those problems. The times I've asked a question, I've gotten a decent reply in short order. No insults, no ranting, no down voting. So, I'm not sure what you're talking about. Marc
I've got to agree with you; if you ask an intelligent question you'll get a reasonable answer. If you post "Gimmie Teh Codez!!! Its Urgentz!!!" on SO; it will get quickly deleted. On CP it gets linked to on the Lounge for widespread mockery. I suspect obliterating the torrent of crap and only keeping the good content has something to do with that fact that when I Google for how to fix a problem I almost always find multiple hits from SO; I don't think I've *ever* seen QA show up in Google.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason? Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful? --Zachris Topelius Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies. -- Sarah Hoyt
-
In stackoverflow, if a new one asks a simple question, then the top users starts down voting, ranting. If someone don't have knowledge on particular topic or another then the regular users start insulting them. They call themselves as experts. They are playing with site good reputation. Overall this website has became very funny.
Oh my, such negativity towards SO. I've been a long time user of the site myself, and while I am not saying it is perfect, most answers I see do try to help the person asking the question by answering the question as best as possible. It is true that a question that to be exactly that (a specific question) and not a general 'how do I do this or that?'. Also it is appreciated that you have tried something, and are stuck (see http://whathaveyoutried.com/). And yes, I think both things are fair to ask.
