Timeline for Why Is SuperUser Designed to Be Hostile to Outsiders?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 10, 2020 at 20:48 | comment | added | user1061912 | Good observation! +1 | |
| Mar 28, 2018 at 4:50 | comment | added | Ray Woodcock | Journeyman: I do appreciate the more thoughtful responses (below). But I have replied to those attempts. They appear to underscore the hostility to outsiders motivating the original question. The point remains: 17 downvotes, now, for essentially expanding upon your own observations of rudeness to outsiders (meta.superuser.com/questions/12972/…). Mokubai: wrong: as elaborated below, for reasons of brevity, I was actually not welcome to post the relevant material on this site. | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 9:35 | comment | added | Mokubai Mod | You also haven't "spoken up". You've effectively spammed us with your blog post on how evil we are without giving us a chance to discuss it here. If you want any constructive discussion at all then you should be posting constructively on this site. | |
| Sep 29, 2017 at 0:52 | answer | added | fixer1234 | timeline score: 7 | |
| Sep 28, 2017 at 23:21 | comment | added | Journeyman Geek Mod | @RayWoodcock 10 people disagree with you. That said, there's no actual loss of reputation or any other actual issues. People are welcome to their views - and disagreeing with people is an essential part of meta. | |
| Sep 28, 2017 at 23:10 | comment | added | Ray Woodcock | Tried to respond briefly to all, but not enough space. Twisty: wrong. Read what I wrote. The question acknowledges the impression that SU is designed to be hostile to outsiders. There is nothing "ingenuine" about having an openly acknowledged impression. The impression is supported by evidence. If you had read it, you would know your point is mistaken. It is disingenuous to advance a moral criticism of an opponent when you have not even bothered to understand his argument. In any case, I have posed a question. Your comment does not address it. | |
| Sep 28, 2017 at 22:31 | comment | added | Ray Woodcock | Per J.G. (below): "metas are relatively judgement free." An excellent illustration of the problem: by SU standards, "judgment free" means I get -10 for speaking up. ... Ramhound: "We want answers here." Wrong. See Help: "Unlike normal Stack Exchange sites, Meta invites the community to discuss..." Ramhound: "We have to click a link." Exactly. Even Meta is hostile to this sort of discussion. ... fixer1234: "Just find a site that you like better" -- i.e., go away. We do. Re hostility, if you don't want to read the writeup, Ramhound's answer and the score illustrate the problem. | |
| Sep 28, 2017 at 14:41 | comment | added | Journeyman Geek Mod | I've added a link to my answer on his blog. Seemed appropriate | |
| Sep 28, 2017 at 12:14 | comment | added | I say Reinstate Monica | -1 for disguising an assertion as a question. It's ingenuine to "invite" dialog about your observations if you've already reached a conclusion before hearing the other side of the story. | |
| Sep 28, 2017 at 7:44 | answer | added | TomEus | timeline score: 6 | |
| Sep 28, 2017 at 5:02 | comment | added | fixer1234 | In any community, you will see human nature, and it won't be exemplary 100% of the time. What little unwelcoming behavior I've seen here has never been directed at people posting good content. You've developed a negative perspective, which has led to selective observations and gravitating to like-minded expressions of dissatisfaction. If you see hostility, call it out. If you think the whole Stack Exchange is a festering pit of hostility, don't be a masochist. Just find a site that you like better. | |
| Sep 28, 2017 at 5:02 | comment | added | fixer1234 | The Stack Exchange traffic volume suggests that you're starting from a bad premise, that the sites penalize good, original questions and helpful answers. That couldn't be farther from the truth. As for hostility, the Politics site kind of fits your description if your views aren't left wing. A couple of other sites have some domineering regulars with strong opinions and little patience. I haven't seen that on the big technical sites on an "institutional scale". It certainly is not intrinsic to the Stack Exchange concept. In fact, the first rule of Stack Exchange is "be nice". (cont'd) | |
| Sep 28, 2017 at 2:20 | comment | added | Ramhound | What is funny is that, this very question doesn’t provide any of these examples, in the question body. We have to click a link, go to an unknown website, to view these examples. While it is a quality content, it serves the community little good, if it’s on another website. Furthermore the examples don’t do a good enough job of really fleshing out and supporting your point of view. It falls short, I am left wondering, and honestly wanting more examples to actually respond and submit an answer to your question | |
| Sep 28, 2017 at 2:13 | comment | added | Ramhound | Since I only really want to comment about two sentences I will submit a comment. “I posted an answer to a question. It linked to a blog post where I had gone through the answer in detail. What I posted did not seem any different from any number of other answers I have seen on Stack Exchange.” - So you submitted an answer which contained a link to your blog, which contained the answer to the question, and the answer to the question didn’t contain the actual answer to the question. We are not a forum. We are not here to drive considerable traffic to your blog. We want answers here. QED | |
| Sep 28, 2017 at 0:05 | answer | added | Journeyman GeekMod | timeline score: 11 | |
| Sep 27, 2017 at 22:12 | history | asked | Ray Woodcock | CC BY-SA 3.0 |