

Why StackExchange will eventually fail – Control-Freak-ism - nsoonhui
http://weblogs.asp.net/rosherove/archive/2010/09/24/why-stackexchange-will-eventually-fail-control-freak-ism.aspx

======
bherms
I love stack overflow, I love the idea, etc. What I don't like, and what I
think is the real problem, which the author gets at, is that the site is
becoming more and more fragmented. Programming is a very broad topic and it
drives me NUTS when I post a question on SO, and get several replies telling
me its more suitable for another SE site, then eventually someone decides to
close it and I have to find the other site to re-ask. More effort gets put in
by the control freaks to tell you what stack overflow is for and that you're
wrong for posting your question there than to actually just answer it in the
first place.

~~~
dasil003
Yeah I was thinking about this. The obvious counter-example where control-
freakism works is wikipedia. But it works there because there is only one
wikipedia, and it is supposed to be about anything that's important. So
there's no fragmentation, and there's no higher ambition for the site
creators.

Stack Overflow is a great site, but I don't see the value of a federated
series of sites for all manner of topics... at least not on a mass scale. I
get the feeling that SO was just a bit too easy for Joel and Jeff, what with
the sad state of the competition, and their mindshare amongst the target
audience. So they needed to find a bigger challenge. I guess more power to
them in their entrepreneurial efforts, but I think success will be elusive.

~~~
dalke
"there is only one wikipedia, and it is supposed to be about anything that's
important. So there's no fragmentation ..."

There is fragmentation. See Wookiepedia, for one, where Star Wars fans have a
different idea of what "important" means.

~~~
mmacaulay
People on the main wikipedia site aren't going to tell you to go post your
Star Wars article on the Star Wars-specific spinoff wiki site though are they?

~~~
dalke
Absolutely. I searched Deletionpedia (pages deleted from Wikipedia) for
"Wookiepedia" and easily found that "Force Lightning" was deleted. One of the
reasons for deletion (see
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Force_lightning)
for discussion) was "this is precisely why we have outlets such as Wookiepedia
for this sort of stuff." The page on Wookiepedia is
<http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Force_lightning> .

------
atomical
Today I posted a simple non-programming question on Quora after I skimmed an
article by MG Siegler espousing its greatness. Ten hours later and I still
don't have an answer.

The same thing happens to me with Stackoverflow. Sometimes I get argumentative
answers but most of the time I get no answer. Maybe I am an idiot but I think
sites like this will fail when they are overwhelmed by people who have
questions but aren't necessarily in the position to contribute back themselves
(hey we are busy!)

The utility in these types of sites is the range of questions that will be
archived and served off search results for years to come.

------
AndrewS
StackOverflow is my first port of call when I run into a programming problem
that I can't solve. I've started mucking around with Unity 3d (a game engine)
and was quite relieved when I found a solid StackExchange forum for the
engine.

The main complaint I have about StackOverflow is how the reputation system
negatively affects peoples' behaviour. Although the net effect of the system
is very positive, I find that people rush to answer easy questions to get some
up-votes. If they take too long to craft a detailed answer, they miss out.
Answers to difficult questions take longer and get less views and up-votes, so
people don't bother trying.

Many of the questions that show up on StackOverflow can be answered with a
quick google. They only serve to dilute the quality questions and answers, and
cheapen the reputation system. I also get the impression that people who
couldn't be bothered to google a question first also couldn't be bothered
responding to the comments and answers that they get.

Having said that, StackOverflow is still the best programming forum for
languages that I use and I don't see it failing any time soon.

------
T-R
Control issues never struck me as significant, either on SO or Area51, and I
have trouble buying the argument that correcting typos and merging similar
sites are unnecessary and evidence that Jeff,Joel, and the site's users are
control freaks. On the other hand, I'm surprised he didn't bring up the
Community Wiki police.

The most common thing I hear about SO lately is along the lines that all the
questions worth asking have been asked, or are esoteric enough that the
quality/quantity of answers is low, and few points are given - if anything
kills those sites, I'd imagine that'd be it. There seems to be a diminishing
ROI for time spent on the site, and scores seem to be fairly biased toward
those who spent time on the site early on. Maybe other subjects won't have
this issue.

------
MikeMacMan
My takeaway:

"StackExchange did something I didn't like, so I'll write a blog post about
why it will fail for (get this!) the exact same reason why it did the think
that I didn't like. What are the chances?!?!"

------
docgnome
"If I wanted people editing my words, looking down at me, and deciding to
change stuff, I’d start a wiki. as is, my answers are my own, and they reflect
my mood, and my typos. and if they want me ot fix them they should ask me."

Sounds like the author is suffering from exactly what he is accusing Joel and
Jeff of.

~~~
jwhite
If you put your name to a comment on a public website, there should be some
guarantee that nobody else can edit your words to say something that you
didn't say and maybe disagree with. An editorial feedback system would be a
more respectful way to achieve the same result.

Disclaimer: I've not spent much time on SO so I don't know how this feature
works. If the comment is clearly marked as having been edited by a more senior
member, that would mitigate somewhat.

~~~
greyfade
Comments (on both questions and answers) cannot be edited by anyone except the
author, but can be made at any time.

 _Questions and answers_ can be edited by anyone with enough rep, and a clear
and detailed edit history is shown, including the names of all those involved.
Anyone with enough rep or the author himself can also roll back any edits with
two clicks.

It works very well, in my experience. I don't know what anyone is complaining
about.

Moreover, editorial feedback on how the website works can be done on a "meta"
site that is linked with the stack site in question.

------
joubert
The title says StackExchange, but the article is about StackOverflow...

~~~
aberkowitz
The article appears to cover both StackOverflow (programming community) and
StackExchange (community sites using Stack software).

