[shippintoboston]

It sounds harsh but I have no sympathy for the company or its community.

The people running that site turned it into such a hostile and toxic place, to the point they probably pushed a lot of people out of engineering.

Just completely condescending and rude jannies who were taking out their anger from being bullied in high school on unsuspecting beginners.

They’re getting what they deserve and I’m savoring every second of their downfall.

[passthejoe]

If I had a nickel for every SO thread that came up in my Google searches that could have answered my question if only the SO moderators had allowed it to be answered, I'd be able to buy a few steak dinners.

[jasonlotito]

This is how it works for me, usually.

Q: I have this problem.

Mod: This is a dup of this.

Me: Goes to read the other ticket. It's from 8 years ago, and the answer was "This is solved in version X."

Me, on something many versions after X, and having the hindsight of knowing that no, it was not solved in X, shakes my head. I find the solution someplace else.

I do not go back to SO because I can't be bothered to fight an uphill battle.

[GordonS]

Same experience here, except half the time I visit the "duplicate" question, only to find it isn't a duplicate at all! In the last I've had several of my own questions closed as "duplicates", where it's quite obvious the moderator didn't read either my question, or the one they point to.

I haven't asked a question on SO for over 2 years now, mainly because I just got sick of the hostile environment that the mods created.

[Etherlord87]

So here's how it looks from the other side:

A 'high' (just not a new one) reputation user (not necessarily a moderator) opens a review queue. He sees a new question. He searches the SO if a similar question has been asked. He finds a similar question, and without reading and testing it thoroughly, he marks yours as a duplicate of that.

Now, you couldn't be bothered writing a comment about how the the duplicate flag is wrong, but another user who already spent some time cleaning up the site is supposed to thoroughly analyze both questions to begin with?

People on Stack Exchange tend to try to not be emotional like you, so they don't fight a battle with you. You just resign from a discussion, and then complain how a mistake has been made, that you didn't care to even point out.

[jasonlotito]

> So here's how it looks from the other side:

I don't care.

> Now, you couldn't be bothered writing a comment about how the the duplicate flag is wrong

Right.

> but another user who already spent some time cleaning up the site

"Cleaning up" by mislabeling stuff. Sounds like they are making a mess. But go on...

> is supposed to thoroughly analyze both questions to begin with?

Yes, they should completley read questions before closing them.

> People on Stack Exchange tend to try to not be emotional like you

I hope they care about being accurate rather than being apathetic about it.

> , so they don't fight a battle with you. You just resign from a discussion, and then complain how a mistake has been made, that you didn't care to even point out.

There was no discussion. I didn't resign, I never engaged in any discussion in the first place. I just found a question and a closed question.

And I can't even comment on how it shouldn't have been closed. It's closed. That's it.

Your entire comment is about how SO fails, and rather than work to overcome it, it just blamed the people for "not holding it right."

[Etherlord87]

> "Cleaning up" by mislabeling stuff. Sounds like they are making a mess. But go on...

Accidents are inevitable.

> Yes, they should completley read questions before closing them.

Do you know the concept of a triage?

> And I can't even comment on how it shouldn't have been closed.

Either you don't have some very minimal reputation in the network (I don't know, 100 points?), which limitation is there, I think, do protect from bots and similar abuse, or the question was *locked* for other reason than just being a duplicate. You could still open a question on meta to discuss that.

I don't even want to defend SO, I'm just frustrated by how terribly bad the arguments criticizing SO are.

[matkoniecz]

> you couldn't be bothered writing a comment about how the the duplicate flag is wrong

this comments are ignored

people closed my questions in past for being duplicate - despite that I linked that question and described why it is not a duplicate

> He sees a new question. He searches the SO if a similar question has been asked. He finds a similar question, and without reading and testing it thoroughly, he marks yours as a duplicate of that.

that is wrongheaded and bad idea leading to predictably terrible results

she/he should not close it as duplicated without proper check (it is better to have some duplicates over bad closures)

[Yhippa]

Well it doesn't matter because the parent post completely disengaged from the site. Turning away potentially active users seems like a horrible move that the owners of SO didn't try to fix and possibly led them to where they are today.

[Etherlord87]

> led them to where they are today

extremely popular network (stack exchange) of wisdom sharing websites?

[mardifoufs]

Flashback to a very common question about relative imports in python that had mostly outdated answers, or very hacky non-solutions but that kept being referenced in newer threads. You actually had to scroll way down to get a reasonable answer. Even then, there was so much confusion and "works for me if I just set the path manually (lol)" or "add __init__.py in this folder" , "no actually don't remove __init__!". Which okay I guess sometimes questions have multiple answers (though the answer way down the page was objectively correct!) ... but then why close newer questions if past answers were messy and very non universal?

[ram4jesus]

They pushed me out when I was a student in Uni struggling with Java 101. And my experience left me shocked that an industry could be so cruel to people trying to learn the ropes and be just another programmer.

Luckily, I persevered, and I give back to the programming community by always being kind to the folks that ask me for help; but I always help others offline and not in hostile web forums.

[dehrmann]

I've answered a lot of Java questions on SO. One of the themes is beginner questions, and a lot are essentially "do my homework for me," poorly researched, or poorly asked. What have you tried? What have you researched? Explain your understanding for why you think what you're doing should work.

Even if you're asking good beginner questions that don't already have an answer, you get tired of reading all the bad ones.

I just signed on and saw this one (#3 in my personalized "new questions"):

https://web.archive.org/web/20231016163745/https://stackover...

The person asking the question put in minimal effort and showed no concern for people answering. Why am I sifting through your merge sort code when you're asking "why can't it open the file?"

[ram4jesus]

I asked two or three questions in SO back in 2014. And it was an awful experience. I got over my Java block by not just reading my Uni's textbook but by also reading another much older textbook.

I got so good at Java that I became a Lab/Teaching Assistant my last two years in college. And I helped folks the best I could in person: always kind, always patient, never blaming the student even if they didn't want to learn and just wanted to pass the Lab; that is an obviously wrong student attitude to have, but whether they cheat or want the answers without learning is between the student and god. I can only try my best to help.

Who cares if someone wants an answer to some test or project? Who cares if their question is not deep enough or poorly written? Just answer their question or don't. You don't need to impose your moral sense of fairness unto them: it's not that deep. And you especially don't need the snark and the putting down of others. Again, the simpler thing is to not engage at all which is obviously not what happened or happens under the sludge and grime of SO answers.

[rgoulter]

Being polite in answering questions is pro-social.

It's a more pleasant interaction when someone is polite. -- Whereas, if you get rude answers, you'll be discouraged from participating.

Asking good questions is pro-social. People are going to be more willing to help if the questions are well thought out. -- Whereas, asking in an anti-social way discourages people from helping out.

It's still possible to ask questions even if you get snarky responses back; and it's still possible to answer lazy questions... But in either case, it's easy to see why people might not like that.

[3seashells]

You are interpreting ability as a social gesture, taking disability as an insult. Thusyou not participating in the part of society that is learning is a good thing.

[rgoulter]

There's a difference between "I haven't paid the full effort to figure the answer out myself" and "I haven't paid the effort that makes it easier for you to help me". -- There's no setting in which being rude is going to be more helpful than being polite.

Expectations vary; in some settings, it's going to be more acceptable for questions to be a more raw "I'm stuck and I need help" than in others.

There is an asymmetry: people giving answers are more able to help those who are asking questions. If the people learning don't like the teachers, they'll have to go elsewhere (& learning is harder). If the teachers don't like the students, they don't have to teach.

[Etherlord87]

> I asked two or three questions in SO back in 2014.

Please link them! They should still be there, and we should be able to analyze them. The strength of Stack Exchange is that it is factual, like on Wikipedia, users are discouraged to be emotional and encouraged to to prove their theories.

> who cares if someone wants an answer to some test or project?

A visitor from Google, who doesn't want to search through dozens of "too localized" problems, that don't apply in his case. There are other places to ask such questions, and the strength of SO/SE lies in its ruleset.

[rgoulter]

I'd phrase this a bit differently, for the questioner's side of things.

I know from experience that when I'm frustrated, I need to keep trying something smaller (or otherwise get more information) until it becomes clear what's not working.

The kind of steps it takes to ask a good question goes hand in hand with the kind of steps you'd take to solve the problem yourself. (Similarly: with domain knowledge, you know what to look for; without domain knowledge, you don't know what to ask about).

If I put too high a value on other people's time, I'm never going to ask questions, and may be slower than if I'd asked a question at a suitable time. (Whereas, putting too little value on other people's time ... can cause friction).

[rrauenza]

This used to be a good reference "back in the day"...

http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

[AlbertCory]

Yes, indeed, it takes a superhuman amount of patience and empathy. I don't particularly have those, and it sounds like you don't, either.

So your course is just to avoid those, not downgrade them.

[ram4jesus]

If people had your level of insight and self-reflection, then SO would be less popular but much more helpful and probably not known for all the needless hostility.

It takes a lot of guts to ask for help. And being put down when you're vulnerable: exposing an ignorance or a lack of understanding, is not a good feeling at all. For me, it always sticks for a long time until I forget it.

[dehrmann]

> It takes a lot of guts to ask for help.

Among coworkers you know, yes, but among internet strangers?

[tekkk]

Yes, that's beginners in nutshell. It's why it's so important to educate them rather than take the opposite stance which is to chastise them for being so inept. I wouldn't take their bad questions that personally myself, it's what it is, but also I am not a person to answer SO questions so there's that.

Those who answer questions want good questions but those who ask good questions probably solve them on their own. Leaving things as they are.

[bastardoperator]

Who cares, people with homework need help too. They're beginners so asking them to formulate a perfect question or conduct research is basically a non-starter. If the barrier to entry is become a professional first, it's no wonder why the company and its user base are shrinking.

[trey-jones]

I think "professionals who can't figure this obscure things out" is the best use-case for SO, really. Perhaps being a professional is something to be required. I'm speaking only from my own experience. I have only ever asked a handful of questions on SO (going back to about 2011), and that's because I spend hours and hours trying to figure it out first. So yes, I think I do expect that of other questioners as well.

"Why won't my docker container build?" Well, because there's a typo in your instructions and it says so clearly in the error output. Of course we get tired of answering these types of questions.

[bastardoperator]

I can agree with you to an extent, but the model doesn't scale and they're getting beat by alternatives that are seemingly better for the majority.

[Etherlord87]

Can you name those alternatives? I don't think SO/SE is being beaten by anything, it has no competition within the set of questions it allows. When it comes to other questions - of course other websites are better for answering the questions that are offtopic on SO/SE.

[alangibson]

I'd you think the SO is bad, you should check out the EE board on StackExchange. I've never seen such aggressively unhelpful behavior by people performing excellence in my life.

ChatGPT may have killed it, but it was already severely weakened by them allowing a-holes to run the place.

[AlbertCory]

also called schadenfreude.

while I agree about SO culture, it's probably the case that most of the laid-off staff took no part in that behavior.

The Great Reset 2.0 which might save SO:

Everyone whose downvotes exceed a certain threshold has their reputation points reduced to zero. And since "sentiment" is measurable nowadays, the same would be done for anyone whose hostile comments exceed some threshold. Probably other behavior would be similarly penalized.

Do you lose some valuable expertise? Undoubtedly, but making an example out of people is a warning to the rest.

[matkoniecz]

> Everyone whose downvotes exceed a certain threshold has their reputation points reduced to zero.

Why it would help?

While closing random questions as duplicates of similar but different question is obnoxious, downvoting "do my homework for me" questions is very useful.

[gunapologist99]

> While closing random questions as duplicates of similar but different question is obnoxious, downvoting "do my homework for me" questions is very useful.

In what way? Who really cares if it's homework or a newbie question? Are you such an expert in everything that you never ask newbie questions?

This arrogant attitude is toxic, spreads quickly, and poisons far too many communities. I'm grateful to dang et al that HN hasn't become like this.

[AlbertCory]

As I said elsewhere:

Just ignoring the newbie questions is best, unless you want to answer honestly.

On the r/jazz and r/classicalmusic, almost every day there's some question like "I'm just getting into <genre>. What are some top albums/artists I should listen to?"

Someone does answer those questions. Props to those saintly people.

[matkoniecz]

> Who really cares if it's homework or a newbie question?

Answering "do my homework for me" is helping cheaters.

[dmckeon]

SO/SE might benefit from a "this question smells like homework" button that could shunt questions that are posted without any code or evidence of adequate clue off to a forum specifically for homework, rather than leaving them in the general queue.

[AlbertCory]

That doesn't seem to be the sentiment here, though, does it? Useful to you, maybe.

Addendum: please tell us how many points YOU have on SO.

[Etherlord87]

> The Great Reset 2.0 which might save SO:

> Everyone whose downvotes exceed a certain threshold has their reputation points reduced to zero.

This could be reasonable or not, depending on the "threshold". SO/SE already have mechanisms (which aren't perfect) to deal with emotional up/down-voting. It already 'punishes' with a 2 rep cost for downvoting an answer. It doesn't for downvoting a question.

[Aleksdev]

Is it really that bad? I know I have asked some duplicate questions in the past but it’s not like I care. As long as they point me to the answer I’m happy.

[tabtab]

When a company monopolizes a market, they almost always turn into jerks.