

Introducing programmers.stackexchange.com - m3mb3r
http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2010/12/introducing-programmers-stackexchange-com/

======
petercooper
Giving an explanation is fine but even as a SO user, I don't "get" it. It's
just splitting a strong StackOverflow down into weaker parts. Why not a
separate Ruby SE? One for dynamic languages? One for questions that involve
networking? That's what _tags_ are for.

 _Stated another way, the best Stack Overflow questions tend to have actual
source code in the questions or answers._

That may be generally true, but isn't my experience. Those SO posts that get
voted up the most on sites like HN and Reddit have tended to not be source
based. These sorts of posts, say:

[http://stackoverflow.com/questions/487258/plain-english-
expl...](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/487258/plain-english-explanation-
of-big-o/) [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/448673/how-do-
emulators-w...](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/448673/how-do-emulators-
work-and-how-are-they-written)

~~~
j_baker
It's the age-old inclusionist vs deletionist battle. I think what they're
trying to do is keep both sides happy by creating a vast network of sites with
various purposes and then encouraging the deletionists to push questions to
other sites rather than deleting them. Personally, I find it highly annoying
but if it keeps interesting questions from getting closed then fine.

~~~
petercooper
In this case, there seems to be a subjective vs objective divide between the
sites whereas the topics are the same (things like algorithms are mentioned
explicitly in the good questions suggestions). Clearing that up in a way that
satisifies even a minority will be tough and many will just end up scanning
both sites (which is perhaps their goal, traffic wise).

------
ghshephard
Great new interface. Poor name for this new site, though, with a bit of work,
I'm sure people will start to remember that:

    
    
      o Stack Overflow = Source Code Examples
      o Programmers = Essay questions about Software Development.  
    

I'm still bummed that "Networking" was considered to overlap with "Server
Fault", and was therefore rejected as a group. I find it ironic that
Webmasters, Wordpress, Unix, Ubuntu (all of which, actually _involve_ servers)
are considered as not overlapping too much with Server Fault, but networking,
a topic that is a discipline that, for many, will never involve working on a
server, is considered to be a Dupe.

------
wanderr
I really wish they would fix the reputation system so that it's not annoying
or downright impossible to constructively use the site until you have a
certain number of points.

Barring that I'd settle for having my reputation carry over to related Stack
Exchange sites. Until then I probably won't bother to use this one.

~~~
SimonPStevens
"I'd settle for having my reputation carry over to related Stack Exchange
sites."

If you have more than 200 on one site, you get a boost of +100 when you link
the account on a new site.

(Maybe not enough for you, depends what you want to do, but I just thought I'd
point it out in case you didn't know)

~~~
wanderr
I spent a bunch of reputation adding a bounty to a question without really
thinking about how having a low reputation would send me back to restricted
functionality. I haven't done much about building it back up once I got to the
point where I could do reasonable things again. I must still be below 200 pts
on stack overflow because I have 1 point on programmers.stackexchange.com.

