Re:Dealing with engineers that frequently leave their jobs
by wpietri on Monday September 10, 2012 @01:20PM
(#4500875)
It was closed at "not constructive", which is obviously thought untrue by the hundreds of people who engaged with it. So I can't agree with the specific closing.
It is a mystery to me why a question that yields some answers that are directly about engineers and some that could apply more widely could be considered off topic. One answer explicitly cites the Joel Test. Another specifically discussed the economics of software development, and why the management behavior is pathological specifically for engineering organizations. How much more on topic does one need to be?
Re:Dealing with engineers that frequently leave their jobs
by yrizos on Monday September 10, 2012 @05:15PM
(#4502295)
Hundreds of people engaging in a question is actually a very good hint that it's Not Constructive (just a hint though). Remember, Programmers and every other Stack Exchange site are about questions and answers, not discussions.
Re:Dealing with engineers that frequently leave their jobs
by wpietri on Tuesday September 11, 2012 @02:49AM
(#4504131)
We have deeply different ideas of what constructive means.
It's not 'anything goes', however.
This is a close call, but I agree with the closing in that the post conflicted with the rules. It's possible it could have been worded better to avoid being closed, but even general employee retention strategies don't belong on that site.
The problem isn't that they don't allow discussion, it's that the range of topics allowed is so narrow. There are many (I've lost count) StackExchange sites, and each one has a very narrow, well-defined (but, importantly, poorly-communicated) breadth of allowable topics. And, if you get the wrong bucket it's closed and that's that.