The ban on opinion based and recommendation questions grew out of the inability for people to make sure that they didn't overrun the entire site and crowding out the information / goal that Jeff and Joel wanted the site to be about.
It is so easy to post a "{background}, what do you think?" which is more of a discussion than a Q&A format... or "I'm looking for XYZ" and getting a page of recommendations... and then people keep adding them without checking for duplicates.
The administrative / curation time requirements of such content then grows faster than the number of people willing to do it.
There are other, smaller, SE sites where such questions are allowed because with the slower amount of daily activity they are able to handle every question every day and a post suddenly getting an abnormal amount of time isn't that much more time.
The result of that is that the question types that are most time consuming for doing curation and moderation get cast out and it becomes the easier, more objective ones that remain.
As to answers... gamification hurt it there. While its part of the onboarding / understanding the site, people went after the numbers and so any answer, no mater how poor was ok. The culture became one of "don't remove an answer if it is any attempt to answer a question (not the question)" and getting 10 points for an upvote and only losing 2 points, unless you've written something awful, as long as you get one up vote its typically a positive point gain.
The example question that is in the article is from 10 years ago.
The current attribution of the comment is:
a -> a.id. Why are you using public fields in the first place? - JB Nizet Dec 14 '14 at 9:27
@JBNizet, I like public final fields in classes which are data structures. They don't implement interfaces or have deep hierarchies. - Daneel S. Yaitskov Dec 14 '14 at 9:31
You're making your own life (and the life of your coworkers) difficult (as shown by your question). This is anti-OO (encapsulation), doesn't respect standard practices, makes your code inconsistent, and unusable by all the standard frameworks and libraries which expect standard Java Beans conventions to be respected. I'd really not do that if I were you. If generating getters is what bothers you, then use a decent IDE, or use Lombok to generate them for you. - JB Nizet Dec 14 '14 at 9:42
> For a community that is so gate-kept through imaginary Internet points, there is an incredible amount of disrespect on the forums not through just voting, but also through people commenting, such as people passive-aggressively calling you dumb.
I don't see this as a passive aggressive calling the poster dumb, but rather an attempt at understanding the shape of the problem.
The "7% of comments are unwelcoming" - if there's a problem, flag them. If a pattern of unwelcoming comments from a person, they can get suspended. Not taking action on unwelcomeing comments perpetuates them.
I would call out that calling someone a condescending asshole for asking about why public fields are being used is more unwelcoming than asking why public fields are being used.
>> For a community that is so gate-kept through imaginary Internet points, there is an incredible amount of disrespect on the forums not through just voting, but also through people commenting, such as people passive-aggressively calling you dumb.
>I don't see this as a passive aggressive calling the poster dumb, but rather an attempt at understanding the shape of the problem.
If you are asking a question on SO, you probably lack the knowledge to understand why a person wouldn't want to use $whatever. So adding a simple contextual clarification ("Public fields are generally frowned upon, as they violate the OO encapsulation principle. So, why are your using public fields here?").
Because there is so much nuance lost in text, some people have (and I think rightly) come to understand that when statements or questions are directed at an individual, the more concise you are, the less respectful the statement or question is. Something like "I don't care enough about you to clarify my intent at all"
The followup, where they say "use a decent IDE" presupposes that the person asking the question isn't. Indeed, this sentence here
>You're making your own life (and the life of your coworkers) difficult (as shown by your question).
reveals that we really shouldn't give this person the benefit of the doubt. If I was an e.g. wikipedia editor removing too much personal flair, the only sentence I'd keep is
>This is anti-OO (encapsulation), doesn't respect standard practices, makes your code inconsistent, and unusable by all the standard frameworks and libraries which expect standard Java Beans conventions to be respected.
It is so easy to post a "{background}, what do you think?" which is more of a discussion than a Q&A format... or "I'm looking for XYZ" and getting a page of recommendations... and then people keep adding them without checking for duplicates.
The administrative / curation time requirements of such content then grows faster than the number of people willing to do it.
There are other, smaller, SE sites where such questions are allowed because with the slower amount of daily activity they are able to handle every question every day and a post suddenly getting an abnormal amount of time isn't that much more time.
https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/big-list?tab=... isn't a problem when they get 38 questions per day... while Stack Overflow gets 100x more, but doesn't have 100x more people doing curation.
The result of that is that the question types that are most time consuming for doing curation and moderation get cast out and it becomes the easier, more objective ones that remain.
As to answers... gamification hurt it there. While its part of the onboarding / understanding the site, people went after the numbers and so any answer, no mater how poor was ok. The culture became one of "don't remove an answer if it is any attempt to answer a question (not the question)" and getting 10 points for an upvote and only losing 2 points, unless you've written something awful, as long as you get one up vote its typically a positive point gain.
The example question that is in the article is from 10 years ago.
The current attribution of the comment is:
There is no "lol" in that comment.The question is https://stackoverflow.com/questions/27467946/lambda-referenc...
The screen shot is old ( https://stackoverflow.com/posts/27467946/timeline - it was at +29 by Dec 14th, 2014).
In the article this is described as:
> For a community that is so gate-kept through imaginary Internet points, there is an incredible amount of disrespect on the forums not through just voting, but also through people commenting, such as people passive-aggressively calling you dumb.
I don't see this as a passive aggressive calling the poster dumb, but rather an attempt at understanding the shape of the problem.
The "7% of comments are unwelcoming" - if there's a problem, flag them. If a pattern of unwelcoming comments from a person, they can get suspended. Not taking action on unwelcomeing comments perpetuates them.
I would call out that calling someone a condescending asshole for asking about why public fields are being used is more unwelcoming than asking why public fields are being used.
reply