I think it's a valid to request to find out if this option is even feasible.
There have been a number of conversations lately, including with SE Community Managers, that have revolved around the site's scope and focus. I think it's safely stated that the current site name does not give a correct first impression for the site's scope.
I've noticed a lot of discussion on this issue, and as a new user I feel I can shed some light as I have previously had difficulty when trying to decide whether a question I have, does in fact fit the sites scope.
Before a user joins programmers.se they are welcomed with what I feel is a fairly clear definition of the sites scope:
It is a well known fact ...
Oct. 20th, 2016 - This is done!
See: It's official! Programmers is now Software Engineering Stack Exchange
It took us a good while, but the Community Team has circled up and here's where we stand on your request to change Programmers.SE's name.
We agree that renaming this site is a good idea.
"Programmers" is an affinity group, whereas "Software ...
It is a valid request, but I see some problems here:
to find a name which really describes the sites scope better, and not just different or equally bad (or worse).
once the name is changed, there is probably no easy way back for the next few years. A site name change is something I do not expect the SE team to make every two weeks. So if the change does ...
I like this, I like this a lot.
The design is just the right amount different from the current one to show continuity and yet show that we've changed, matured and grown up.
One small thing - is there any change whatsoever we can get se.stackexchange.com as a short form of the url? softwareengineering.stackexchange.com is a doozy to type out when you're in ...
I write this both as a 20,000+ user and former elected moderator on Programmers, and as a community manager at Stack Exchange.
First and foremost: we will not be changing this site's name.
Why? Well, let's talk about that.
As others have brought up here, there is no evidence right now to support the claim that the site's name is leading to its problems. ...
Well, I am with you here, Robert, but not just for the reason you gave. The whole description is
too damn long
it is not surprising people read only the first half of it and forget about the second half.
Here is the full text:
Q&A for professionals, academics, and students working within the systems development life cycle who care about creating, ...
Yes, the board should be made to be publicly viewable. This would allow for more transparency in the creation of the blog as well as giving other sites a template on how to run their Trello boards for their blogs. It would foster a more open atmosphere on the site and give potential authors possible ideas for what to do as far as blogging topics without ...
New logo for Software Engineering Stack Exchange
Deliver working software frequently, from a couple of weeks to a
couple of months, with a preference to the shorter timescale.
I think we'd like the new stuff sooner rather than later.
You have consulted with stakeholders.
You have cooperated with them as much as naturally ...
I would be okay with this being removed.
I personally feel that there is a huge amount of wisdom in this article, but there are a number of highly opinionated and possibly wrongheaded assumptions that many people may not only disagree with, but also find highly offensive.
Specifically I am calling out his observations and assumptions about software ...
It would be a good idea but if I remember correctly the primary reason against this happening is that this would significantly hurt SEO.
Search Engine Optimization
This however can be a PITA, but it is not the insurmountable challenge that the StackExchange folks make it seem.
How to Change Domain Names and not Lose SEO
Acquire new domain ...
Please disregard this post if there is any danger of it causing a delay in the name change.
Well, it has a coffee cup. So I'm already ecstatic. :)
With all due respect to our chronically-overworked design team, let me show you what an hour playing with windows paint let me do.
Why? Well, in addition to having a healthy respect for symmetry, I like ...
In the past 60 days, 76% of all questions from unregistered users have been either down-voted below 0, closed, deleted, or some combination of the three.
That's a total of 182 questions, compared to 877 similarly bad questions from registered users. It's a relatively small number, but as a percentage of the total it's high enough that implementing #1 holds ...
In the How To Ask it says, "Is your question about software development?" That seems like a pretty good name.
The Tour, has a list of questions not to ask. New posters are not reading this list. Many items are straight-forward.
Don't ask about...
general workplace issues, career advice, job hunting, salary, or compensation -- The name Programmers ...
After discussing with The Workplace moderators, and given the positive feedback both this and the Meta Workplace discussion received, I went ahead and updated our off topic list:
and it is not about...
general workplace issues, office politics, résumé help (check out The Workplace instead),
implementation issues or programming tools (ask ...
Due to our perception as a sort of second SO (deserved or otherwise) I think doing #1 would be a good idea, because we constantly have to deal with both our expected growing pains, and fallout from SO as they grow. I think this puts our site in a special category where requiring registration would be justified.
Our site definition seems difficult enough for ...
The answer is exceptional and all edits added information to it. Even if the author intended to bump the answer, he did so with significant improvements and I think in this particular instance CW feels more like a penalty than an incentive for other users to continue evolving the answer. So, I've removed the CW status from the answer.
I don't think there is ...
I agree. It's not something that belongs in the site faq. The 'dont call yourself a programmer' article is an opinion piece, and shouldnt be presented as if its the site's uniformly accepted authority on the topic. There's already a link to The Workplace - which should be the go-to 'authority' on the topic. I think that's sufficient.
This might be a good example of an unfair CW, every edit added something valuable to the answer and there doesn't seem to be a series of minor edits that would point to rep whoring. Furthermore all edits are by the answer's author, I don't see any reason to encourage collaboration, which is what CW is supposed to be about. Also, it's worth pointing out that ...
Voting is, and it should be, anonymous. That includes the fact that you voted, not just who you voted for.
Think of all the snarky comments after the election: "But you didn't even voted, what makes you think your opinion matters in random Meta issue".
People should vote because they care for the site, not the election process itself.
I think a better way to approach it might be like how Gaming.SE does their contests
You start by picking a timeframe and a tag. The tag could be a design pattern, a development methodology, or any broad category you'd like to promote.
There are two winners: One for best question, and one for best answer.
Best Question is won by the person who asked a ...
software-developer is a blatant meta-tag; everyone on this site should already be a software developer, so the tag does not add anything. If you see it, feel free to edit, vote to close and/or cast a delete vote as appropriate, and then remove the tag.
My response is going to come in two (and a half) parts.
I agree with your take on the question and have reopened it.
I asked a similar question ("What are the rules around moderators closing questions outright?") last year and one of the responses summed it up:
The principle is that moderators are encouraged to make decisions; that's ...