Timeline for New Site Name and Scope: how to handle blatant debugging questions?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
33 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 20, 2017 at 10:29 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.stackexchange.com/ with https://meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Mar 17, 2017 at 8:26 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.programmers.stackexchange.com/ with https://softwareengineering.meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Mar 17, 2017 at 8:26 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.programmers.stackexchange.com/ with https://softwareengineering.meta.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Sep 16, 2016 at 15:27 | history | edited | gnat | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
system features += [3](http://meta.programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/8056/new-site-name-and-scope-proposals/8061#comment24925_8065 "example - interstitial page")
|
| Aug 18, 2016 at 13:23 | comment | added | gnat | @Trilarion it's not really simple if you think of it, because system has no way to tell if they are going to ask for debugging or something else, something that would be on-topic. It would be funny if askers blocked at SO couldn't ask at say, EL&U or Worldbuilding but I somehow doubt that this will happen. :) That said one can imagine some system features that could help in handling such askers, my question refers two examples of requests for such features | |
| Aug 18, 2016 at 13:15 | comment | added | NoDataDumpNoContribution | "...users who simply don't have an option to ask for debugging help at more appropriate site." Then they should not be given that option here too. Simple as that. | |
| Aug 13, 2016 at 16:58 | vote | accept | gnat | ||
| Aug 13, 2016 at 16:58 | answer | added | gnat | timeline score: 3 | |
| Aug 13, 2016 at 16:57 | history | edited | gnat | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
the way += maybe ask for system features
|
| Aug 12, 2016 at 19:12 | comment | added | Doc Brown | @RobertHarvey: ... and it seems it takes another year to discuss around this rebranding, but actually nothing happens except these kind of exhausting discussions. Honestly, I hope the rebranding will take place soon, so we can actually see if it works or not, instead of theorizing. | |
| Aug 12, 2016 at 17:19 | comment | added | gnat | @ThomasOwens such a relief to find out that it wasn't only me who heard what Shog said: "delete everything that's blatantly off-topic as soon as it appears" | |
| Aug 12, 2016 at 17:18 | comment | added | Robert Harvey | @ThomasOwens: Fair enough. | |
| Aug 12, 2016 at 17:17 | comment | added | Thomas Owens Mod | @RobertHarvey Personally, I have been. Ever since Shog strongly suggested faster deletions in The Whiteboard. Previously, I was hesitant to delete questions that would otherwise be Roomba'd, but I am now. I guess I don't see that as a change that is related to the rebranding at all. | |
| Aug 12, 2016 at 17:15 | comment | added | Robert Harvey | @ThomasOwens: Not to put words in gnat's mouth, but it seems to me like he's asking "When the site actually gets branded with the words "but not code troubleshooting," will the diamond moderators take a more active role in sweeping up the code troubleshooting questions that get asked despite the warnings (there will be some significant number of these still; you and I both know that). In other words, will you Oded more often? | |
| Aug 12, 2016 at 17:13 | comment | added | Robert Harvey | @DocBrown: We're probably only going to get one chance at this. It's taken four years to get this far. | |
| Aug 12, 2016 at 14:40 | comment | added | gnat | @Snowman to me wait-and-see approach looks like the right way for now, I only decided to re-check this more publicly with site community for the reasons laid out in this prior comment | |
| Aug 12, 2016 at 14:23 | comment | added | user22815 | Maybe I am just being cynical, but I think @gnat has a valid concern here. The distinction between sites is clear to intelligent people, but we are dealing with help vampires. On one hand they are not smart enough to get their CS101 assignment working and could use some on-topic guidance, but on the other hand they probably don't care. Maybe taking a wait-and-see approach is best like Doc said earlier in the comments? | |
| Aug 11, 2016 at 20:57 | comment | added | gnat | to the buddy who upvoted comments that may appear like supporting your downvote. Please note that I addressed these and none of commenters expressed that my explanations lacked. You may probably wish this question to disappear so that meta looks like there could be no trouble ahead but please note that I am not going to hide it | |
| Aug 11, 2016 at 14:49 | comment | added | gnat | ...for the sake of completeness, comments at Math may be different matter but debugging questions from misguided Math folks, however awful, seem to be rare - not even close to 20%, hardly a problem really | |
| Aug 11, 2016 at 14:47 | comment | added | gnat | @ThomasOwens did you by chance mean wording in tagline ("not code troubleshooting")? I can't see how comments may relate to this, it is hardly that anyone in sane mind at SO would suggest us for debugging (nor do I recall this sort comments in Duga archives ever). As for site name, I am really skeptical about that because of word "software" in it - please note how we had to specifically clarify it with that additional statement in tagline, name alone would hardly suffice | |
| Aug 11, 2016 at 14:38 | comment | added | Thomas Owens Mod | @gnat Maybe. I hope that reducing the number of comments pointing here and the new name will at least give people pause before they dump crap. | |
| Aug 11, 2016 at 14:32 | comment | added | gnat | @ThomasOwens that makes good sense, thanks. Do you also expect that rebranding will help cut debugging help questions from users who are banned at Stack Overflow? | |
| Aug 11, 2016 at 14:28 | comment | added | Thomas Owens Mod | I think you misunderstand what I said. I believe that changing the name and improving the tagline alone will reduce the number of people who think that they can ask things that don't belong here sufficiently to not need any other changes, at least immediately. A rebranding should be a hint to people on Stack Overflow to stop suggesting that people take their questions here, a suggestion to new users as to what our scope is, and so on. The new name and tagline, alone, will reduce the code debugging and troubleshooting questions posted here. | |
| Aug 11, 2016 at 14:25 | comment | added | gnat | @ThomasOwens wrt whether current system works, my reading of the discussion suggests that some may disagree: "it doesn't. Commenting, guiding, and so on will help. Unfortunately, the bigger problem (code debugging/troubleshooting) is keeping us worn down from helping users with the second problem. I think we get tired of the first and aren't doing what we can to coach on the second". Please feel free to correct if I misread | |
| Aug 11, 2016 at 14:19 | comment | added | gnat | @DocBrown that's a good point and originally I planned to do just that. But then I figured that chances of getting this kind of issue look rather strong (see the reference to stats in the question) and we maybe better have some preliminary discussion instead of waiting and checking if it falls on us or not (I particularly liked how matters of overlapping sites were clarified prior to change) | |
| Aug 11, 2016 at 14:12 | comment | added | Doc Brown | I suggest you ask this question again after the site name was changed for a few weeks, assumed you think it is still relevant then. | |
| Aug 11, 2016 at 14:11 | comment | added | Thomas Owens Mod | I still don't understand. We are changing our name and tagline to make it easier to understand that these questions don't belong here. Beyond that, why does anything need to change in how we handle questions that don't belong here? I don't understand, since the current system works, and should get easier by reducing the people who legitimately don't know that their question doesn't belong here. | |
| Aug 11, 2016 at 14:05 | comment | added | gnat | ...this "tradition" seems to be so widespread that SE team had to implement a special feature to handle it, so that questions from banned users can't migrate from other sites | |
| Aug 11, 2016 at 14:00 | comment | added | gnat | @ThomasOwens I tried to explain that in the closing of this question: "...statistics seems to suggest that ~20% questions here come from users who simply don't have an option to ask for debugging help at more appropriate site..." If someone needs a debugging help but can't ask at Stack Overflow, it looks quite likely that they will try their luck here. There is long known "tradition" of attempts to circumvent such bans by posting at inappropriate sites | |
| Aug 11, 2016 at 13:56 | comment | added | Thomas Owens Mod | I just don't understand what you're suggesting or trying to discuss. Our hypothesis is that, unless you dig into the Help Center, you get the impression that our community may be one that accepts questions about code debugging and that simply putting a more clear name and tagline in front of people will go a long way in fixing that. If you accept that hypothesis, why are any other changes necessary at all? | |
| Aug 11, 2016 at 13:53 | comment | added | gnat | @ThomasOwens I tried to explain why it looks like that in the opening quotes of my question, "And the code troubleshooting types are, by far, the worst... they're a problem, so you focus on that" etc. Please feel free to correct if I misread | |
| Aug 11, 2016 at 13:49 | comment | added | Thomas Owens Mod | I'm confused why you think that one particular type of question needs special treatment over others. There are some things that would be nice to make the homepage cleaner, but they would be systematic changes with respect to how questions are displayed on the homepage and /questions page and should probably go to Meta Stack Exchange. | |
| Aug 11, 2016 at 13:28 | history | asked | gnat | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
