

Stackoverflow rolls out "Chat with an expert" - aSig
http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/174407/what-is-chat-with-an-expert

======
wilhelm
Disregarding the current date, this is actually a great idea. Instant
gratification for a fee. Yes, I'd pay for that.

They could recruit their experts from the community itself, limited to those
over a certain karma threshold, adding further incentive to participate.

~~~
gav
The question I always have is: is a high karma a meaningful measurement of
somebody's abilities?

~~~
Mahn
Nope. On SO at least there are lots of folks who amassed hundreds of thousands
of reputation merely for being on the site early enough to be able to answer
simple and common questions like "how I can remove an array member" and the
like.

~~~
NickLarsen
I'm pretty sure the folks who have amassed "hundreds of thousands of
reputation" did it merely by answering 1000's of questions.

[http://data.stackexchange.com/stackoverflow/query/105837/how...](http://data.stackexchange.com/stackoverflow/query/105837/how-
many-questions-have-people-with-over-100-000-rep-answered)

Sure there are a few questions with highly voted up answers because they are
widely useful, but there is certainly the minority of high rep earners. Even
the new people who are gaining lots of rep are doing it by answering hundreds
of questions.

<http://stackoverflow.com/users?tab=newusers>

------
pbiggar
Oh FFS! This looked like a great product that seemed a natural monetization of
their platform, that I would actually use and pay for. But its a fucking april
fools joke connected to an eliza bot.

See also: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5470437>

~~~
wting
Flask started out as an April Fool's joke that eventually became a real
product, there's no reason why the same can't happen with this.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flask_(programming)#History>

------
simonsarris
How funny: Just yesterday my friend (whom I met on StackOverflow months ago)
mentioned that someone in the JavaScript chat channel was asking about some
canvas tutorial, one that I just so happened to write. He summoned me so that
the questioner could in fact, chat with an expert. (Or at least the author.)

The (none-too-interesting) transcript as proof:

[http://chat.stackoverflow.com/transcript/message/8574110#857...](http://chat.stackoverflow.com/transcript/message/8574110#8574110)

Unfortunately the question wasn't particularly interesting and concerned an
old tutorial. But I love SO because it really does let you chat with experts
(Skeet being the most obvious), if not always in real time.

------
darkxanthos
This would make a great feature but as an April Fool's joke it seems to fall a
bit flat. On that link a couple users are being upset by it.

Maybe don't April Fool's your users with terrible service?

------
Zolomon
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_Fools_Day>

~~~
est
The S.O. experts always responds: Your question is off-topic and will be
closed.

------
greggman
If it means people posting their random code and asking others to debug it
disappears from stackoverflow I'm all for it.

While their at it it would be nice if questions marked as duplicate were
either deleted or at least had a pointer to the duplicate

~~~
mediumdeviation
Uh, duplicates _always_ have the question that they are a duplicate of linked
- <http://i.imgur.com/1lata16.png>. In fact, if you don't see this it's
probably a bug and you should report it
<http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/ask?tags=bug>

------
Selfcommit
This seems relevant, <http://adviza.stackexchange.com/transcript/3H7fYEZJI0KJ>

------
guiomie
This product would make Jon Skeet millionnaire.

------
hsmyers
More properly, towards the bottom, it should say "You must log in to LOOK at
this question"...

------
fidz
Could i have my own robot in my own favor without setting up high performance
server?

