
StackOverflow Considered Harmful? - codingthebeach
http://codingthewheel.com/wc/stackoverflow-considered-harmful
======
Sir_Substance
Here's the thing about stack overflow:

How many people have worked at a location that has blocked stack overflow?

Because I have worked with an organization of about 2500 people, not all of
which were IT. One day, management went on a mad whitelisting crusade and
blocked about 98% of the internet, including the stack exchange network.

IT ground totally to a halt, across all our branches. No programming, no sys-
admining, no help desk.

Stack overflow is not a programmer social network, and it is not a Q&A site.

It's the new textbook. Developers and sysadmins used to keep hundreds of kilos
of dead tree libraries with them because only the textbooks contained the
arcane knowledge like "component X was actually not implemented properly, and
will crash under Y circumstances". Languages and libraries never advertise
that on their website.

Post-stack-overflow developers and admins use stack-overflow as their source
of kooky corner cases and badly explained concepts documentation. They don't
have or need the dead tree books.

So considered harmful? In my experience any IT staff who say they don't rely
on stack overflow are lying.

~~~
mdekkers
The amount of all-round bad advice on SO is staggering. It also encourages
"copy-paste" coding and systems engineering, without the engineer really
understanding the issue.

~~~
chrismcb
There are a lot of bad answers. But it doesn't in courage copy-paste anymore
than any other site with samples, including the reference manual. It isn't
SO's fault if people don't try to understand the answers. But between the
multiple comments and multiple answers it does a better job of indicating to
the user that they still need to understand the solution.

------
blt
I like Stack Overflow. I agree with many of its criticisms, but I still think
it's a huge gain for the programming community overall.

I think the worst aspect is the endless "your premise is flawed, you should do
<this> instead" answers. I often formulate toy examples, or ask questions out
of curiosity rather than practical need. Somehow, users always latch on to the
irrelevant part of my question instead of answering the part I care about.
It's gotten to the point where I put big disclaimers in my questions to steer
users away from those useless (to me) responses.

I got so annoyed with this pattern that I now consciously avoid writing
anything that's not a direct answer to the user's question. I wish others
would do the same.

~~~
bojo
My buddy and I call that "I asked how to use a ladder, you told me to take the
elevator" syndrome. I'm picking apples!

~~~
sciurus
That's why in your question, you need to state that you're picking apples!

[http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-
questions.html#goal](http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html#goal)

~~~
davidgerard
Makes no difference in my experience. Geeksplaining is an unstoppable force of
obnoxiousness.

------
DennisP
Considering that whenever I google a programming question, the most useful
answer is generally on StackOverflow and at the top of the search results, I
have a hard time considering it harmful in any way. It might not be perfect,
but I don't know anything better.

~~~
ratsmack
Considering that whenever I Google a programming question, the most relevant
question has been moderated into oblivion and so I have to seek my answer
elsewhere.

Above is a bit toungue-in-cheek, but it is true in many cases. I don't find SO
as the definitive answer site for that reason, but there is a lot of good
information there.

~~~
jjoonathan
> whenever I Google a programming question, the most relevant question has
> been moderated into oblivion

That or bombarded with "just google it" replies.

~~~
netheril96
If any answer on stackoverflow is "just google it", the said answer will be
downvoted because it doesn't actually answer the question.

------
foobarbecue
What a strange rant.

First of all, this guy continued answering and asking questions since he
published this article, so I guess he changed his mind about deleting his
account.
[http://stackoverflow.com/users/2189331/jdevlin](http://stackoverflow.com/users/2189331/jdevlin)

Secondly the italic bits about how he should be allowed to delete questions
because he created the content make no sense. All SO questions and answers are
collaboratively created so he can't claim ownership.

I agree the moderation is out of hand, and it should be easy to delete your
account (but what's this about a link that "got misclicked")?

~~~
knorby
There are plenty of collaborative communities where post deletion is allowed.
There is clearly a different level of value between a SO question and a reddit
comment thread, but deletions are almost always disruptive in some way.

But those posts have his name on them. He is judged by them, and he in some
way has to stand by them. I don't know that deletion should be an assured
right with all user-created content, but no one should be publishing someone
else's content under their name without their continued consent.

~~~
tsotha
>... no one should be publishing someone else's content under their name
without their continued consent.

I disagree. That's the deal when you add content to one of these kinds of
sites - you don't own it. And you _know that_ going in. And there are valid
reasons to disallow it: if people start deleting their own answers the
conversation becomes (in some cases) impossible to follow.

It's kind of silly to be so heavily invested on a site like this and then
expect them to change the rules when you're ready to move on.

~~~
knorby
But StackOverflow sites allows deletion, at least in part, as the author
points out. So it is fair to say they aren't really enforcing that notion
either.

I don't think I'm necessarily hinting at a copyright issue, though I think
some control over attribution is pretty fundamental to it, but the point I'm
trying to make is that the right of attribution is a stronger one than SO's
right to maintain high-quality content. There are a number of ways that right
can be accommodated, and it is the job of the publisher to figure out how.

------
fl0wenol
Meta-comment:

I am so over titles of the form "* considered harmful" when it has something
to do with someone's opinion and IT/computing.

Please just stop.

~~~
elnate
And -gate over trivialities.

~~~
smtucker
I like to call this "gategate"

------
redthrowaway
This sounds like a similar problem to Wikipedia: great resource, bad
community. I've never been active in the SO community, and am no longer active
in the WP community, so my experience with both is as a read-only resource.
Both are excellent in that regard.

~~~
codinghorror
All communities trend to strictness over time, otherwise they do not survive.

But anyone can bring this up on meta, if they have data, if they have
examples, and lobby for change.

~~~
DanBC
Some of the SE sites are much more hostile than others. Maths is pretty harsh;
gaming not so much.

It's interesting how some sites manage to be strict and not horrible while
other sites don't manage that so well.

I'm not sure how that culture is nurtured. Setting expectations is important -
but you can't do that for all gajillion sites; and you can't do it after
you've left.

------
phirschybar
When I look at the previous alternative of experts-exchange.com vs SO, I am so
grateful to have a free site like SO. The gamification of it is simply a
BETTER alternative to it being a pay-walled garden.

------
BigChiefSmokem
I can't say this wasn't unexpected. I've read so many useful questions on
there that were seemingly derailed by the mods and people complaining to the
mods in the comments section. I understand their point of view about the
strict QA format. That's their business model and it's how they became who
they are, but not listening to your core audience begging you to reform your
policies is a clear sign of stagnation and complacency.

Leaves them wide open to be dominated by a newcomer.

~~~
alfasin
That is simply not true! SO has changed a few times over the time,
discussions, suggestions to improvements are constantly being discussed in
meta. For the most of it - most of the changes that I saw in my 3+ years there
were good changes. That's a constant uphill battle that must take into account
malicious users and trolls.

And to the article writer: once you wrote a question and people responded it
is no longer "your" question. It belongs to the community: as an example I'll
give you a 3 lines question that was answered by a few paragraphs answer
including screenshots, links etc. Who put more effort into it? the OP or the
guys that answered ? Now, if you delete such a question - you're deleting all
the useful comments and answers as well. And yes, if you try to do that for
multiple questions in a row - it looks suspicious and you should be stopped!

As for the "attitude" towards new users, this happens only when the user posts
a bad question, and by bad I mean: 1\. impossible to understand 2\. impossible
to reproduce 3\. already been asked multiple times 4\. HM or alternatively,
posted a question that is far from perfect but can be improved - but then
he/she bails off and not respond to comments.

In all the scenarios above - I'd rather have this question put on hold, until
the user improves it.

And in general, when you join a community you should put minimal effort in
learning the guidelines of acceptable behavior - if you don't like it - don't
use it.

Personally, I find these guidelines useful and helpful.

All in all, I like the interface, I find it as a GREAT resource of learning
and developing my personal skills, and unlike the author - I LOVE SO.

~~~
PhasmaFelis
> _As for the "attitude" towards new users, this happens only when the user
> posts a bad question_

This is not true in my experience. Several times in the past month, I've
googled for some problem or other and found a StackExchange question with my
exact problem and several useful solutions, which had been closed because a
moderator deemed it insignificant or overly broad. I understand the need for
community standards in a site like this, but if your standards are getting in
the way of the actual questions people want to ask, you need to change the
standards, not crack down on legitimate use.

------
robusto
Junk title, but you can apply this article's critique to many communities in
general (especially online ones with a myopic user base). On the whole, the
StackExchange sites contain a wealth of information that's readily accessible
and can't be duplicated easily. There's certainly room for competition that's
not just a plain forum, but what that looks like I'm not sure.

"Harmful" though? Have we already forgotten "experts-exchange" so soon?

~~~
readme
Plenty of people complain about SO but no one is stepping up to challenge
them.

------
Shog9
FWIW, I personally scheduled his account for deletion weeks ago; not sure why
it wasn't removed, other than that the system thought he canceled the deletion
(which we allow, because deletion is permanent).

We're working with him now to figure out what happened.

~~~
vonklaus
Out of curiosity, not hostility, why can a user not delete their own account?
Why is there no obvious account option that says 'permanently delete account'
which would remove a user from the site? All the content would still be there,
the user would simply lose the ability to create more content and make edits?

~~~
Shog9
Short answer: most users _can_ do exactly that.

There's an automated process that confirms the request via email and starts a
timer that, if not cancelled, removes the account. For accounts with a non-
trivial number of posts we hold them for manual confirmation just to prevent
unfortunate accidents (there's no undo - more on that next) but all it
involves is an affirmative response from an email associated with the account.

The longer answer is... This is one of those very early design decisions that,
in hindsight, was probably sub-optimal. Ideally, account deletion would amount
to nothing more than flipping a bit on a database record, at least in the
short term - if someone regretted their decision a day later, no harm done;
just flip it back. But things are not ideal, and deleting an account actually
purges rather a lot of information that can't easily be restored - so given
that a non-trivial number of users _do_ change their minds (especially those
with a long history of activity that will be lost), it's worth everyone's time
to make double-sure before hitting the big red button.

We've slowly been improving the process over the past few years, but it's
still no where near ideal from anyone's perspective. I could go into more
detail, but... Can sum it up with, "We're now only wasting ridiculous amounts
of time on this instead of utterly insane amounts of time".

------
pnathan
I came to similar conclusions in 2010 or so; I had gotten a fair number of
points whiling away my hours as a help desk TA in my CS department, I then got
a job, asked some questions about Perl, and then faded out. Then as I realized
money making was - broadly - absent from SO, it became clear that the digital
sharecroppers were what was fueling whatever money making venture it would
turn out to be.

As the community moderation approaches began to migrate from the lighthearted
to the grim-faced bureaucratic, I migrated away.

While I _have_ derived value from SO, I derive more value today from reading
documents and manuals than I do from StackOverflow questions.

------
hnwoj
I have a love(70%)-hate(30%) relationship with SO. Pros: \- someone often had
a long time ago the same problem as I have, the are 14 answers I can shop in.
\- I learned a few concepts just because so many people were referring to them
(comprehensions in Python for instance - magnificent) Cons: \- incredible ego
of some, punishing what they feel bring "wrong" with coward, anonymous
downvotes \- someone always knows better what I want to ask, even though my
question is well-researched. It is well researched exactly bacause I want to
fend off these guys, but they are still there, lurking in the shadows :)

------
halayli
SO is like an advanced news group. Once you post something it's there forever
because they publish their DB every month and it's up for grab and copying.

------
Spooky23
To sounds to me like the guy acted like an arrogant jerk, and a mod or bunch
of mods has a low tolerance for such behavior.

SO is a victim of its own success, it's too big and has a DMV like user
experience. But if you act like a jerk, you shouldn't expect a warm response.

------
nvivo
I had this problem with forums before. As I requested my content to be removed
from a site, my account was suspended and they actually reposted some stuff I
had deleted, and blocked my account. I lost the right to my content, even
though my name was still there. It was just a small dev forum, so it wasn't a
big deal.

But it's funny because when you join those sites, they make it clear that any
content you may find in their website is not their responsibility, as they are
just a place for people to express their opinions, and any texts you find are
owned by it's authors. But once you don't want your opinions there anymore,
suddenly your texts become their texts and you're a dick for preventing them
from making money of your content.

~~~
Old_Thrashbarg
Content on Stack Exchange is licensed under CC-BY-SA. Therefore Stack Exchange
(as well as any other site on the internet) has the right to repost your
material if they attribute it and share it properly.

~~~
nvivo
I didn't know that. Anyway, this may be the case of Stack Exchange, but the
website I had problems with stated the things I said in their agreement.

------
kevin_thibedeau
SO is much more pleasant if you stick to the less populous niche tags where
there isn't a race to get the first answer, pompous mods, and other negative
side effects of gamification.

~~~
thedufer
> a race to get the first answer

This seems like desired behavior, no? Quick answers ought to be a goal for Q&A
sites.

~~~
TheLoneWolfling
Not when it is at the expense of quality, or, say, actually answering the
question.

------
TheLoneWolfling
My biggest frustration with StackOverflow is the massive splitting, combined
with the restrictions on low-karma (i.e. new) accounts for subsites.

------
chrismcb
My biggest problem with SO is the number of questions that are closed as off
topic. Thankfully they were answered before being closed

------
jusio
This article should be titled "StackOverflow Rep-Whoring Considered Harmful?"

------
cheshire137
I still don't understand what this guy's on about.

------
enlightenedfool
why care about badges/scores. Just contribute, help and get help. It's great
for just that. I find answers to 70% of programming questions I have.

~~~
PythonicAlpha
I think, part of the trouble comes from the situation that many people care
(to much).

