I find that the questions that are least likely to be answered are ones that require some expertise to answer. "Please write a regex for me" questions invariably get multiple answers.
I have actually found questions with no answer that I eventually found the answer for myself (either from another site, trial and error, luck, or frightening insight). I have zero ability to add an answer for these tough problems.
The easy questions get answered quickly because it's a game. I don't play that game, I work for a living. I have the knowledge to contribute the long tail value of SO if I was able but I am not. I'm not sure there's a solution but that's the gripe I have.
The thing is, the usefulness of a question answering system is in answering questions people don't generally know. We don't need an answering system for things that are common knowledge.
And it's not uncommon that certain knowledge would be, well uncommon even among experts. Experts specialize.
Since the usefulness of ornithological examples is getting exhausted, let's say one out of a hundred lawyers works in bankruptcy. If you ask a million lawyers about the provisions of 11 USC § 1129 and only ten thousand know the answer, is the answer untrustworthy, just because bankruptcy lawyers are far rarer than civil and criminal lawyers?
It is. Note that it takes some skill at writing to do a self answered question well. Often these falls into either:
1. Lots of material in question. Very simple unexplained answer.
2. Sparse material in question. Want to be multi part blog in the answer.
Neither of those are received well.
The key is to have a question that is good, helpful, and reproducible by others too (so they can try it out or find it if they have similar problems) and enough, but not too much detail in the answer. The answer is the tricky part because people get caught with not explaining anything because they already understand the domain in the question or explaining every nuance of the solution even though it is unnecessary for the solution itself.
I also find the quality of answers, and of questions(!) poor. A little googling usually finds better information. And then there's the line-going-dead issue that plagues most question/answer forums (fora?): after some back-and-forth somebody suggests to try something, and the supplicant never responds. Did that work, and they went on with their life? Did they give up? Are they still trying to find an answer? Nobody will ever know.
The problem is, the answers are useful to more than just the original questioner. Sure, the questioner may be doing things vastly wrong - but the people who land on that question's page via search may have legitimate reasons for doing things a certain way.
The silent majority of viewers will benefit from an answer that does both of (1) explaining why the answer is probably not what is wanted, and (2) answering the initial question _as written_ anyway, for future viewers.
Yes, once you start asking _really_ difficult questions that require in-depth knowledge of a niche topic to answer SO becomes less useful, since the pool of people who know enough to actually answer your question is too small.
In cases like that I usually just end up answering my own question later, after I've figured it out by other means.
For me it's because I've been trained by decades of searching to type in only a few words to obtain a presumably relevant answer, whereas I think I have to write a mini-essay to ChatGPT to get an answer. But when I acquiesce to explaining to ChatGPT my information need, I get a more useful answer. (though frequently inaccurate in details)
Anytime I ask these things something (bard, gpt etc),
33% of the answer is genius,
33% misleading garbage,
33% filler stuff that’s neither here or there
The problem is distinguishing between these parts requires me to be be an expert in the area I’m inquiring about - and then why the heck do I need to ask some idiot bot for answers to questions that I already know an answer to?
I don’t know who finds these things useful and more importantly blowing smoke up everyone’s collective rear, especially medias.
It's a little messy sometimes. Trivial beginner questions are usually answered within a minute and you get about three correct answers immediately.
But there are those nagging questions where you pondered two days and researched and then pour everything you know into a long, elaborate question, asking for help. And then, nothing. 16 views, no votes, no answers. Can be very frustrating.
If you have mostly questions of the latter kind then there's a bit of luck involved whether the right person sees your question or whether it just goes unnoticed and dies.
You may also get attempts at answers which don't answer the question, and then people whining at you to accept one when none of them are actually adequate. A small price to pay, admittedly.
I think its one of those things where the real issue is if you have an answer at all. Of those ppl that have answers the quality of answers, I'd expect to be similar (across a population).
People probably keep asking "give me the code for x" because they know that someone out there will give them the answer. If they knew that the only reply they could expect to get to that query was a link to http://whathaveyoutried.com (or a curt "RTFM"), they'd be forced to develop their own skills.
By giving them the answers without pushing them to work harder at answering their own questions, we're actually hurting them, not helping them.
But this is a very old observation that long predates programming or the internet. The old Chinese proverb is: "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime."
I guess it's a ROI issue. Low effort answers to many easy questions gets you many points, while novel questions which requires thorough understanding is high effort and few points.
Same experience here. Quick, one or two line answers to simple, common questions seem to do the best.
Although, those questions that I've poured the most time into and really tried to answer thoroughly are my favorites. Especially if it's something I had to do a bunch of research and/or testing to confirm. The lack of feedback is supplanted by the quenching of the thirst to learn something new. In fact, this quenching is my favorite part of the SE sites.
I think it depends on how you phrase the question. If the question can be easily answer (or even have an answer) and is properly written, people will be more keen to answer back.
But things that are too subjective or easily find on google, you will probably not get many answers..
I find that most questions have been answered already. Unless one is doing cutting edge research, somebody has almost always had the same problem I'm having before, and written about it, and some guru has written a five page response on SO that breaks it down in detail and I don't have to ask...
My problem with Stackoverflow has been that for the majority of the questions I've asked, I'm more of an expert in the subject matter than the people answering the question. Most of the answers I receive are to the wrong question, or are an answer that I specifically mentioned in the question as not being viable.
reply