Timeline for What can we do to help users understand our site better?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
18 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 16, 2020 at 10:01 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Apr 12, 2017 at 7:31 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://programmers.stackexchange.com/ with https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Mar 16, 2017 at 17:21 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.programmers.stackexchange.com/ with https://softwareengineering.meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Mar 16, 2017 at 17:21 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.programmers.stackexchange.com/ with https://softwareengineering.meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| May 16, 2012 at 16:58 | comment | added | Rachel |
@YannisRizos Programmers is an extremely broad term. It's like creating a site called Athletes, but only allowing questions about sports. And not technical questions about how to play sports, but only conceptual questions on sports. It's very confusing if you're new to the site.
|
|
| May 14, 2012 at 18:40 | comment | added | yannis Mod | The "interested in conceptual questions about software development" part is only meant to distinguish us from Stack Overflow, which is also about the primary expertise of programmers, but from a different perspective. | |
| May 14, 2012 at 18:39 | comment | added | yannis Mod |
if you read through the migration list, P.SE is the only one different Yes, but different how? You claim that the "professional programmers" part is the troublesome, but how is that any different from "system administrator, computer enthusiasts, pro webmasters"? Is ServerFault a site about system administrators? Nope. Is SuperUser a site about computer enthusiasts? Nope. Is Pro Webmasters a site about webmasters? Nope. They are all sites about the primary expertise of these people, as is programmers.
|
|
| May 14, 2012 at 18:33 | comment | added | Rachel | @YannisRizos RE: The chat link with Vash and Joshua, I was pointing out the fact that two users who have been with the site for a long time were not actually aware of the site scope. It wasn't about the question being discussed (which should rightfully have been closed). Now please, make a chat room if you want to discuss this further, or ping me in the main chat. | |
| May 14, 2012 at 18:33 | comment | added | Rachel | @YannisRizos RE: SE migrations, if you read through the migration list, P.SE is the only one different. It basically gives you options for "SE Engine, system administrator, computer enthusiasts, pro webmasters, or professional programmers [interested in conceptual questions on software development]". Most users used to the SO migration system just see the site name is Programmers and it is "for professional programmers". We can't force them to read, but we can clarify what we say to make it harder to misunderstand. | |
| May 14, 2012 at 18:33 | comment | added | Rachel |
@YannisRizos RE: we are a site for programmers to ask questions and get answers from other programmers - If that is true then you are incorrectly closing questions. I think the actual phrase you are looking for is something like "we are a site for programmers to ask questions and get answers from other programmers providing they are about conceptual software development or freelancing and business concerns only"
|
|
| May 14, 2012 at 18:33 | comment | added | Rachel | @YannisRizos As for my "evidence", just look through the closed questions. The majority of them are new users to the site that are looking for an answer from programmers. | |
| May 14, 2012 at 18:33 | comment | added | Rachel |
@YannisRizos The subject of the tagline is Professional Programmers, and the interested in conceptual questions about software development is merely an attribute of the programmer. It makes the site sound like it is a site for professional programmers with a specific interest, and not a site that is only for conceptual questions on software development (or freelancing and business concerns). Why not just try out a change and see if it helps? I think you'll see it does.
|
|
| May 14, 2012 at 18:29 | comment | added | yannis Mod | Also the question you and Vash talked about, you somehow yet again missed the close reason, the question wasn't closed as off topic but as not a real question, because, well, it's extremely unclear. But a version of it that would ask for a professional code of conduct like the IEEE Code of Ethics would be on topic (if not NC/NARQ). Your little crusade doesn't help anyone, if you are constantly misguiding people that their low quality questions were closed because of a scope change that happened more than a year ago. | |
| May 14, 2012 at 18:20 | comment | added | yannis Mod |
Most people won't willingly post or migrate bad questions to a site Any evidence for that? Because we've noticed that SOpedians willingly migrate bad questions here, thinking that it's somehow nicer to migrate the question than close it. Can you blame them?
|
|
| May 14, 2012 at 18:19 | comment | added | yannis Mod |
by all first impressions, we are a site for programmers to ask questions and get answers from other programmers. This is true, we are a site for programmers to ask questions and get answers from other programmers. I fail to see your point there, that's a great description for the site.
|
|
| May 14, 2012 at 18:16 | comment | added | yannis Mod |
the majority of closed questions seem to come from new users that are looking for an answer from a programmer What are your evidence for that bold claim?
|
|
| May 14, 2012 at 18:13 | comment | added | yannis Mod | "Professional programmers interested in conceptual questions about software development" works for me. You keep focusing on programmers completely dismissing the rest of the tagline, however people who read will read all of it, people who don't will not read any version of it. I have absolutely no idea why someone would only read "programmers" and somehow fail to read "conceptual questions about software development". | |
| May 14, 2012 at 17:37 | history | answered | Rachel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |