News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:What does Stack Overflow want to be when it grows up? by jrochkind1 on Monday October 22, 2018 @09:55PM (#18280184)
The solution to dups is obvious too, right? Close em as dups? Yet that is a large focus of the article.

The solution to out-dated answers might be obvious, but apparently obvious isn't stopping it from being a problem... it's a big problem.

If it's obvious, why is it still a problem? If the answer is "because the userbase isn't doing what I want", then _that's_ a problem to which the answer is apparently not obvious. To the extent that SO has been succesful, it is of course that figuring out how to structure the software so as to get the userbase to do useful things _is_ the problem, not an "exersize left to the reader".

Re:What does Stack Overflow want to be when it grows up? by codinghorror on Tuesday October 23, 2018 @01:36AM (#18280962)
It's a problem that is within your power to fix, and in fact within the power of anyone in front of a web browser to fix, because it requires no permissions or even a login. When you see an obsolete answer in need of clarification (such as this only works on versions 1.0 - 5.3, or this functionality was removed in version 2.3), press the edit button and make it so.
Re:What does Stack Overflow want to be when it grows up? by explainplease on Tuesday October 23, 2018 @04:45PM (#18287319)
Only to have the edit be rejected by a wonk who's farming rep by mindlessly plowing through his edit queue so he can cite his SO reputation points on his LinkedIn profile. No thanks. If you want me to spend my time fighting against these kind of policy zombies on SO, you'll have to reward me appropriately.

When SO was new, there was incentive for people with expertise to contribute it. Now there is more incentive for Wikipedia-types to go around smashing others' contributions with their rejection hammers. It's a waste of time for those who actually have something to contribute.