"Which of those answers is the correct one?" is not a problem if you are soliciting a list ... that's sometimes the point of the question.
"The single right answer is what SO was designed to help us find" is precisely the community norm that I find less desirable. It wasn't there at the start, it is there now. That community norm was a product decision by Jeff (and possibly Joel). It has since been taken to extremes due to the self re-enforcing feedback loop of the community. It's treated as a sort of born-again revealed wisdom by the group.
One could claim this limitation is the required tradeoff to attract the group that manages the site. That might be true ... but I don't blame the software.
Did the software close Alan Kay's question as not constructive or was it a pair of moderators?
What does non-constructive say:
"This question is not a good fit to our Q&A format. We expect answers to generally involve facts, references, or specific expertise; this question will likely solicit opinion, debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. "
Except answers to Kay's question do involve facts, reference, and specific expertise, as well as opinion, and debate. Is the question really non-constructive ... or is was it actually closed as a side effect of the community norm?
The community norm is an over the top version of Godwin's law that opinion is a slippery slope to group death. It makes for a more focused product. The creators read this: http://shirky.com/writings/group_enemy.html
Then cut the baby in half and kept the profitable half.
I'm claiming part of what they threw away makes SO less pleasant for me to use as a contributor. I actually don't like that I contributed to something that treats debate and opinion as anathema.
"The single right answer is what SO was designed to help us find" is precisely the community norm that I find less desirable. It wasn't there at the start, it is there now. That community norm was a product decision by Jeff (and possibly Joel). It has since been taken to extremes due to the self re-enforcing feedback loop of the community. It's treated as a sort of born-again revealed wisdom by the group.
One could claim this limitation is the required tradeoff to attract the group that manages the site. That might be true ... but I don't blame the software.
Did the software close Alan Kay's question as not constructive or was it a pair of moderators?
What does non-constructive say:
"This question is not a good fit to our Q&A format. We expect answers to generally involve facts, references, or specific expertise; this question will likely solicit opinion, debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. " Except answers to Kay's question do involve facts, reference, and specific expertise, as well as opinion, and debate. Is the question really non-constructive ... or is was it actually closed as a side effect of the community norm?
The community norm is an over the top version of Godwin's law that opinion is a slippery slope to group death. It makes for a more focused product. The creators read this: http://shirky.com/writings/group_enemy.html Then cut the baby in half and kept the profitable half.
I'm claiming part of what they threw away makes SO less pleasant for me to use as a contributor. I actually don't like that I contributed to something that treats debate and opinion as anathema.
reply