Discourse PR as a Service
-
@blakeyrat said in Discourse PR as a Service:
So they say they don't want "low quality questions" but refuse to answer high quality ones.
The gaming system, and the way first posts float to the top is what is causing that.
-
@boomzilla said in Discourse PR as a Service:
which stem from their, "We want to be a repository of information and duplicates or imperfect questions are anathema and will be made unquestions" sort of attitude (which we've discussed around here a bunch).
Honestly, they'd get a lot of mileage by hiding the question when it's marked duplicate, and making it available only to the OP with a link to the original question.
It would work the same and appear less hostile.
The poster then gets an option to say, "it's not a duplicate, I'm going to rewrite it to make that more apparent."
-
@blakeyrat said in Discourse PR as a Service:
it demonstrably didn't solve the problem of people putting words into my mouth.
If you thought that it was what my advice was supposed to do, you got it wrong (note how I can say that without saying that you are putting words in my mouth?). My advice is supposed to help you not look like a moron who cares more about the surface of the discussion than its content. But of course you'll probably yell at me that you didn't ask for help anyway.
It's like you turn left at an intersection, get into a car wreck, then later your buddy's like "well you should have tried turning left."
It's more like you turned left, get into a car wreck then later your buddy's recounting the story and says you turned right and you have to yell at him that actually you turned left, not right, even when it doesn't change anything to the wreck you got in and everyone is now rolling their eyes at how you ruined not only your car but also a good story.
Now how about you shut up? I'm trying to drop the subject and you keep fucking dragging me back in.
I don't know, that's starting to be almost funny. But you're right. Fuck off, until your next whining session for a misplaced word.
-
@xaade said in Discourse PR as a Service:
Honestly, they'd get a lot of mileage by hiding the question when it's marked duplicate, and making it available only to the OP with a link to the original question.
Duplicates aren't even the real problem, so long as they provide a link (which doesn't seem to always happen). It's closing stuff because it doesn't fit the question paradigm they want. Like there might be some subjectivity or whatever other stupid things get their hackles up.
-
@xaade Unless a question is character-for-character duplicated, I don't see the point in removing duplicates at all. Who knows, maybe the duplicate is worded in some way that gets Google to send more people to SO, which increases the number of people SO has helped with the question.
The other issue with duplicates is they have this weird alien belief that if two questions have the same answer, they must therefore be the same question. Which is ridiculous, but there you go.
Like "how do I secure against SQL insertion?" and "how do I safely insert an arbitrary string into a database without errors?" both have the same answer: use prepared statements. But they're nowhere close to the same question.
-
@remi said in Discourse PR as a Service:
My advice is supposed to help you not look like a moron who cares more about the surface of the discussion than its content.
HE DIDN'T ASK FOR ADVICE YOU EVIL PERSON
-
@boomzilla said in Discourse PR as a Service:
@remi said in Discourse PR as a Service:
My advice is supposed to help you not look like a moron who cares more about the surface of the discussion than its content.
HE DIDN'T ASK FOR ADVICE YOU EVIL PERSON
HAVE YOU READ MY POST I SAID IT BEFORE YOU
-
@boomzilla Well I didn't ask for advice, but the bigger problem was that it was really stupid advice.
-
@xaade said in Discourse PR as a Service:
@boomzilla said in Discourse PR as a Service:
which stem from their, "We want to be a repository of information and duplicates or imperfect questions are anathema and will be made unquestions" sort of attitude (which we've discussed around here a bunch).
Honestly, they'd get a lot of mileage by hiding the question when it's marked duplicate, and making it available only to the OP with a link to the original question.
It would work the same and appear less hostile.
The poster then gets an option to say, "it's not a duplicate, I'm going to rewrite it to make that more apparent."
The duplicates kill me. Google-searching whatever my error of the day almost always gets me a question without an answer that was closed for being a duplicate. How about they do some SEO so the original one with an actual solution shows up first, instead of wasting my time digging through 2384234 pages of closed duplicates?
-
@blakeyrat said in Discourse PR as a Service:
Unless a question is character-for-character duplicated, I don't see the point in removing duplicates at all. Who knows, maybe the duplicate is worded in some way that gets Google to send more people to SO, which increases the number of people SO has helped with the question.
I agree. I don't get the idea that content has to be removed at all (except obvious gibberish, spam etc.). Better linked, structured, organized so that you don't get swamped into too many versions of the same thing, sure, but it doesn't need to be deleted.
I see duplicate questions kind of like redirection pages in Wikipedia, as long as they all end up pointing to the same answer (whether it is a single reference one, or the same answer on several different pages), it doesn't matter that two persons asking the same question get to the answer through different paths.
-
@blakeyrat said in Discourse PR as a Service:
@boomzilla Well I didn't ask for advice, but the bigger problem was that it was really stupid advice.
One out of two is pretty good for you!
-
@el_heffe said in Discourse PR as a Service:
Yes, that is true. However it has absolutely nothing to do with a persons, race or gender.
Just as an FYI, you can't actually prove that.
I'm sure you aren't bigoted towards those demographics, and you probably won't understand the mindset of people who come to stackoverflow that are, but you can't prove that they're not more unpleasant to foreign or female names.
Also, society in general has a lot of bigotry. If any hostility is likely in a community, demographics who suffer a lot of bigotry will remain cautious and are more likely to stay away.
-
@boomzilla said in Discourse PR as a Service:
@blakeyrat said in Discourse PR as a Service:
Anyway if people "not engaging with me" also means they don't put words in my mouth, I'm a huge fan of that, how do we make that happen?
-
@remi said in Discourse PR as a Service:
@blakeyrat You're the only one in this forum who consistently and systematically gets their panties in a twist for this kind of things. So either you're the only one who ever gets misread/misquoted, or that happens to everyone and you're the only one who, well, consistently gets their panties in a twist about it.
That is not entirely true. There is at least one other. It does not happen quite as often, but often enough.
-
@boomzilla said in Discourse PR as a Service:
@remi said in Discourse PR as a Service:
My advice is supposed to help you not look like a moron who cares more about the surface of the discussion than its content.
HE DIDN'T ASK FOR ADVICE YOU EVIL PERSON
-
@blakeyrat said in Discourse PR as a Service:
Anyway if people "not engaging with me" also means they don't put words in my mouth, I'm a huge fan of that, how do we make that happen?
Probably
to hell, but....
-
@blakeyrat said in Discourse PR as a Service:
I'm trying to drop the subject and you keep fucking dragging me back in.
You're really bad at that, BTW...
-
@mott555 said in Discourse PR as a Service:
@polygeekery said in Discourse PR as a Service:
@sh_code said in Discourse PR as a Service:
@sh_code oh, close. a white knight.
and of course, no comments enabled.SO is a place to find answers and solutions. if you want to feel welcomed, go visit family or friends, where that feeling is, unlike on SO, relevant.
Hey man, I am all for telling
to go run their genitals through a tree chipper, but SO is just fucking horrible. It is not a place to go ask questions and get answers. It is a place where you go answer a question and get it closed without an answer. It is what happens when you cross Wikipedia with a Linux community from the 90's.Mine never even got closed. Just ignored. I once got a badge/achievement/whatever on SO for asking questions that nobody responded to. How the f
does that level of gamification help with anything?I think I got one useful answer on SO maybe once in my life.
That's what has happened to my questions.
-
@xaade said in Discourse PR as a Service:
Honestly, they'd get a lot of mileage by hiding the question when it's marked duplicate, and making it available only to the OP with a link to the original question.
They really don't want to do that. You've just totally failed to understand the whole point of the site, which is to make questions available in ways that allow people to search for the answers to the problem. With an ordinary search engine. The ability to ask questions is how they seed that process, but it's the fundamental searchability that's important. And clearly-marked-and-linked duplicates help that as it lets the search engine know that if you ask like this then an answer like that is acceptable.
SO is not and never has been about being a touchy-feely community thing. It's about getting a question answered, and if someone else has already asked the question and got a good answer for it, why wouldn't you be satisfied with that? Being able to read that immediately beats having to ask and wait hopefully…
-
@mott555 said in Discourse PR as a Service:
I think I got one useful answer on SO maybe once in my life.
That's one more than I've gotten. Though I've only tried to ask a question once, and I refuse to contribute questions or answers ever again.
After failing to find any relevant answer with a fair bit of googling, I asked on SO and was greeted with "You don't have the pointzzz to do that." A conversation here, months or perhaps years later, suggests that my error was probably attempting to tag the question with the relevant language, and that unknown to me, that tag did not already exist, and that the thing I lacked the pointzzz to do was create a new tag. Whatever the reason, the experience was so new-user-hostile that I have refused to interact with the site ever since. And that was before I even found out what an expletive deleted the co-founder is.
That said, I did contribute a (partial) answer to an SE forum, once. I happened on a months-old unanswered question to which I knew part of the answer and figured part of an answer was better than none. Some twat probably deleted it as unhelpful because it was incomplete, or something. Whatever.
-
@stillwater said in Discourse PR as a Service:
@sh_code said in Discourse PR as a Service:
SO is a place to find answers and solutions. if you want to feel welcomed, go visit family or friends, where that feeling is, unlike on SO, relevant.
You must either have the attitude of an annoying 12 year old or just be a plain old bitter cunt. Which one is it?
-
@hardwaregeek said in Discourse PR as a Service:
suggests that my error was probably attempting to tag the question with the relevant language
Yep, been there, done that. I recall one question that got
'd on for not having relevant tags, yet I didn't have enough pointzzz to tag it properly.
-
@blakeyrat said in Discourse PR as a Service:
maybe the duplicate is worded in some way that gets Google to send more people to SO,
I don't know how many of the questions/answers I find through Google have duplicates elsewhere, but a good percentage of the the ones I find are the duplicates that Google sent me to instead of the original. Sometimes the duplicate even has a better answer than the original. So I say thanks! for duplicates.
-
@mott555 said in Discourse PR as a Service:
Google-searching whatever my error of the day almost always gets me a question without an answer that was closed for being a duplicate.
I usually seem to find ones that have been closed, but not until after having gotten good answers, sometimes better than the original.
-
@hardwaregeek said in Discourse PR as a Service:
And that was before I even found out what an expletive deleted the co-founder is.
I'm curious now about the expletive deleted.
Also, Which co-founder are we talking about? Joel Spolsky or Jeff Atwood?
-
@stillwater said in Discourse PR as a Service:
...a plain old bitter cunt.
I don't care (much) about the feelz either. And get the fuck off my lawn.
-
@stillwater said in Discourse PR as a Service:
Also, Which co-founder are we talking about?
Jeff is also the founder of CDCK, the company that makes Discourse. Many of us became quite well acquainted with him while TDWTF was using Discurse, and very few of us have a good opinion of him. Joel, OTOH, I have no connection with nor opinion of, apart from having read his blog a few times.
-
@hardwaregeek said in Discourse PR as a Service:
very few of us
Getting massbanned is a great way to make even relatively positive members of a community regard you as quite a dick...
-
@dkf said in Discourse PR as a Service:
And clearly-marked-and-linked duplicates help that as it lets the search engine know that if you ask like this then an answer like that is acceptable.
But they only need to have the duplicates all properly linked together for that to work. There is no need to close them in any way, especially since similar questions often differ in tiny details. They don't need to be hostile about the duplicates, they just need to tag them as duplicates.
if someone else has already asked the question and got a good answer for it, why wouldn't you be satisfied with that?
Years of FAQs and similar on Usenet and before really hasn't taught us anything about human behaviour and interaction, it seems.
Being able to read that immediately beats having to ask and wait hopefully…
On a purely technical and abstract level, that's true. Too bad humans aren't purely technical and abstract beings.
If they want humans to voluntarily spend their own time to ask and answer questions, then they have to build a touchy-feely community thing.
-
@hardwaregeek Well, you can regard me as a bit of a dipshit if you want. But don't speak for everyone. And I never said I liked Atwood, I've just been stubbornly resistant to taking everything you've said as gospel since we're all unreasonable assholes here. What I like is Discourse.
-
@remi said in Discourse PR as a Service:
If they want humans to voluntarily spend their own time to ask and answer questions, then they have to build a touchy-feely community thing.
No, they don't. They've built enough to get key questions answered, and that's exactly the point. Community building is something else entirely, and a non-goal of SO. Knowing what you don't do is a very important part of knowing what you do; it keeps you from pounding effort into boiling the ocean.
Not every question deserves an answer. Some are just so badly asked that you can't figure out what could be wrong to start out with. Some are just asking the same old shit over and over (sometimes literally and by the same person being a fuckwad, sometimes with variations in set dressing and by someone else but it's still the same answers). Some are flat-out unanswerable without an absolute ton of work. Some are invitations to pointless flamewars. Some just show the questioner to be a lazy-ass jerk who would do better just reading the fucking error message. And some questions are just asked in the wrong place.
Question closure and deletion is necessary. Anyone who feels that their feelings are hurt by this needs to stop acting like a
as that site is not about them and never ever was.
-
@dkf said in Discourse PR as a Service:
@remi said in Discourse PR as a Service:
If they want humans to voluntarily spend their own time to ask and answer questions, then they have to build a touchy-feely community thing.
No, they don't. They've built enough to get key questions answered, and that's exactly the point. Community building is something else entirely, and a non-goal of SO. Knowing what you don't do is a very important part of knowing what you do; it keeps you from pounding effort into boiling the ocean.
You're missing my point. I'm saying you can't build a long term relationship with a sufficiently large number of people, while keeping them engaged enough to keep participating freely, without actually building a community. I could even argue that what I described is about the exact definition of building a community.
They did not set out to build a community, sure, but since they are dealing with humans, not just computers, they cannot avoid becoming one to reach their goal.
It's like saying that an office company should only care about its desks areas and not about break rooms, lavatories and such. It's not what they are being paid for, and they might outsource the handling of those to someone else if they want, but as long as they've got humans running the show, they must have them, because humans are humans.
Not every question deserves an answer.
Well now you are close to contradicting yourself when you said that SO goal was to search-efficient. If someone asked a question once, then it can be assumed that someone else will ask it again, and thus having an answer to that question means the search engine will find it.
(I'm playing devil's advocate here, in reality I agree that there is some level of really catastrophically worded questions, random nonsense or spam-like stuff that needs to be filtered out... but I don't really think the people writing these "questions" are the one who are offended by the community, more likely they're just random monkeys dropping their shit and moving on)
Now, not all questions deserve a valid and complete answer, sometimes just redirecting to another place, or just having a stub for complex things, or requests for clarifications, might be enough. But all that doesn't mean closing (as in, definitively preventing any further attempt at answering) or even deleting (as in, no search engine will ever find the question).
that site is not about them and never ever was.
And then you wonder why people are dissatisfied. "RTFM n00b" did not work in the Usenet days to make friendly and efficient groups, and surprise surprise, this still doesn't work nowadays. It's almost as if it's about engaging humans and not answering questions.
-
@Polygeekery said in Discourse PR as a Service:
It is a place where you go
answerask a question and get it closed without an answer.I've asked a few questions there and received good answers. Sometimes I didn't get a response for a while, though. And like @mott555, I've also received the badge for having an unanswered question for long enough. I've also asked questions that got responses amounting to "you're so dumb for even having that question" despite trying to follow the guidelines for "good" questions and trying to avoid or head off X-Y Problem responses.
I will say that asking for help here has been a much more rewarding experience. I get a response very quickly (within a day, and sometimes within minutes), and the responses help guide me to the answer I need.
-
@dkf said in Discourse PR as a Service:
@xaade said in Discourse PR as a Service:
Honestly, they'd get a lot of mileage by hiding the question when it's marked duplicate, and making it available only to the OP with a link to the original question.
They really don't want to do that. You've just totally failed to understand the whole point of the site, which is to make questions available in ways that allow people to search for the answers to the problem. With an ordinary search engine. The ability to ask questions is how they seed that process, but it's the fundamental searchability that's important. And clearly-marked-and-linked duplicates help that as it lets the search engine know that if you ask like this then an answer like that is acceptable.
SO is not and never has been about being a touchy-feely community thing. It's about getting a question answered, and if someone else has already asked the question and got a good answer for it, why wouldn't you be satisfied with that? Being able to read that immediately beats having to ask and wait hopefully…
But if I don't know all the right jargon to use in my search (or don't even know where to find the right terms), then allowing and redirecting/linking "duplicates" means it's more likely that someone will have used the same terms I'm using in my search and thereby I can more easily find the answer I need.
-
@remi said in Discourse PR as a Service:
@dkf said in Discourse PR as a Service:
@remi said in Discourse PR as a Service:
If they want humans to voluntarily spend their own time to ask and answer questions, then they have to build a touchy-feely community thing.
No, they don't. They've built enough to get key questions answered, and that's exactly the point. Community building is something else entirely, and a non-goal of SO. Knowing what you don't do is a very important part of knowing what you do; it keeps you from pounding effort into boiling the ocean.
You're missing my point. I'm saying you can't build a long term relationship with a sufficiently large number of people, while keeping them engaged enough to keep participating freely, without actually building a community. I could even argue that what I described is about the exact definition of building a community.
They did not set out to build a community, sure, but since they are dealing with humans, not just computers, they cannot avoid becoming one to reach their goal.
It's like saying that an office company should only care about its desks areas and not about break rooms, lavatories and such. It's not what they are being paid for, and they might outsource the handling of those to someone else if they want, but as long as they've got humans running the show, they must have them, because humans are humans.
I remember how they resisted it. No questions about Stack Overflow were to be allowed on the platform itself! Delete with extreme prejudice!
However, people kept asking for some forum to discuss "organizing Stack Overflow" questions, so at one point they just gave up and created meta.stackoverflow.com with much fanfare, then Jeff had to explain his reasons again on his blog a few weeks later.
That first article makes for an interesting quote though:
What’s the first rule of Stack Overflow Club?
You don’t talk about Stack Overflow on Stack Overflow.We have this policy not because we are jerks (or at least, not just because we are jerks)
Well, know thyself I guess.
-
@djls45 said in Discourse PR as a Service:
I will say that asking for help here has been a much more rewarding experience. I get a response very quickly (within a day, and sometimes within minutes), and the responses help guide me to the answer I need.
I guess part of it is that here, people don't try to write generic answers to a generic problem, but only to help you get through the very specific issue that you have right now.
It's part of fundamental flaw of SO, I think: it's based on the idea that all (or at least, most) individual questions are nothing but examples of more general questions, and that by answering the general question (and turning the question into a general one) you will satisfactorily answer not only the original specific question, but also all other specific questions that are the same.
Which squarely fells afoul of the human nature. It's essentially the same as saying RTFM. True, the FM does contain the answer to the specific question that is being asked right now, but the asker is not interested in anything but solving his question. Sure, "teach a man to fish..." but there is a reason we have teachers for that and not just random people. Teaching people to solve their problems is not just telling them that their specific question is just an instance of a generic problem and solve that problem instead.
-
@remi said in Discourse PR as a Service:
Teaching people to solve their problems is not just telling them that their specific question is just an instance of a generic problem and solve that problem instead.
Reminds me of the joke about asking a mathematician about how to change a tyre
Get a jack, jack up the car, loosen the nuts, remove the wheel, put the new wheel on, tighten nuts and put everything away.
OK, and what would you do if the car was already on the jack and the nuts were loosened?
Tighten the nuts, remove the jack and put it back, thus reducing the problem to one I've already solved
-
@dkf said in Discourse PR as a Service:
You've just totally failed to understand the whole point of the site, which is to make questions available in ways that allow people to search for the answers to the problem.
Yes, and somehow I've gotten just that result out of a normal forum without all of the hostility. In fact, I've gotten better results finding answers to questions out of a normal forum, for say household repair. I think it has to do with the fact that normal forums don't have a gaming system to them. That there is no benefit to answering a question other than just helping someone.
In those cases, they somehow manage to link duplicates without closing threads. Partially because sometimes the person has a unique problem and you don't know until you've conversed a little. The link to the duplicate is still there at the top of the thread, and the more applicable answer is further in the thread. Now you have two answers. Useful if you somehow didn't know how to ask the question.
@dkf said in Discourse PR as a Service:
SO is not and never has been about being a touchy-feely community thing.
Understood.
SO goes beyond avoiding touchy-feely and becomes arguably rude.
@dkf said in Discourse PR as a Service:
why wouldn't you be satisfied with that?
Because sometimes you don't know how to ask the question. Other forums have people that will spend the time to figure out what information you really want. SO closes your question and leaves it to you to figure out what you should have asked.
-
@xaade said in Discourse PR as a Service:
Because sometimes you don't know how to ask the question. Other forums have people that will spend the time to figure out what information you really want. SO closes your question and leaves it to you to figure out what you should have asked.
That's why keeping the duplicates visible is useful; they make it much more likely that what you search for when formulating the question will hit an actual answer.
-
@dkf said in Discourse PR as a Service:
Not every question deserves an answer.
If someone takes the effort to sign up for an account and type in a question, they obviously have some kind of need.
@dkf said in Discourse PR as a Service:
Some are just so badly asked that you can't figure out what could be wrong to start out with.
Then ask clarifying questions until you know.
@dkf said in Discourse PR as a Service:
Some are just asking the same old shit over and over
Then providing an answer should be really fucking easy, shouldn't it?
@dkf said in Discourse PR as a Service:
Some are flat-out unanswerable without an absolute ton of work.
I see SO has inherited some of the open source philosophy here. "If it takes even the slighest amount of effort, it's not worth doing. Lazy people unite!"
Seriously, are you saying the question I asked and nobody answered (presumably because coming up with an answer was "too difficult") should have been deleted? Is that really what you believe?
@dkf said in Discourse PR as a Service:
Some are invitations to pointless flamewars.
Are they really.
@dkf said in Discourse PR as a Service:
Some just show the questioner to be a lazy-ass jerk who would do better just reading the fucking error message.
Then, again, providing an answer should be pretty fucking easy, no?
@dkf said in Discourse PR as a Service:
And some questions are just asked in the wrong place.
So move it to the right place.
@dkf said in Discourse PR as a Service:
Question closure and deletion is necessary.
Nothing you've said in your first paragraph has convinced me of this.
@dkf said in Discourse PR as a Service:
Anyone who feels that their feelings are hurt by this needs to stop acting like a as that site is not about them and never ever was.
And this is just cruel.
-
@sloosecannon said in Discourse PR as a Service:
@hardwaregeek said in Discourse PR as a Service:
very few of us
Getting massbanned is a great way to make even relatively positive members of a community regard you as quite a dick...
To this day I still don't know how I escaped that unscathed.
-
@blakeyrat said in Discourse PR as a Service:
@dkf said in Discourse PR as a Service:
Not every question deserves an answer.
If someone takes the effort to sign up for an account and type in a question, they obviously have some kind of need.
Again, this goes back to my frustration that SO leaves a person to their own devices if they didn't ask the question well enough.
Closing questions shuts down dialog, and shuts down the capacity to determine whether the person has been helped or not.
Yes, spending dialog goes against making a repository for answered questions, but that's what wiki is for, right?
@blakeyrat said in Discourse PR as a Service:
Then ask clarifying questions until you know.
I'm on blakey's side here.
-
@tsaukpaetra said in Discourse PR as a Service:
@sloosecannon said in Discourse PR as a Service:
@hardwaregeek said in Discourse PR as a Service:
very few of us
Getting massbanned is a great way to make even relatively positive members of a community regard you as quite a dick...
To this day I still don't know how I escaped that unscathed.
Turing test failure?
-
@boomzilla said in Discourse PR as a Service:
@tsaukpaetra said in Discourse PR as a Service:
@sloosecannon said in Discourse PR as a Service:
@hardwaregeek said in Discourse PR as a Service:
very few of us
Getting massbanned is a great way to make even relatively positive members of a community regard you as quite a dick...
To this day I still don't know how I escaped that unscathed.
Turing test failure?
I hadn't considered that.
After all, it's impossible to run bots on Discourse, right?
-
@blakeyrat said in Discourse PR as a Service:
Someone on Hacker News when this was discussed there thought SO should just delete everybody's InternetPointzzz every 6 months. I liked that idea a lot.
The mods should zero your internetpointzz since you don't give any upvote back you selfish bastard.
-
I'm not a great fan of SO, and I mostly use it as a place where I can get the name of what I am actually needing. The answers there are usually not very good solutions, so I go look at source material and cook up something better once I know where to look, and what to look for.
I've tried asking questions there a few times, and all but one languished without the slightest bit of interaction, and the one that got a comment or two was basically just entirely wrong, which I had already gone through and explained why they were wrong in the question.
If anything, I've learned more about programming from hanging out on tdwtf than I ever did on SO. There are some seriously knowledgeable people around these parts, as long as you don't mind being called out on being wrong or dumb. OR right. :D
And then there is the whole thing with how software is not a mature field, everything is in a constant churn of change, so the answers for something from 2010, while technically still a solution, may be a bad way to do it with current libraries and technologies. Questions that are duplicates should be left open, and once answered satisfactory, they should be merged into a FAQ repository rather than the current way of working on SO.
But feh. It's still useful for the way I use it. I am just not ever going to get involved with that community.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9QEQHe8ax4
I've seen one-too-many spoof advertisements that sound exactly like this and I can't stop doubting whether this is genuine, even though I know it is.
-
@lb_ Hacker News had a conversation about this. The concensus is that as long as SO's search feature is utterly useless, so is this product. (The only way searching works on SO now is if you use Google to do it.)
-
@carnage said in Discourse PR as a Service:
I'm not a great fan of SO, and I mostly use it as a place where I can get the name of what I am actually needing.
I think that's a great way to use it. Almost all interesting questions I come across in general are sufficiently cutting-edge or obscure that SO doesn't help much. OTOH, I think SO is a reasonable user support channel; for all its imperfections, it's a lot better than many of the truly awful FAQ pages that preceded it precisely because at least every question was useful to someone. (Many FAQs were not useful to anyone at all.)
-
@tsaukpaetra said in Discourse PR as a Service:
@blakeyrat said in Discourse PR as a Service:
Anyway if people "not engaging with me" also means they don't put words in my mouth, I'm a huge fan of that, how do we make that happen?
Probably
to hell, but....You were
'd by at least five years.
